UNIQLO has become a location for photo ops after the scandal.

A video of a young couple having sex in a fitting room of Uniqlo’s Sanlitun store in Beijing went viral on Wednesday and was deleted shortly after by censors. The discussion about this latest episode of “pornographic” private content leaks online that has continued in its wake, however, touches on issues that are gaining attention from the Chinese public.

The minute-long video, taken with a smart phone and showing a young couple — allegedly two college students — was spread on social media such as Sina Weibo and WeChat and viewed by millions of people before it was deleted on the order of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) for violating the “socialist values.”

This isn’t the first time that explicit images and videos were leaked online in China despite the fact that the distribution of pornography is a criminal offense in the country. In 2008, more than a thousand of naked photos of several Hong Kong A-list movie and pop stars taken by singer-actor Edison Chen were leaked, which resulted in the arrests of at least ten people. In the Mainland China, a number of sex videos of government officials (e.g., Lei Zhengfu and several Fuzhou officials) and university professors (on a side note, in 2014, an appalling 57% of female college students in China said they had been sexually harassed by their professors) were leaked by their mistresses, whom have been hailed by many as a sort of heroines in combating corruption.

The Uniqlo’s sex video leak, however, is a different case in that it doesn’t involve celebrities or public/semi-public figures. This couple in the video are private persons and their sexual act appeared to be consensual, that is, with no apparent power imbalance or coercion implied as in the cases of officials and professors. Perhaps that was partly why rumors arose saying that the leak was either a marketing stunt by Uniqlo or the young couple’s attention seeking attempt. The Japanese fast fashion giant has since issued a statement denying its role in the distribution of the video. As to the young couple, their identities have not been officially disclosed, although attempts of revealing them, or what Chinese Internet users call “renrou,” have been made by hackers and several people’s personal information has been published online. In this Internet frenzy, one also sees ultra nationalist chatters advocating boycotting Japanese goods (as every time a Japanese company is involved in a controversy) and of course, slut shaming rhetoric springing from a self-righteous sense of morality and perhaps a kind of voyeuristic impulse.

No surprise there, but what’s worth noting is that in the midst of all this noise, there are thoughtful voices that demand our attention. For instance, in an article titled “Uniqlo and Lewinsky: the Price and Profit of the Shaming Economy” trending on the popular social media platform WeChat, author Wen Yan draws attention to Internet privacy and public shaming. Relating to Monica Lewinsky’s TED talk in March, she argues that in the age the Internet, there’s a certain “shaming economy” at work that allows corporations and individuals to profit at others’ expense:

The shaming economy is a tightly knit industrial chain, which, relying on an central event and by leaking private content via viral distribution, shames a particular individual while extracts value from public attention and profits from it. The price to pay in the shaming economy may be a young woman’s youth and reputation, but the profits are shared by leakers and certain groups. Everyone who has shared embarrassing photos and videos is a promoter of this economic chain, who amplifies the harm done to the victims and accumulates profits for those who benefit [from such distribution].

The author then challenges her readers: “Precisely because power can be easily put in your hand, will you chose to take the whip and wave it recklessly, or keep silence and think for yourself?”

On a different note, Dou Wentao of Phoenix TV, a Hong Kong-based Chinese television network, reflected on the phenomenon of ungrounded speculation of publicity stunt in the aftermath of the leak, attributing it to the seemingly ubiquitous presence of marketing and advertising in every slip of the Chinese social and private life and a growing fame-seeking culture. He said on his talk show:

Nowadays in China, many things in society perplex me. My judgment on this event is no judgment, because nothing is what it appears, and people’s thinking has become conditioned [accordingly]. Our producer, for instance, at once believed it was a publicity scheme. Have you noticed that nowadays, there isn’t any serious discussion, because all the discussion is about things being a media hype. This makes one not want to discuss anything.

Not without irony — since he himself is a high profile media personality — Dou expressed a deep anxiety rooted in the suspicion of the media in the grip of the government AND corporate power. Because of the lack of transparency, both in the sense of censorship and the aggressive marketing culture in today’s China, it’s very difficult for the public to construct a reality that corresponds accurately to the reality they live in as citizens and consumers. For years, the Chinese government has been cracking down “rumors” spreading on the Internet and failed, precisely because “rumors” are only a way in which people respond to the conditions of communication greatly shaped by, obviously, the government and the cut-throat materialistic culture it supports.

Like others preceding it, the Uniqlo viral video will die down from the media — perhaps sooner than we think — as we move on to a fresh scandal. Let’s hope that next time we’ll deal with it better, with a bit more humanity and decency.

The recent deadly flood in Beijing exposed the municipal government’s poor infrastructure and emergency response. The government didn’t have any effective warning system in place for the public. Taking advantage of the high cell phone use rate in China, some cities use text messaging to send out warnings to the public in case of emergencies. Of the 20 million permanent residents in Beijing, more than 95 percent own cell phones, but the city doesn’t have a text messaging warning system in place. The municipal government’s excuse is that it takes too long to send out text messages to such as big population, but a few days after the flood, telecommunication service providers such as Beijing Mobile and Beijing Telecomm issued statements that there is no such technical barrier as claimed by the Beijing city authority.

The authority is slow in response to the flood, but it has been quick to muzzle people’s mouths. Webmasters, under the pressure of the government, have been deleting the discussions about the flood, its casualty, and criticism of the government. The official death toll released on July 22, a day after a monstrous storm was 37. Days later, despite the increasing doubts raised in the public, the authority still stands by this number. In the cyber sphere, weibo users have been posting photos and witness accounts of the disaster, which have amounted to more suspicion in the public that the actual death toll is way larger than the officially released number.

“Liangxiang residents witnessed with their own eyes, that more than 20 bodies were recovered from the water this morning, and there are more under the water,” a netizen 鸥orianna posted. Liangxiang is a neighborhood in Beijing’s Fangshan District, where the food caused the most damage in the region.

Another post showed a still shot from a video in which a group of government officials waited for other people to pull out the bodies in the water and then took off their pants posing for publicity photos.

Both of these posts, however, were deleted by “little secretaries,” a name weibo netizens have given to the “security editors” hired by Sina to self-censor the site, shortly after they were posted. In fact, posts like these will only survive for a few hours on the website.

But the netizens haven’t given up. As the original posts are getting deleted, images of screen captures of these deleted posts started to be circulated fast. Because texts in the images are not searchable, it is harder for little secretaries to search for sensitive posts and delete them. Sometimes, instead of reposting, some people attach these images to their posts so that when the original post gets deleted, their posts won’t be affected.

Li Kaifu, an IT entrepreneur and opinion leader on Sina Weibo, even posted a tutorials of how to avoid posts getting deleted. “Don’t repost the original, but post the screen shot. This way, you can avoid getting into trouble, and can also save the screen shot for later use,” wrote Li.

Even these posts are disappearing too, but the hide-and-seek game between the netizens and the authority has just started. Netizen 摄影爱好兔 collected a long list of posts from witnesses of the flood, all of which had already been deleted, made it into a long image and posted it on Sina Weibo (see partial below). The post was reposted for more thousands of times before it was finally deleted by the administrator. However, new posts are still popping up, one at a time, keeping the little secretaries busy.

Two posts in a collection of deleted posts of images and witness accounts about Beijing’s flood in late July

The flood has passed, leaving rubles of buildings, damaged cars, and grieving families in Beijing. However, the flood of speech hasn’t been muzzled, despite the government’s effort to. On the contrary, people’s enthusiasm in participating in the public discourse has been going ever stronger. Maybe it is time for those in power to reconsider the ancient Chinese wisdom. For thousands of years, Chinese have seen too many times the demise of dynasties, and perhaps the authority should learn something from history after all.

In a recent episode of a Chinese reality show Only You (非你莫属), where job seekers compete for jobs through live job interviews, Chinese TV viewers had a glimpse of Foxconn’s “military-style management” and what it could do to the employees through the first-person account of a mid-level manager working for the company. The 30-year old interviewee, named Zhang Fei, started working for Foxconn’s factory in Shenzhen as an entry-level employee after he finished technical high school, making 330 yuan ($52) a month. After twelve years working for the company, he is now an IT manager in charge of a team of fifty employees who are responsible for the entire network, communication facilities and security system for the factory.

Zhang Fei, an Foxconn employee, defends his company after his account of an incident of physical penalty that lead to his blacking out (click image for video in Chinese)

On the show, Zhang revealed that he once fell unconscious in the Foxconn compound. He told the audience what happened:

It was arranged that we were going to be “loaned” to another company that day. Usually, we were supposed to get up at six in the morning for a morning drill. This time, we didn’t know whether we were still supposed to participate in the drill, so we stood at the opening of the staircase, wondering what to do. Then the training officer saw us and pointed out that we didn’t participate in the drill as we were supposed to. [I thought] I had a good reason, so I tried to explain to him, but at this point, he said that [he must] penalize me and asked me to go running up and down the stairs. [I think] the military-style management doesn’t allow any excuse. Whatever the boss asks you to do, you must do it. … [I went] up the staircase on this side and came down on the other side. There were six floors all together. I ran for more than an hour, almost two hours, waiting for an order, that is, the order to stop, but it didn’t come. So I was thinking, as long as I didn’t have the order to stop, I must keep running. It turned out that the training officer might have carelessly forgotten about me. When finally somebody told me to stop, I suddenly passed out on the stairs. At that moment, I felt numb all over. It felt like that your face, your eyes, your brain, and every part of your entire body were numb.

What’s even more shocking is, Zhang did not see this treatment as abuse. Instead, he kept defending the company. Before he told his story, he already were saying that “it wasn’t the company’s fault… [but] maybe because I did something wrong.” When the host said after hearing his story, “I don’t think you were at fault,” Zhang responded, with a strong conviction:

This is the military-style management. From the team’s perspective, [if] you don’t perform as you are instructed to, if you don’t operated as you are instructed to, it surely is your fault. As an employee, you must [see this situation] from the team’s perspective rather than the individual’s perspective, because these are two different view points. When you stand on your ground as an individual, you will think that you’re always right, but when you look at it from the team’s perspective, you’ll realize that this may be your problem.

Zhang wants to leave Foxconn and become a career trainer, helping young people who have just joined the workforce become a competitive employee and plan their future. Here’s what he said to his “trainee” in a mock training session on the show:

Every new employee coming into a company must first form a spirit of teamwork that fits yourself. First of all, you must learn to listen [to your supervisor] and know how to behave properly. This is the most basic requirement. I’m not entitled to say “no” to the boss, so I can only obey. So obeying orders is the foremost requirement.

A “boss” on the show pointed out that Zhang’s management style and expectations from employees would work well in manufacturing industry. He said that with Zhang’s experience, he was in demand and would easily find a company that’d hire him. That’s true. The fact is, in reality, military-style management that controls almost every minute of a worker’s life so as to eliminate every trait of individuality has been adopted by many factories in China, not just Foxconn. This dehumanizing rigid control of workers, unfortunately, is where productivity comes from. It is what has brought astronomic profits to companies like Foxconn and put it ahead of other companies on the international market (read about Apple’s example in NYT).

The scariest thing about this dehumanizing culture of the manufacturing industry in China is that it doesn’t only exploits workers, it also changes them, like Zhang, who, working his way up from a lowest-ranking worker to a mid-level manager, has been completely molded into the system, with heart and soul. Having contributed to Foxconn’s big boss Terry Gou’s $5.5 billion, Zhang is now willing, actually, eager to promote Foxconn’s ideology that legitimizes dehumanizing exploitation and its huge human cost in pursuit for profits. Perhaps after all, that’s what capitalism requires in order to grow–the capital must not only control the workers’ bodies, but also their minds. And that’s what’s behind Foxconn’s, and Apples’, success.

“I found this company you work for is indeed very powerful. You worked there for twelve years, and now you’re brainwashed completely,” the host of the show said to Zhang, half-jokingly, after Zhang defended Foxconn. He was right, and that situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

Anonymous's message on the defaced websites

Over the years of its “operation,” if anything, Anon is known to be good at creating excitement in our psyche. And they did it again. The news of its attack on the Chinese government, one of the most notorious censors in the world, surely has excited many freedom lovers, Chinese or not, especially as this happened just a few days after the government’s crack down on websites and the blockage of weibo comments in China. Does this mean that Anon has officially declared war on the Chinese government? How much will their hacktivism impact the Internet in China? Will this become the beginning of a larger social movement?

Don’t get to excited. At this point, I do not see that Anon will have major impact on loosening the Chinese government’s grip on the Internet, nor will it effectively mobilize the Chinese public. And here are my reasons:

On the list that Anon published on pastebin.com, the websites under attack are mostly websites of private businesses. Only a few government websites are on the list, all of them for local governments. The list does not have a single website of a big transnational company (and the group is advocating a “global revolution”) or the central government.

This means, the impact of these attacks is no comparison with that of the attacks on the websites of the U.S. Department of Justice, FBI, Universal Music, and MPAA in protest against SOPA and PIPA earlier this year. Actually, I doubt the government websites Anon attacked have much traffic to begin with since they’re mostly government websites on the city level.

Perhaps that’s why Anon chose to attack the hundreds of non-governmental websites as well. In fact, in Anon’s webchat on #GlobalREvolution, a participant (unclear if s/he is affiliated with Anon) pointed out that attacking those websites was to “spread the word.” If that was Anon’s intension, it didn’t pick the best targets because most of them seem to be of some obscure IT companies.

More importantly, the “word” Anon is trying to spread really doesn’t tell us anything that we didn’t know. There’s no need for anyone to tell Chinese, living in China or overseas, that our freedom of speech is suppressed, because we are living it. In fact, Chinese have been expressing their discontent with the government’s Internet restriction and censoring. Chinese netizens’ reaction to the statement by Hong Lei, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, can well evidence this. Hong said during a press conference yesterday that “the Internet in China is open, and netizens enjoy tremendous freedom… The Chinese government regulates the Internet according to the laws.” Thousands of Chinese commented on various weibo sites, expressing their disgust with the government’s hypocrisy (“Blocking comments, identity verification, we are indeed free”).

So why haven’t Chinese risen up and done something to change? That’s because the Internet is only one place of control. There’s stops and frisks, there’s secret imprisonment, there’s forced eviction, and there’s suppression of unionization of workers… The Chinese government’s control over its citizens is a complex system that reaches various aspects of citizens’ lives on multiple levels and in myriad forms. To mobilize Chinese to take action, if we want to entertain this idea for a second, the Internet is not the only battleground, but it is THE battleground of Anon.

In fact, despite censorship, the Internet the most open space in China and it has been serving as a place for information dissemination, deliberation, and expression that hosts public opinions. However, as the example of Guangzhou’s stops and frisks has shown, in a police state, public opinion hardly has the power that required for change. As Anon and its supporters are raving their victories on Twitter, I’m not sure by taking down a few websites in China, Anon can start a revolution in China as the hashtag #GlobalRevolution suggests.

In the end, Anon’s action has created more of a fantastic image than any actual effects in China. Anon certainly has taken advantage of the sensation-seeking Western media’s obsession with the group and with China’s human rights issues and made a loud noise. I’m not sure, however, how long this sensation can last. Besides, most Chinese governmental websites are so poorly designed and of little use (except for showing off the government’ “good work”) that they do not even need to be hacked to be malfunctioning. As @AnonymousChina tweeted, “cdcbd.gov.cn qnwqdj.gov.cn bbdj.gov.cn redefaced lol your security still suck…” You know what? Maybe that’s because they don’t care about it that much.

It’s no secret that cultural production has been a favorite and an effective tool for the CPC to promote its legitimacy and mobilize the public throughout the years since its formation. In recent years, as China develops its market economy and opens up its cultural market, the CPC has not only embraced the Western model of cultural production and the emerging popular celebrity culture, but puts them to use. Beginning of the Great Revival, among others, is a perfect example of this effort. A companion production following The Founding of a Republic (2009), Beginning of the Great Revival depicts the historical events starting from the Nationalist Revolution in 1911 and leading to the founding of the CPC in 1921.

A Hong Kong-Mainland joint production, the movie is marketed at the same time as a “main theme” movie that praises the achievements of the CPC and its “leader” position in China, and a production that has a stunning stellar cast. It’s said that 173 movie stars and celebrities appeared in the movie, one for every 30 seconds. Among them, many are A-list stars in China such as Chou Yun Fat (Crouching Tiger), Ye Liu (Lan Yu), Zhao Benshan (Happy Times), Zhou Xun (Suzhou River), Fan Bingbing (Lost in Beijing), Leehom Wang (Lust, Caution), John Woo (Mission Impossible, director), and Andy Lau (Infernal Affairs). This cast is even more extravagant than that of its predecessor, The Founding of a Republic, which includes A-list actors such as Ziyi Zhang (Crouching Tiger), Donnie Ye (Hero), Jakie Chan (Rush Hour), and Stephen Chow (Kong Fu Hustle).

And this star-gazing extravaganza type of marketing worked. In less than a week’s time after its opening, Beginning of the Great Revival already grossed about 150 million yuan ($24 million). The Legal Evening (Fazhi Wanbao) estimated that its total box office gross will surpass that of The Founding of a Republic, which grossed a total of a staggering 420 million yuan ($67.7 million).

Many microbloggers confessed on weibo.com, where Beginning of the Great Revival has been the most talked about topic for a week and stays no. 1 today, that they went to see the movie because of the cast. “Just came back from Beginning of the Great Revival. For illiterates of history, they go to [the movie] only to count stars,” weibo user 发发0924 writes. Indeed, it turns out that many young Chinese are perhaps more familiar with the movie stars and celebrities than the historical figures portrayed in the movie. As another weibo user VivickieM admits, “After seeing Beginning of the Great Revival – I know who were acting, but don’t know whom they played…  pretty scary…”

However, besides its all-star glory, the cast drew so much attention from the netizens also because of a list circulated before the release of the movie that supposedly exposed the nationalities of the main actors in the movie. According to the list (the poster below @米店lynne), the citizenships of most of the actors in the cast are of countries other than China, although most of them were born and have built their careers in China. On the poster, it says, “International friends take part in a revolutionary movie for China’s sake; what spirit is this?,” parodying Mao’s article commemorating the Canadian physician Henry Norman Bethune, who served Chinese people and die on duty in the 1930s. After a long list of the “international” actors, Wei Tang (Lust, Caution) is listed as “Chinese,” followed, however, by a note stating “the only Chinese, who has been cut after all.”

This list and some variations of it have been circulated online for quite some time, and stirred up much criticism and ridicule among netizens. “[This is a] Chinese characteristic. Chinese government officials should love the Party and the country best, but all of them have sent their offsprings overseas to hide away,” a microblogger, 真诚处世, writes. Others blame the hard life in China, “[This is] great irony. If I could, I’d leave too. These days it’s hard to love our country, when you have to pay to go to an educational base to get patriotic education,” 真诚处世 writes. “So many celebrities don’t want to be Chinese; what does this say [about China]?” writes 来自火星的小鱼.

However, after the opening of the movie, some netizens pointed out that many actors on the list did not appear in the movie. Nevertheless, the list is still being reposted by weibo users. (Wei Tang’s part has indeed been cut due to a ban on her in Mainland China because of her part in Lust, Caution.)

Perhaps what’s more of “Chinese characteristic” than anything else is how the movie is watched. This might sound strange to people outside China, but many Chinese “working units,” including both public and private sectors, organize movie watching events for their employees to watch this movie. Some employers arrange special screenings in theaters for their employees, some bought group tickets, and some have screenings on their own premises (perhaps using pirated DVDs). In fact, according to Shenzhen Evening (Shenzhen Wanbao), special screenings and group tickets for Beginning of the Great Revival counted for more than half of its gross in Shenzhen during the first weekend of its showing. Some netizens don’t care too much about special screenings or group viewings, such as 彼岸花annie, who writes.

My company out of blue organized a movie watching event for employees, Beginning of the Great Revival! I surprised myself by sitting through the two hours. To be honest, except for a few faces of stars, the movie really sucks ~~~ what’s reported in the news that it grossed several hundreds of millions, if it were not for companies’ and organizations’ group screenings and sponsoring, would have been a dream of Han Sanping (the producer).

Some even criticized that organizing special screenings or buying group tickets for civil servants is a questionable way for the government to spend tax payers’ money.

Others are amused that the pirated version of the movie is already available, free. Weibo user kpCheung found that the HD version of the movie is already available on her/his company’s intranet. “Wahahaha! [They gave us a] political task to reach 80 million box office gross? Go screw yourself ,” (s)he writes.

More netizens simply point out the irony of the movie. One of the most reposted weibos on this topic is a quote from the Associate Dean of the Law School of China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL), He Bing:

This is a ridiculous time: it encourages you to sing revolutionary songs, but doesn’t encourage you to start a revolution; it encourages you to watch Beginning of the Great Revival, but doesn’t encourage to found a political party.

The movie is titled The Founding of the Party in Chinese, and what He pointed out is the illegitimate one-party rule in China.

Many netizens compared today’s China to the China under Beiyang Gevernment’s rule before the Nationalist Revolution. “Now everybody’s saying that Beginning of the Great Revival has made us see the good side of Beiyang Government,” writes RoyGong, in reply to Liu小某‘s post, “em, turned out to be a historical analogy.”

Another weibo user, 芮成钢, writes:

After watching Beginning of the Great Revival, [I think] it was well made! Through vivid cinematography, captivating cases, heart-warming details, [the movie] depicts the Beiyang era: newspapers could be owned privately, news could criticize the government, universities could maintain intellectual independence, students could go out onto streets to protest, the mass could form organizations, the police couldn’t arrest people randomly, power had boundaries, laws were enforced, human rights were ensured, the poor had a way out, the youth had aspirations…

The history textbook version of Beiyong Government in China is a corrupted and oppressive government that the revolutionaries sought to overthrow. Comparing the China under the ruling of Beiyong Government to the China today, netizens found a way to express their dissatisfaction with the lack of civil rights, abuse of power, corruption, declining of culture, and the growing gap between the rich and the poor in today’s China.

Unsurprisingly, on the most popular movie review site in China, douban.com, the rating and reviewing options for Beginning of the Great Revival are turned off. About this, weibo user V时评 writes:

First on the profile of Beginning of the Great Revival on Douban, [they] got rid of the forum, then comments, and later, because about 90% of viewers gave it one star (out of 5), they even got rid of rating, making this movie the first one in Douban’s history that does not allow rating, commenting, reviewing, recommending, or marking as “seen” or “want to see.” About the content of this movie, [I] suggest a disclaimer: “Danger! Don’t imitate!”

Beginning of the Great Revival is scheduled to open on June 24 in the U.S.

            More Share and Comments

It seems that Strauss-Kahn’s fall fed Chinese’s hunger for examples of justice, examples of powerful figures being punished for their abuse of power, even if they did not happen in China:

白水古月: Sex and politics are always tied together, and this is true across the world. Look at this brother (IMF head Strauss-Kahn, born in Paris on May 25, 1949), at this age, he’s still into sexual assaults. I’m so impressed. Look, because of a bit carelessness, he’s famous now; even somebody from a poor mountain valley like myself knows this character.

最强力#IMF总裁 性侵#: He thought too much about himself, thought that he could use his money to calm everything down. But he forgot that money can’t put down our dignity.

Many microbloggers are impressed by NYPD’s quick response, and, albeit quite naively, a system that works to protect people’s rights. The following comment has been circulated around, reflecting many microbloggers’ appreciation of a such a “big city” system that protects “petty citizens,” especially women, and their condemnation of a system controlled by those in power:

侯少开: One of the differences between a big city and a small town: when powerful big shots cover the sky with one hand, it’s called small town; when petty citizens’ rights can be ensured, it’s called a big city. This might be why many people feel safe in big cities despite the feeling of displacement. (@新周刊) Based on the fact that after a female hotel housekeeping employee reported being sexually assaulted by IMF head Strauss-Kahn, the police arrested him in the first class chamber on an international flight and charged him, New York is a big city.

吾亦与点也#sexually assaulting female hotel employee, IMF head arrested#: Strauss-Kahn wouldn’t have lacked women around him, but the weakness of his character and his power and conceit allowed him to step on the bottom line of the law. In front of power and money, powerless women are willing and able to protect their dignity, this is a necessary requirement for modern society.

Others directly compared this case to those in China, often with a sarcastic tone such as the following entry:

书画家作家陈祖芬: If this brother had been born in China, he wouldn’t have needed to sexually assault [someone]. Look at Luo Mengguo, he’s having so much fun, and could even collect the underwear of the women he slept with.

Luo Mengguo was the corrupted Secretary of the Municipal committee of the CPC in the city of Maoming, Guangdong, who had multiple mistresses.

Of course, there are always those interested in international affairs who speculated on the impact of this incident on French politics:

爱智慧心飞扬: IMF head Strauss-Kahn was arrested in the U.S. on charges of sexual assault. I thought the was the strongest candidate for France’s presidential election in 2012, what a shame! Could it be a political conspiracy?

Chinese microbloggers’ interest in this incident seems to come from their dissatisfaction of the lack of social justice in China, especially in underdeveloped regions, or “small towns,” where local officials tend to abuse their power even more often than in larger cities. On a positive note, with the extensive use of social media, Chinese do have more channels to access to information and to express their opinions with a certain degree of freedom. One time a good friend of mine, a journalist in China, said to me that in China people know what’s going on in the country and in the world, but they just don’t talk about it. That’s partly true. After all, people who have access to the internet are still a fraction of the entire population in China. However, what I see is still encouraging and exciting. Many Chinese do speak out candidly, directly or through humor or sarcasm, and I believe more will be willing and able to express themselves in the future. We’ll see.

              More Share and Comments