Latest news with #informationcontrol
Yahoo
27-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
China is suppressing coverage of deadly attacks. Some people are complaining online
China Questioning Censorship BEIJING (AP) — Late last month, a car struck children near an elementary school in an outlying district of Beijing, according to a Chinese news report. A four-sentence police statement said a 35-year-old male driver hit pedestrians due to 'improper operation' of the car. It didn't mention the school or that the victims included children. Photos of the aftermath, which showed a half-dozen people lying in the street, were scrubbed from China's closely controlled internet. 'We need the truth,' said one post on Weibo, a leading social media platform similar to X. The ruling Communist Party has expanded information control since leader Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, seeing it as a way to prevent unrest. More and more topics, from negative news about the economy to LGBTQ+ identity, have become subject to some form of censorship. In the past half year, mass attacks — in which a person kills or injures multiple people with a vehicle or knife — appear to have been added to the list. Some people in China are pushing back, complaining online in at least two cases in recent months after drivers hit pedestrians. The government may be trying to prevent copycat crimes, experts have said. Another motivation could be local authorities wanting to cover up when they fail to do so. A deadly case in November sparked a government reaction There was a spate of attacks last fall, but it's difficult to gauge whether they are increasing, given the dearth of information. The attacks weren't always a taboo topic. In the past, authorities released the basic details. Typically, the assailant was described as taking out their anger on society, often over financial losses. That appears to have changed following a particularly horrific case in November that killed 35 people in Zhuhai in southern China. Authorities said the driver was upset about a divorce settlement. Orders came from the very top — from Xi — to take steps to prevent similar attacks. Eight days later, an SUV hit students arriving at an elementary school in Hunan province. The number of injured — 30 children and adults — wasn't made public until nearly a month later when the driver was sentenced. The clampdown on information has tightened further since. In April, reports circulated online that a car had run into people outside a primary school in Jinhua city. At least three provincial state media outlets posted stories — but they were quickly taken down. To date, authorities haven't released any information. Censorship makes some people hungry for information Twelve days later, a fast-moving car veered off a street and into people at a bus stop in the city of Tengzhou in eastern China. Authorities said nothing. Videos of the May 4 crash were taken down from social media. The next day, online criticism of the silence began to appear. People said the police should release basic information such as the driver's identity and the number of casualties. A few defended the police, saying it happened on a holiday. 'If a few such precedents are set, and more local governments follow this way in the future, the rules of information disclosure may not be upheld and may be compromised,' Hu Xijin, the former editor of a state-owned newspaper, warned in a social media post. Local governments want to cover up news that reflects badly on them or their polices, said Jennifer Pan, a Stanford University professor who researches how political censorship and information manipulation work in the digital age. The central government sometimes has other priorities. 'When the issue gains attention despite local censorship efforts, the center has an incentive to preserve the legitimacy of the overall system through responsiveness and acknowledgement of the event and underlying issues,' she said in an email response. The details came out 48 hours after the crash. Six people had died, and it had not been an intentional attack: The driver was drunk, a state media report said. Police respond with quick statements that are short on details Since then, local authorities, at least in two cases in Beijing, seem to be taking a new approach: Issue a report quickly but with scant details. Eleven days after the drunk driving case, a car hit people outside an elementary school in Beijing on May 15. The Beijing Traffic Police issued a report within a few hours but left out that the location was near a school. It said only that four people had been injured when a car sideswiped pedestrians on Jian'an West Road, and that the driver had been detained. Authorities appeared to impose an information shutdown that evening. Police were stationed along the stretch of road and a person who appeared to be a neighborhood watch volunteer cautioned people in a nearby residential compound not to speak to strangers. Six weeks later, posts appeared online on June 26 saying a car had hit children in Miyun, about 60 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of central Beijing. One well-reputed media outlet, Caixin, reached area shop owners who said that children had been hit, and a hospital that confirmed it was treating some child victims. Whether it was an intentional act remains unclear. ___ Associated Press journalist Emily Wang Fujiyama contributed to this story.
The Independent
27-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
China is suppressing coverage of deadly attacks. Some people are complaining online
Late last month, a car struck children near an elementary school in an outlying district of Beijing, according to a Chinese news report. A four-sentence police statement said a 35-year-old male driver hit pedestrians due to 'improper operation' of the car. It didn't mention the school or that the victims included children. Photos of the aftermath, which showed a half-dozen people lying in the street, were scrubbed from China's closely controlled internet. 'We need the truth,' said one post on Weibo, a leading social media platform similar to X. The ruling Communist Party has expanded information control since leader Xi Jinping came to power in 2012, seeing it as a way to prevent unrest. More and more topics, from negative news about the economy to LGBTQ+ identity, have become subject to some form of censorship. In the past half year, mass attacks — in which a person kills or injures multiple people with a vehicle or knife — appear to have been added to the list. Some people in China are pushing back, complaining online in at least two cases in recent months after drivers hit pedestrians. The government may be trying to prevent copycat crimes, experts have said. Another motivation could be local authorities wanting to cover up when they fail to do so. A deadly case in November sparked a government reaction There was a spate of attacks last fall, but it's difficult to gauge whether they are increasing, given the dearth of information. The attacks weren't always a taboo topic. In the past, authorities released the basic details. Typically, the assailant was described as taking out their anger on society, often over financial losses. That appears to have changed following a particularly horrific case in November that killed 35 people in Zhuhai in southern China. Authorities said the driver was upset about a divorce settlement. Orders came from the very top — from Xi — to take steps to prevent similar attacks. Eight days later, an SUV hit students arriving at an elementary school in Hunan province. The number of injured — 30 children and adults — wasn't made public until nearly a month later when the driver was sentenced. The clampdown on information has tightened further since. In April, reports circulated online that a car had run into people outside a primary school in Jinhua city. At least three provincial state media outlets posted stories — but they were quickly taken down. To date, authorities haven't released any information. Censorship makes some people hungry for information Twelve days later, a fast-moving car veered off a street and into people at a bus stop in the city of Tengzhou in eastern China. Authorities said nothing. Videos of the May 4 crash were taken down from social media. The next day, online criticism of the silence began to appear. People said the police should release basic information such as the driver's identity and the number of casualties. A few defended the police, saying it happened on a holiday. 'If a few such precedents are set, and more local governments follow this way in the future, the rules of information disclosure may not be upheld and may be compromised,' Hu Xijin, the former editor of a state-owned newspaper, warned in a social media post. Local governments want to cover up news that reflects badly on them or their polices, said Jennifer Pan, a Stanford University professor who researches how political censorship and information manipulation work in the digital age. The central government sometimes has other priorities. 'When the issue gains attention despite local censorship efforts, the center has an incentive to preserve the legitimacy of the overall system through responsiveness and acknowledgement of the event and underlying issues,' she said in an email response. The details came out 48 hours after the crash. Six people had died, and it had not been an intentional attack: The driver was drunk, a state media report said. Police respond with quick statements that are short on details Since then, local authorities, at least in two cases in Beijing, seem to be taking a new approach: Issue a report quickly but with scant details. Eleven days after the drunk driving case, a car hit people outside an elementary school in Beijing on May 15. The Beijing Traffic Police issued a report within a few hours but left out that the location was near a school. It said only that four people had been injured when a car sideswiped pedestrians on Jian'an West Road, and that the driver had been detained. Authorities appeared to impose an information shutdown that evening. Police were stationed along the stretch of road and a person who appeared to be a neighborhood watch volunteer cautioned people in a nearby residential compound not to speak to strangers. Six weeks later, posts appeared online on June 26 saying a car had hit children in Miyun, about 60 kilometers (40 miles) northwest of central Beijing. One well-reputed media outlet, Caixin, reached area shop owners who said that children had been hit, and a hospital that confirmed it was treating some child victims. Whether it was an intentional act remains unclear. ___ Associated Press journalist Emily Wang Fujiyama contributed to this story.
Malay Mail
22-06-2025
- Malay Mail
Control in the name of distraction — Aisha Fahmy Mohd Zulhery Fahmy
JUNE 22 — People call them big companies or even giants: Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Meta, Netflix. These names dominate our digital world. They've become so woven into our daily lives that we often forget just how much we rely on them. At the touch of our fingertips, we send messages, stream videos, search for answers, shop, and socialise. The line 'there's an app for that' came from their inventions. In many ways, these companies built the modern digital landscape. Thanks to them, we're more connected than ever before. We can communicate across borders, access information instantly, and enjoy the kind of convenience our ancestors couldn't have imagined. But with great innovation comes great responsibility and even greater power. The question is: Where do we draw the line? Yes, we should be thankful for the tools they've created. But we should also be cautious. There's a saying: 'Don't bite the hand that feeds you,' but perhaps in this case, the real warning should be: 'Don't keep eating if the hand starts feeding you poison.' These platforms don't just connect us — they also control the flow of information we see. The news we read, the videos we watch, the ads we encounter, even the people we interact with — much of it is determined by algorithms designed by a few powerful corporations. This control over information isn't just a matter of business. It affects public opinion, political debates, and even personal beliefs. When a handful of companies can amplify some voices while silencing others, promote certain narratives while burying others, it becomes clear that they don't just participate in the media industry — they dominate it. And the content never stops. We scroll endlessly through social media, binge-watch entire series in a weekend, and click through a dozen tabs without finishing a single one. At some point, this starts to feel less like freedom and more like hypnosis. We're feeding on content voluntarily but without limits. We're consuming and consuming, but what are we really getting in return? Control of information affects public opinion, political debates, and even personal beliefs. — Picture from Unsplash/Maxim Ilyahov I believe this endless stream of media has become a distraction — a way to pull us away from the real world, from reality itself. Instead of looking out at the world and engaging with people face to face, we're staring into screens, losing ourselves in curated images and carefully calculated feeds. And while it feels like we're in control, choosing what to watch or who to follow, the truth is, much of our experience is shaped by behind-the-scenes algorithms we don't fully understand. Of course, not everything is harmful. There are many benefits to the digital world: education, community-building, activism, entertainment, even healing. But we can't ignore the other sides too. The addictive design of social media, the spread of misinformation, the invasion of privacy, the mental health challenges — it's all part of the same package. So yes, the tech giants are part of the media industry — but they're more than that. They are the media industry now. They've become the new gatekeepers of information. And while they promise freedom, access, and innovation, they also hold immense power over what we see, what we know, and how we feel. The real challenge isn't just recognising this power — it's deciding what to do with it. Should we regulate them? Should we limit our use? Should we demand more transparency? These are the questions we need to start asking, not just as consumers, but as citizens of a digital world. * Aisha Fahmy Mohd Zulhery Fahmy is an undergraduate student of Universiti Malaya, taking an elective university course entitled 'Introduction to Journalism and Storytelling in Digital Age'. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
