SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
China Quarterly
Aug 30th, 2017 by Gao

Ian Johnson: Cambridge University Press Removes Academic Articles on Chinese Site / 迫于审查压力,剑桥大学出版社在华删除敏感内容 (New York Times)

One of the world’s oldest and most respected publishing houses, Cambridge University Press, has bowed to pressure from Beijing and removed sensitive content on its site in China.

Echo Huang: Forced to comply or shut down, Cambridge University Press’s China Quarterly removes 300 articles in China (Quartz)
Cambridge University Press statement regarding content in The China Quarterly (Cambridge University Press)

We can confirm that we received an instruction from a Chinese import agency to block individual articles from The China Quarterly within China. We complied with this initial request to remove individual articles, to ensure that other academic and educational materials we publish remain available to researchers and educators in this market.
We are aware that other publishers have had entire collections of content blocked in China until they have enabled the import agencies to block access to individual articles. We do not, and will not, proactively censor our content and will only consider blocking individual items (when requested to do so) when the wider availability of content is at risk.

Alex Linder: Cambridge University Press bows to Chinese censors, removes 300 ‚politically sensitive‘ articles (Shanghaiist)

On Friday, the CUP said that more than 300 articles had been scrubbed from the China Quarterly’s Chinese website following a request from Chinese censors, which threatened to have its site shut down. Apparently, the articles had been chosen for deletion not through a careful reading and examination of the text, but by quick searches for certain naughty words.

Liste der entfernten Artikel: www.cambridge.org/… (PDF, Cambridge University Press)
Tim Pringle: Message from the editor, The China Quarterly (PDF, Cambridge University Press)

The China Quarterly wishes to express its deep concern and disappointment that over 300 articles
and reviews published in the journal have been censored by a Chinese import agency. We note too
that this restriction of academic freedom is not an isolated move but an extension of policies that
have narrowed the space for public engagement and discussion across Chinese society.

Tim Pringle: China’s bid to block my journal’s articles is a new attack on academic freedom (Guardian)

Cambridge University Press was asked to suppress articles in China Quarterly. It has now resisted, but it is a worrying development

The China Quarterly follow-up statement (Cambridge University Press)

Following a clear order from its Chinese importer, Cambridge University Press reluctantly took the decision to block, within China, 315 articles in The China Quarterly. This decision was taken as a temporary measure pending discussion with the academic leadership of the University of Cambridge, and pending a scheduled meeting with the Chinese importer in Beijing.
The academic leadership of the University has now reviewed this action in advance of the meeting in China later this week. Academic freedom is the overriding principle on which the University of Cambridge is based. Therefore, while this temporary decision was taken in order to protect short-term access in China to the vast majority of the Press’s journal articles, the University’s academic leadership and the Press have agreed to reinstate the blocked content, with immediate effect, so as to uphold the principle of academic freedom on which the University’s work is founded.

Cambridge University Press battles censorship in China (Economist)

This is not the only recent case. Censors have demanded the removal of about 100 articles in the Journal of Asian Studies, also published by CUP. The Communist Party used to allow scholars a modest latitude in their fields of research, permitting, for example, access to foreign academic publications that would be banned from general circulation. But in March the customs authorities tightened rules on importing books. Chinese academics complain that risk-averse librarians will not now order even innocuous scholarly works for fear of offending the customs service.

Cambridge University Press Refuses to Comply With Second Chinese Takedown Request (Radio Free Asia)

Chinese censors have made another request to a top academic journal published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) for the removal of online content from a website hosted in China, the Association for Asian Studies said in a statement.
CUP has refused the request from the State Administration of Press and Publications, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT), which requested the removal of some 100 articles from the website of the Journal of Asian Studies.
The Association for Asian Studies (AAS) said the request was similar to one made by Chinese authorities to CUP, prompting the publishing house to take down some 300 articles from the China website of the China Quarterly academic journal last week.

China Quarterly debate a matter of principle (Global Times)

As the readership of the China Quarterly is limited, there will be little impact over the CUP withdrawing some articles. The Western media, which must have other things to pay attention to, seems more sensitive than some relevant Chinese authorities.
China has a number of laws and regulations concerning cyber security. The China Quarterly is published overseas. There is no overlap between the two sides. The CUP can enjoy academic freedom under British law. But overseas media reports that it set up a server in China hoping to explore the Chinese market, which has to abide by the Chinese law. As long as the Chinese request was made in accordance with the law, there is no reason to be critical.
China has blocked some information on foreign websites that it deems harmful to Chinese society. This is for the sake of China’s security and is within the scope of China’s sovereignty. China is also trying to strike a balance between opening itself up and preventing harmful external information from penetrating into Chinese society, to realize steady and sustainable progress.
Western institutions have the freedom to choose. If they don’t like the Chinese way, they can stop engaging with us. If they think China’s Internet market is so important that they can’t miss out, they need to respect Chinese law and adapt to the Chinese way. Now it seems that some Western institutions would like to make adjustments, while some forces are unhappy about it.

AFP: At Beijing book fair, publishers admit to self-censorship to keep texts on Chinese market (South China Morning Post)

Tiananmen, Tibet and Taiwan are off limits for companies wanting to sell their books in China, publisher says

James A. Millward: Open Letter to Cambridge University Press about its censorship of the China Quarterly (Medium)

Cambridge University Press’s decision to censor the journal China Quarterly as it is viewed online in China is a craven, shameful and destructive concession to the PRC’s growing censorship regime. It is also needless.

Christopher Balding: Petition Cambridge University Press Not to Censor China Articles (Change.org)

As academics and China focused academics, we are disturbed by the request by the Chinese government for Cambridge University Press to censor articles from the China Quarterly. As academics, we believe in the free and open exchange of ideas and information on all topics not just those we agree with. It is disturbing to academics and universities world wide that China is attempting to export its censorship on topics that do not fit its preferred narrative.
We call upon Cambridge University Press to refuse the censorship request not just for the China Quarterly but on any other topics, journals or publication that have been requested by the Chinese government.
If Cambridge University Press acquiesces to the demands of the Chinese government, we as academics and universities reserve the right to pursue other actions including boycotts of Cambridge University Press and related journals.

Maev Kennedy, Tom Phillips: Cambridge University Press backs down over China censorship (Guardian)

Publisher will reinstate articles to which it blocked online access in China in the face of international protests by academics

Simon Denyer: In reversal, Cambridge University Press restores articles after China censorship row (Washington Post)

Cambridge University Press reversed course Monday after facing a major backlash from academics over its decision to bow to Chinese government demands to censor an important academic journal.

Joseph Hincks: A Top Publisher Bowed to China’s Censors. Then it Bowed to Outraged Academics (Time)

Margaret Lewis, Andrew J. Nathan, Pamela Kyle Crossley, Edward Friedman, Yifu Dong, Joseph W. Esherick: Should Publications Compromise to Remain in China? (China File)

Freedom of expression may have won this battle against state censorship, but if state interference continues what compromises is it permissable for academic institutions and publications to make to stay inside China?

Jonathan Sullivan: Censorship and China Studies (China Policy Institute)

CUP’s decision to accede to the demands is a misguided, if understandable, economic decision that does harm to the Press’ reputation and integrity (whether there is any integrity in the business of academic publishing is another story).

In diesem Zusammenhang siehe auch:
中华人民共和国网络安全法(全国人民代表大会)
Inoffizielle Übersetzung ins Englische: 2016 Cybersecurity Law (China Law Translate)

Article 1: This law is formulated so as to ensure network security, to safeguard cyberspace sovereignty, national security and the societal public interest, to protect the lawful rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, and to promote the healthy development of economic and social informatization.
Article 2: This law applies with respect to the construction, operation, maintenance and usage of networks, as well as network security supervision and management within the mainland territory of the People’s Republic of China.

People’s Republic of China Cybersecurity Law: A Preliminary Overview for Western Companies (National Law Review)

The PRC Cybersecurity Law maintains the trend from elective regimes toward mandatory cybersecurity standards and requirements. As seen in the EU, with the recently adopted General Data Protection Regulation framework, and in the US, with proposed federal regulations of financial institutions to address the risk of “cyber contagion,” global actors are flexing their regulatory and national security powers to address the threat of cyber-attacks in an increasingly interconnected world.

Streik | Atomkraft | Monsanto | 1989
Mai 30th, 2015 by Gao

Elaine Hui: Chinese Bike Light Strikers Occupy Factory, Face Firings and Arrests (Labor Notes)

Workers who make bike lights at a factory in Shenzhen, China, have been on strike since April 30, demanding that the company pay up what it legally owes them.
The strikers stayed overnight in the factory, stopping production and delivery for two weeks, until police came to evict them and arrest worker leaders on May 13.
New An Lun Lamp, a Taiwanese-owned factory, produces bicycle lights for brands including the German Messingschlager and Buchel and the Dutch AXA.
There are about 100 workers in the factory, mostly middle-aged women, with some nearing retirement.
Though their actions have been peaceful, thus far 13 workers have been fired and nine arrested by police for “disrupting public order.”
Seven out of the nine detained workers were released within 24 hours. The other two—including one of the workers’ elected representatives—were held by police for seven days. During the police raid on May 13 these two clutched the legs of the general manager and his son, crying and begging them not to remove the finish goods.

Migrant worker in Nanjing cheated out of compensation and left to die (China Labour Bulletin)

Listed in Shanghai, Hong Kong, London and New York, China Petroleum and Chemical Corp (Sinopec) is one of China’s largest and best-known companies. It has a vast network of subsidiaries including Yangzi Petrochemical based in Nanjing. This company reportedly owns or has an interest in Nanjing Yangzi Maintenance and Installation (南京扬子检修安装), which employed Chen Dejun, a young migrant worker from the neighbouring province of Anhui.
Chen started work at Yangzi Maintenance and Installation in July 2010. Within 18 months, he started to experience dizziness, irregular heartbeat, headaches and tremors – all the symptoms of benzene poisoning, and almost certainly the result of his work doing spray-painting, acid washing, chemical cleaning and toxic waste disposal at the plant.
Today, Chen is seriously ill and bedridden but he has still not received any compensation because his employer did everything it could to prevent his illness from being classified by the authorities as an occupational disease.

Robert Foyle Hunwick: Desperate Chinese are turning to mass suicide to get their government’s attention (Global Post)

The location was chosen for maximum impact: a downtown boulevard, famous for Beijing’s swankiest shops and its plushest hotels. Studded with these symbols of Western capitalist chic, Wangfujing Shopping Street could hardly be further from the more desperate concerns of rural China.
It was here that a group of about 30 men gathered on a warm spring morning and, in front of hundreds of shoppers, swallowed a quantity of pesticide. They fell to the ground en masse and, according to several eyewitnesses, foamed at the mouth.
As the men were rushed to hospital, startled crowds spread the news on social media, while the scene quickly returned to normal. Police issued a statement later that day that none had died; local reports explained they were taxi drivers from the northeast, who’d traveled to the capital to stage the protest…
In August 2013, a group of 21, also from Heilongjiang, attempted mass suicide near the Beijing West rail station, after a railway company failed to provide their children with the public-service jobs they were promised. Four months later, 13 homeowners attempted the same over a failure to be compensated for demolitions. In two incidents in July last year, five petitioners drank poison in a police station, and five men and two women from Jiangsu, did the same outside the offices of the China Youth Daily newspaper. They were dissatisfied with the terms of their eviction.

孟山都滚出中国! (monsanto-out-of-china.org)

Emma Graham-Harrison: China warned over ‚insane‘ plans for new nuclear power plants (Guardian)

China’s plans for a rapid expansion of nuclear power plants are “insane” because the country is not investing enough in safety controls, a leading Chinese scientist has warned.
Proposals to build plants inland, as China ends a moratorium on new generators imposed after the Fukushima disaster in March 2011, are particularly risky, the physicist He Zuoxiu said, because if there was an accident it could contaminate rivers that hundreds of millions of people rely on for water and taint groundwater supplies to vast swathes of important farmlands.
China halted the approval of new reactors in 2011 in order to review its safety standards, but gave the go-ahead in March for two units, part of an attempt to surpass Japan’s nuclear-generating capacity by 2020 and become the world’s biggest user of nuclear power a decade later.
Barack Obama recently announced plans to renew a nuclear cooperation deal with Beijing that would allow it to buy more US-designed reactors, and potentially pursue the technology to reprocess plutonium from spent fuel…
He, who worked on China’s nuclear weapons programme, said the planned rollout was going too fast to ensure it had the safety and monitoring expertise needed to avert an accident.
“There are currently two voices on nuclear energy in China. One prioritises safety while the other prioritises development,” He told the Guardian in an interview at the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
He spoke of risks including “corruption, poor management abilities and decision-making capabilities”. He said: “They want to build 58 (gigawatts of nuclear generating capacity) by 2020 and eventually 120 to 200. This is insane.”

Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian: These Chinese People Want High-Speed Rail So Badly They Are Fighting Police to Get It (Foreign Policy)

On May 16, thousands of people carrying banners marched through the streets of Linshui, a county in the southwest Chinese province of Sichuan. Some shouted slogans while others hurled rocks at lines of police in riot gear, who pushed back against the crowds and beat some with batons. Photographs show several people with bloody head injuries being cared for by paramedics and onlookers. Linshui residents turned out in droves, burned vehicles, and braved riot police for more than eight hours — not to protest inequality, corruption, or environmental degradation, but to demand that a high-speed rail line be built through their county.

Wolfgang Pomrehn: Chinas Investitions-Offensive (Telepolis)

Die Volksrepublik verstärkt ihren Kapitalexport und steckt viel Geld in den Aufbau von Eisenbahnen und anderer Infrastruktur in befreundeten Ländern.

Gu Yi etc.: On the 26th Anniversary of Tian’anmen Massacre (Sri Lanka Guardian)

We are a group of Chinese students born in the 1980s and 1990s and now studying abroad. Twenty-six years ago on June 4th, young students, in life’s prime with innocent love for their country just as we are today, died under the gun of the People’s Liberation Army in Beijing’s streets.

境外势力试图煽动八零后九零后(《环球时报》 im Google-Speicher. Das Original wurde mittlerweile gelöscht.)

十几名自称是“八零后和九零后”的在美“中国留学生”日前联署了一封致国内青年学生的公开信,就八九政治风波发表充满“民运味”、像是被手把手教着写出来的极端观点。它以十分凶悍的语言攻击中国现政权,照抄海外一些势力的话语歪曲讲述26年前发生的事情。通常来说,中国大陆赴美留学生即使思想发生一些变化,也写不出如此赤裸裸攻击祖国的文稿。

Hostile forces target younger generation (Global Times)

Eleven Chinese students born in the 1980s or 1990s and studying in the US recently signed an open letter to their counterparts in the mainland. The letter carries their extreme views on the 1989 Tiananmen incident in the tone that used to be adopted by much older pro-democracy activists. It harshly attacked the current Chinese regime, twisting the facts of 26 years ago with narratives of some overseas hostile forces. Generally, even if changes in thought do take place, it’s unlikely for mainland students who study in the US to lash out at their homeland in such an insulting way.

Emma Graham-Harrison: Chinese students in the west call for transparency over Tiananmen Square (Guardian)
范凌志:香港左翼爱国团体立场坚定反对泛民(《环球时报》)

Writing China: Rian Thum, ‘The Sacred Routes of Uyghur History’ (Wall Street Journal)

Julian Ryall: China plans for North Korean regime collapse leaked (Washington Post)

China has drawn up detailed contingency plans for the collapse of the North Korean government, suggesting that Beijing has little faith in the longevity of Kim Jong-un’s regime.
Documents drawn up by planners from China’s People’s Liberation Army that were leaked to Japanese media include proposals for detaining key North Korean leaders and the creation of refugee camps on the Chinese side of the frontier in the event of an outbreak of civil unrest in the secretive state.

Paul Mason: How to turn a liberal hipster into a capitalist tyrant in one evening (Guardian)

A new play, World Factory, asks the audience to run a clothing factory in China – and even the creators have been surprised at how people have behaved.

Frank Langfitt: How China’s Censors Influence Hollywood (NPR)

SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
»  Host:Blogsport   »  Code:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa