 | |||||||||||||||
| virtual spectators on weibo.com, photo credit: www.cyol.net |
2. What have you learned from Prof. Guobin Yang's conclusion to his book The Power of the Internet in China? Use quotes with page numbers to support your observations.
Due Wednesday December 11 by 8 pm for one extra credit.
The Southern Weekly issue, in my opinion, is an issue about speech freedom. As the symbolic of Southern Weekly, New Year greeting received a lot of cheers in the past years. However, in the year of 2013, the article was changed by Guangdong’s provincial propaganda chief. “According to chatter on Weibo, there were three versions of the letter. The first was the original by Dai Zhiyong, from which the above translation comes. The second was the draft from editors at the newspaper. The third, the version that eventually went to print, contains further changes now being attributed to Tuo Zhen (庹震), Guangdong’s provincial propaganda chief, as well as an introductory message from Tuo Zhen.”( Samuel Wade) This is the conflict between speech freedom and political control. For myself, I think citizens should have their rights for speaking. And about “Chinese dream,” I do not think we came to the nearest point to realize. There is still a long way to go.
ReplyDeleteFor the second paper, the author concerned about online activism. And he holds the opinion that “Chinese online activism is a generalized response to the sequences of Chinese modernity… online activism reflects Chinese citizens’ struggles in dynamic interaction with political, cultural, social, economic, and global conditions.” The long-term online revolution also relates to the democracy in some cases. And government should build a legal system to practice “their own unofficial democracy.” (Yang)
From looking at the “China Digital Times Articles” on the Southern Weekly protest it is clear that the message is about freedom of speech. The article is not like it used to be because in former years it was received very well from those who read it. In 2013, this was not the case. “According to chatter on Weibo, there were three versions of the letter. The first was the original by Dai Zhiyong, from which the above translation comes. The second was the draft from editors at the newspaper. The third, the version that eventually went to print, contains further changes now being attributed to Tuo Zhen” (Samuel Wade). This is a quote from the article shows that free speech is not obtainable without a free government. The political control in china is still strong and this reading shows that although the country has made a lot of strides towards being free over the years they are still a long way from their goals. Like all countries China has some downfalls and this is a large problem because if the people can’t speak then they are not free at all.
ReplyDeleteFor the second question, Prof. Yang’s conclusion to his book shows that he wants for the country to be a true democracy. It is clear because he talks about “online activism” and the “struggles in dynamic interaction with political, cultural, social, economic and global conditions.” (Yang) This shows that all that China needs is a government without so much power. Although those in power think what they are doing is best they are very wrong. What they want is not at all what the people want.
The censorship on China’s medium is one of the biggest topics and has been talked for a long time around the nation. I personally value the efforts of South Weekly to endeavor to the freedom of speech. However, what I try to say is China now still has not sufficient space and energy to speed up the process of democracy and not yet achieve the dream of the constitutional politics, but this does not mean all current legal systems are junks. The event does make more and more people to rethink about the government’s policy and the issues of the nation, but at the same time we have to be vigilant to have overmuch those criticism and too much comparing to west world because this could lead citizens lost too much beliefs and hopes to this old nation, which was more dangerous than the censorships.
ReplyDeleteChina’s situations are so different and not similar to any other those of west nations. To all the current medium institutions, it is impossible to be or to surpass the most “romantic” west medium right now and I think they actually don’t have to try to do so. China does not need to learn how to become one of the west nations but to grow up to be as strong as them. That's the key point. All I want to hear or to read are definitely not all the “quarrels”, but a faith, a more proper way to improve the people’s lives, which can lead this old nation to stand out with its unique values. That's what all medium and citizens should be seeking for.
One article I read that really interested me was called "Death of a News Censor". It talked about a man who worked as a news censor and after he retired wrote a farewell letter in which he admitted to doing things he knows he shouldn't have as well as killing reports he knows he shouldn't have. I learned that this man played a big role in fighting against "overbearing censorship policies earlier this year."
ReplyDeleteThe most significant thing I learned from the conclusion of "The Power of the Internet in China" is that the Chinese people want a democracy. If there is no desire for change from the people, then there won't be a change. Since the people do want change though, they are taking action using the internet for online activism and creating a sort of unofficial democracy. "In a sense, online activism marks the expansion of a grassroots, citizen democracy. It is an unofficial democracy because the initiatives, both in thinking and action, come from citizens." (Yang, 223)
China has a restricted press and even have restrict on the internet. Freedom of speech is not something the people of China have, but do want. In 2013, there was a strike by the editorial staff if Southern Weekly, a well-known news provider. Guangdong’s propaganda chief interfere with the Southern Weekly’s annual “New Year’s Greetings.” Their original article, “China’s Dream, the Dream of Constitutionalism,” had become a “bland propagandist piece complete with an egregious factual error” (Sensitive Words). The meddling of the propaganda chief had change the content of the original and change it to something completely else. The message of the article had changed as well. It change to something that the government would of approve of. It is ironic that the article talks about China dreaming to be a constitutional country but the government places a censor on it and changes the content.
ReplyDeleteWith the government doing this, they have taken away the words written down and tried to block the ears of the people of words they found politically sensitive. The strike of Southern Weekly is a fight for freedom of speech. It’s a fight many want to win. Many gathered on the internet and in the streets in support of Southern Weekly’s strike. People from middle school students to famous celebrities in China are out and showing their support.
The Chinese government wants too much control over their people. The constitutionalism dream that was written in the Southern Weekly’s article will not come true if the government continues putting all these censor and restrictions on the people. As the quote used in the article by Solzhenitsyn, “One word of truth outweighs the whole world” (China’s Dream). Being able to speak the truth and hearing it means a lot to the people. You can’t just hide everything from them. China’s government needs to realize that hiding everything from the people will only anger them. They will seek and find it all. So the government should relax their censorship and restrictions a bit. They can not try to catch all of these flies and keep them out (New York Times). It is causing more harm than good.
After read the Southern Weekly issue, it is let me shocked and sad. In China, everyone knows there have no speech freedom. When a person said some the fact of speech but not conducive to the development of the society, the government will delete these words and let whole society think these truth words were not the real words. Southern Weekly special editions are known for their outspokenness on core ideas like democracy and civil society. But “Southern Weekly has long been a thorn in the side of Party conservatives and entrenched interests.” (Southern, Why Southern Weekly?) For conservatives, this weekly is a threat to their interests. The political control in china is still strong, we cannot use our power to change it, but we can let the speech more freedom. China have a long way to change their own shortcoming. Control the people’s speech is not correctly, moreover, I think if a country want to continue develop, they should give people speech freedom that can have a healthy development to face the future.
ReplyDeleteSince China entered the Internet age, there begin to appear a lot of some negative information about China. I think China should be more liberalization and democratization. In this way can make our voice to convey to the government. “In a sense, online activism marks the expansion of a grassroots, citizen democracy. It is an unofficial democracy because the initiatives, both in thinking and action, come from citizens.”(Yang,223)
After reading China Digital Times Articles, from my point of view I support the Southern Weekly. I agree with “Southern Weekly special editions are known for their outspokenness on core ideas like democracy and civil society.”(Scoot “Why Southern Weekly) I think media should not become a tool that controlled by government. Journalists and editors should have their own freedom to tell the truth. Journalists and editors from Southern Weekly directly pointed out problems because they wanted our government to slove those problems, they wanted our nation become better and better. I think leaders of Southern Weekly should encourage this kind of practice, not just shut them up.
ReplyDeleteFor the second essay, professor Yang support online activism, “At the same time, online activism demonstrates enormous cultural creativity and innovation.”(Yang p211) From my opinion, I agree with what professor Yang’s point of view. China need more freedom, it is a big deal. Government should encourage citizen publish their own opinion, at least do not use power to stop them.
After I read China Digital Times articles the Southern Weekly issue is about human rights and freedom. In China people have no speech freedom, citizens have no power to Speech at government and The Communist Party. People cannot even use Youtube and Facebook in China. This is 21st, we should have power to know the truth and to tell the truth. Chinese dreams are not what the government say, it should be what the citizens say.
ReplyDeleteSince the mid-1990s, the Internet has revolutionized popular expression in China, enabling users to organize, protest, and influence public opinion in unprecedented ways. Despite efforts to control these activities, online activism has been an agent of immense social change, allowing common citizens to disseminate content and openly challenge the authority of political and economic elites. We should have power to know the truth and feel free to make our speech. “In a sense, online activism marks the expansion of a grassroots, citizen democracy. It is an unofficial democracy because the initiatives, both in thinking and action, come from citizens.”(Yang,223)
This book draws out two issues in particular that are important for thinking about social movements anywhere: that of the role of the market as an actor beyond the state-activist binary, and the role of what kind of a "space" the internet creates.Yang focuses on China, where he argues that the rise of a dynamic public sphere and internet activity are intertwined.
ReplyDeleteSince the mid-1990s, the Internet has revolutionized popular expression in China, enabling users to organize, protest, and influence public opinion in unprecedented ways. Guobin Yang's pioneering study maps an innovative range of contentious forms and practices linked to Chinese cyberspace, delineating a nuanced and dynamic image of the Chinese Internet as an arena for creativity, community, conflict, and control.Yang argues, Chinese online activism derives its methods and vitality from multiple and intersecting forces, and state efforts to constrain it have only led to more creative acts of subversion. “In a sense, online activism marks the expansion of a grassroots, citizen democracy. It is an unofficial democracy because the initiatives, both in thinking and action, come from citizens.”(Yang,223)
Guobin Yang’s pioneering study follows the rise of this dynamic protest and the forces that keep it relevant and unique. Online activism encompasses an innovative range of rituals, genres, and styles, and state efforts to constrain it have only led to more creative acts of subversion.