Moderator: Community Team
by macbone on Fri May 15, 2015 9:18 am
macbone
by macbone on Fri May 15, 2015 9:19 am
macbone
by macbone on Fri May 15, 2015 9:36 am
macbone
by _sabotage_ on Fri May 15, 2015 9:43 am
_sabotage_
by AndyDufresne on Fri May 15, 2015 9:57 am
AndyDufresne
by macbone on Fri May 15, 2015 10:37 am
macbone
by mrswdk on Sat May 16, 2015 1:02 am
mrswdk
by mrswdk on Sat May 16, 2015 1:07 am
mrswdk
by macbone on Sat May 16, 2015 1:55 am
In February 2011, Ai Weiwei tweeted that he would like to conduct an interview with an “online commentator”. Commentators are hired by the Chinese government or the Communist Party of China to post comments favourable towards party policies and to shape public opinion on internet message boards and forums. The commentators are known as the 50-Cent Party, as they are said to be paid 50 cents for every post that steers a discussion away from anti-party content or that advances the Communist Party line.
Below is the transcript of Ai’s interview with an online commentator. As requested, an iPad was given as compensation for the interview. To protect the interviewee, relevant personal information has been concealed in this script.
Question: What’s your name, age, city of residence and online username?
Answer: I cannot make my name public. I’m 26. I have too many usernames. If I want to use one, I just register it. I won’t mention them here.
What do you call the work you do now?
It doesn’t matter what you call it: online commentator, public opinion guide, or even “the 50-Cent Party” that everyone’s heard of.
What is your level of education and work experience? How did you begin the work of guiding public opinion?
I graduated from university and studied media. I once worked for a TV channel, then in online media. I’ve always been in the news media industry, for four or five years now.Over a year ago, a friend asked me if I wanted to be an online commentator, to earn some extra money. I said I’d give it a try. Later, I discovered it was very easy.
When and from where will you receive directives for work?
Almost every morning at 9am I receive an email from my superiors – the internet publicity office of the local government – telling me about the news we’re to comment on for the day. Sometimes it specifies the website to comment on, but most of the time it’s not limited to certain websites: you just find relevant news and comment on it.
Can you describe your work in detail?
The process has three steps – receive task, search for topic, post comments to guide public opinion. Receiving a task mainly involves ensuring you open your email box every day. Usually after an event has happened, or even before the news has come out, we’ll receive an email telling us what the event is, then instructions on which direction to guide the netizens’ thoughts, to blur their focus, or to fan their enthusiasm for certain ideas. After we’ve found the relevant articles or news on a website, according to the overall direction given by our superiors we start to write articles, post or reply to comments. This requires a lot of skill. You can’t write in a very official manner, you must conceal your identity, write articles in many different styles, sometimes even have a dialogue with yourself, argue, debate. In sum, you want to create illusions to attract the attention and comments of netizens.
In a forum, there are three roles for you to play: the leader, the follower, the onlooker or unsuspecting member of the public. The leader is the relatively authoritative speaker, who usually appears after a controversy and speaks with powerful evidence. The public usually finds such users very convincing. There are two opposing groups of followers. The role they play is to continuously debate, argue, or even swear on the forum. This will attract attention from observers. At the end of the argument, the leader appears, brings out some powerful evidence, makes public opinion align with him and the objective is achieved. The third type is the onlookers, the netizens. They are our true target “clients”. We influence the third group mainly through role-playing between the other two kinds of identity. You could say we’re like directors, influencing the audience through our own writing, directing and acting. Sometimes I feel like I have a split personality.
Regarding the three roles that you play, is that a common tactic? Or are there other ways?
There are too many ways. It’s kind of psychological. Netizens nowadays are more thoughtful than before. We have many ways. You can make a bad thing sound even worse, make an elaborate account, and make people think it’s nonsense when they see it. In fact, it’s like two negatives make a positive. When it’s reached a certain degree of mediocrity, they’ll think it might not be all that bad.
What is the guiding principle of your work?
The principle is to understand the guiding thought of superiors, the direction of public opinion desired, then to start your own work.
Can you reveal the content of a “task” email?
For example, “Don’t spread rumours, don’t believe in rumours”, or “Influence public understanding of X event”, “Promote the correct direction of public opinion on XXXX”, “Explain and clarify XX event; avoid the appearance of untrue or illegal remarks”, “For the detrimental social effect created by the recent XX event, focus on guiding the thoughts of netizens in the correct direction of XXXX”.
What are the categories of information that you usually receive?
They are mainly local events. They cover over 60 to 70 per cent of local instructions – for example, people who are filing complaints or petitioning.
For countrywide events, such as the Jasmine Revolution [the pro-democracy protests that took place across the country in 2011], do you get involved?
For popular online events like the Jasmine Revolution, we have never received a related task. I also thought it was quite strange. Perhaps we aren’t senior enough.
Can you tell us the content of the commentary you usually write?
The netizens are used to seeing unskilled comments that simply say the government is great or so and so is a traitor. They know what is behind it at a glance. The principle I observe is: don’t directly praise the government or criticise negative news. Moreover, the tone of speech, identity and stance of speech must look as if it’s an unsuspecting member of public; only then can it resonate with netizens. To sum up, you want to guide netizens obliquely and let them change their focus without realising it.
Can you go off the topic?
Of course you can go off the topic. When transferring the attention of netizens and blurring the public focus, going off the topic is very effective. For example, during the census, everyone will be talking about its truthfulness or necessity; then I’ll post jokes that appeared in the census. Or, in other instances, I would publish adverts to take up space on political news reports.
Can you tell us a specific, typical process of “guiding public opinion”?
For example, each time the oil price is about to go up, we’ll receive a notification to “stabilise the emotions of netizens and divert public attention”. The next day, when news of the rise comes out, netizens will definitely be condemning the state, CNPC and Sinopec. At this point, I register an ID and post a comment: “Rise, rise however you want, I don’t care. Best if it rises to 50 yuan per litre: it serves you right if you’re too poor to drive. Only those with money should be allowed to drive on the roads . . .”
This sounds like I’m inviting attacks but the aim is to anger netizens and divert the anger and attention on oil prices to me. I would then change my identity several times and start to condemn myself. This will attract more attention. After many people have seen it, they start to attack me directly. Slowly, the content of the whole page has also changed from oil price to what I’ve said. It is very effective.
What’s your area of work? Which websites do you comment on? Which netizens do you target?
There’s no limit on which websites I visit. I mainly deal with local websites, or work on Tencent. There are too many commentators on Sohu, Sina, etc. As far as I know, these websites have dedicated internal departments for commenting.
Can you tell which online comments are by online commentators?
Because I do this, I can tell at a glance that about 10 to 20 per cent out of the tens of thousands of comments posted on a forum are made by online commentators.
Will you debate with other people online? What sorts of conflicts do you have? How do you control and disperse emotion?
Most of the time we’re debating with ourselves. I usually never debate with netizens and I’ll never say I’ve been angered by a netizen or an event. You could say that usually when I’m working, I stay rational.
When the government says, “Don’t believe in rumours, don’t spread rumours,” it achieves the opposite effect. For example, when Sars and the melamine in milk case broke out, people tended to choose not to trust the government when faced with the choices of “Don’t trust rumours” and “Don’t trust the government”.
I think this country and government have got into a rather embarrassing situation. No matter what happens – for example, if a person commits a crime, or there’s a traffic accident – as long as it’s a bad event and it’s publicised online, there will be people who condemn the government. I think this is very strange.
This is inevitable, because the government encompasses all. When all honour is attributed to you, all mistakes are also attributed to you. Apart from targeted events, are individuals targeted? Would there be this kind of directive?
There should be. I think for the Dalai Lama, there must be guidance throughout the country. All people in China hate the Dalai Lama and Falun Gong somewhat. According to my understanding, the government has truly gone a bit over the top. Before I got involved in this circle, I didn’t know anything. So I believe that wherever public opinion has been controlled relatively well, there will always have been commentators involved.
How do your superiors inspect and assess your work?
The superiors will arrange dedicated auditors who do random checks according to the links we provide. Auditors usually don’t assess, because they always make work requirements very clear. We just have to do as they say and there won’t be any mistakes.
How is your compensation decided?
It’s calculated on a monthly basis, according to quantity and quality. It’s basically calculated at 50 yuan per 100 comments. When there’s an unexpected event, the compensation might be higher. If you work together to guide public opinion on a hot topic and several dozen people are posting, the compensation for those days counts for more. Basically, the compensation is very low. I work part-time. On average, the monthly pay is about 500-600 yuan. There are people who work full-time on this. It’s possible they could earn thousands of yuan a month.
Do you like your work?
I wouldn’t say I like it or hate it. It’s just a bit more to do each day. A bit more pocket money each month, that’s all.
What’s the biggest difficulty in the work?
Perhaps it’s that you have to guess the psychology of netizens. You have to learn a lot of writing skills. You have to know how to imitate another person’s writing style. You need to understand how to gain the trust of the public and influence their thoughts.
Why can’t you reveal your identity? Why do you think it’s sensitive?
Do you want me to lose my job? Whatever form or name we use to post on any forums or blogs is absolutely confidential. We can’t reveal our identity, and I definitely wouldn’t reveal that I’m a professional online commentator.
If we do, what would be the purpose of our existence? Exposure would affect not just me, it would create an even greater negative effect on our “superiors”.
What do you mean by “superiors”?
Our superior leaders – above that should be the propaganda department.
Is your identity known to your family? Your friends?
No. I haven’t revealed it to my family or friends. If people knew I was doing this, it might have a negative effect on my reputation.
You say: “If I reveal inside information, without exaggeration this could lead to fatality.” Do you think that the consequence would be so serious?
With my identity, I’m involved in the media and also the internet. If I really reveal my identity or let something slip, it could have an incalculable effect on me.
If you say you want to quit, will there be resistance? Are there any strings attached?
Not at all. This industry is already very transparent. For me, it’s just a part-time job. It’s like any other job. It’s not as dark as you think.
How many hours do you go online each day and on which sites? Do you rest at the weekend?
I go online for six to eight hours nearly every day. I’m mainly active on our local BBS and some large mainstream internet media and microblogs. I don’t work over weekends, but I’ll sign in to my email account and see if there’s any important instruction.
In daily life, will you still be thinking about your online work?
Now and then. For example, when I see a piece of news, I’ll think about which direction the superiors will request it to be guided in and how I would go about it. It’s a bit of an occupational hazard.
Do you watch CCTV News and read the People’s Daily?
I usually follow all the news, particularly the local news. But I generally don’t watch CCTV News, because it’s too much about harmony.
Do you go on Twitter? Who do you follow?
Yes. I follow a few interesting people, including Ai Weiwei. But I don’t speak on Twitter, just read and learn.
How big a role do you think this industry plays in guiding public opinion in China?
Truthfully speaking, I think the role is quite big. The majority of netizens in China are actually very stupid. Sometimes, if you don’t guide them, they really will believe in rumours.
Because their information is limited to begin with. So, with limited information, it’s very difficult for them to express a political view.
I think they can be incited very easily. I can control them very easily. Depending on how I want them to be, I use a little bit of thought and that’s enough. It’s very easy. So I think the effect should be quite significant.
Do you think the government has the right to guide public opinion?
Personally, I think absolutely not. But in China, the government absolutely must interfere and guide public opinion. The majority of Chinese netizens are incited too easily, don’t think for themselves and are deceived and incited too easily by false news.
Do you have to believe in the viewpoints you express? Are you concerned about politics and the future?
I don’t have to believe in them. Sometimes you know well that what you say is false or untrue. But you still have to say it, because it’s your job. I’m not too concerned about Chinese politics. There’s nothing to be concerned about in Chinese politics.
macbone
by macbone on Sat May 16, 2015 2:38 am
BBC wrote:A document released by the public security bureau in the city of Jiaozuo in Henan province boasts of the success of this approach.
It retells the story of one disgruntled citizen who posted an unfavourable comment about the police on a website after being punished for a traffic offence.
One of the bureau's internet commentators reported this posting to the authorities within 10 minutes of it going up.
The bureau then began to spin, using more than 120 people to post their own comments that neatly shifted the debate.
"Twenty minutes later, most postings supported the police - in fact many internet users began to condemn the original commentator," said the report.
These internet opinion-formers obviously need to show loyalty and support to the authorities.
They also need other skills, as a document from the hygiene department in the city of Nanning in Guangxi province makes clear.
"[They] need to possess relatively good political and professional qualities, and have a pioneering and enterprising spirit," the document said.
They also need to be able to react quickly, it went on.
China Digital Times wrote:The original story — independently reported by Guangzhou Daily, Southern Metropolis Daily, China News Service, the Information Times and Shanghai’s Xinmin Evening News — quoted the head of Guangzhou’s City Inspectors Committee (广州城管委), Li Yangui (李廷贵), as saying at an awards ceremony that the Guangzhou committee would build a system of internet commentators, “working together with relevant departments to strengthen processing and monitoring of online public opinion.”
The goal, Li said (invoking the old media control buzzword of “guidance”), would be to “track and analyze online public opinion, preventing the spread of undesirable information and thereby generating positive guidance of public opinion.”
The cheekiest response came the following day from China Youth Daily , with columnist Liang Fafu (梁发芾) expressing support for China’s proposed “real-name registration system,” which would effectively end anonymity on China’s web.
In order to deal with negative online information and channel public opinion, a number of government departments have set up special internet commentator teams as well as part-time teams, and this is no longer a secret. It’s my view that we should make information about internet commentators completely open and transparent, instituting a system of real-name registration for internet commentators making online posts. The government has touted the real-name system for the web all along, and we should begin with internet commentators.
Since 2005, observers of the Chinese blogosphere have noted the presence of users who are paid to support the authorities in online discussions, often referred to as the “50 Cent Party” for the alleged fee they collect for each posted comment. Several incidents in recent weeks have once again drawn domestic and international attention to this effort by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to manipulate public debate. Last month, the Propaganda Department in a small county in Hubei Province accidentally posted online a video showing local officials training progovernment internet commentators. The media quickly took interest in the revelation, which stipulated commentators’ duty to guide public opinion in a “constructive” way and engage the internet as “an important battlefield of ideology.” Meanwhile, at a seminar in Beijing at the end of September, the vice minister of public security said that the police should use microblogs as a communication platform to “release correct information and dispel misunderstandings.”
These incidents provide snapshots of a much broader phenomenon that reflects the decentralization and institutionalization of the CCP’s effort to inject the party line into online conversations. Unlike in other countries, the campaign is not an ad hoc effort to preserve the reputation of individual officials or perform short-term damage control. Instead it is a comprehensive CCP policy, accompanied by a vast system of trainings and rewards.
A quick online search of Chinese official websites by researchers with Freedom House’s China Media Bulletin identified over a dozen such training workshops that had taken place throughout China over the past year—including events in Anhui, Shandong, Yunnan, and Zhejiang. Many of them were held in small cities and districts, including in ethnic minority areas like Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang, where party leaders are particularly wary of the internet’s ability to mobilize public protests. Attendance at each training ranged from 50 to 200 people. An examination of the official reports from these workshops indicates that most of the attendees were individuals employed by the government in some capacity, though some trainings likely included private citizens.
Such examples suggest a possible distinction between two kinds of state-supported internet commentator, though the line between them may be blurred in practice:
The “50 Cent Party” model – Private citizens are paid by the government to pretend to be “ordinary” netizens while in fact promoting the CCP line and seeking, in a nontransparent fashion, to guide public opinion in a particular direction.
The “Official PR” model – Government employees from a range of departments hone their public-relations skills in order to get the official message out to the public more quickly and effectively. In this case, the commentators’ identity is transparent, but the information conveyed could still be spun or blatantly deceptive. Moreover, there remains the possibility that these government workers might also engage in online conversations under assumed identities, thereby crossing over to something more closely resembling the “50 Cent Party” model.
Beijing prosecution authorities on Friday indicted veteran human rights lawyer Pu Zhiqiang on the charges of “inciting ethnic hatred” and “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”, having dropped two other charges.
But his lawyer says he still faces up to eight years in jail.
A posting on the official microblog of the Beijing People Procuratorate’s second branch said Pu’s crime was “serious” because he repeatedly posted messages on his microblog account to “incite ethnic hatred” and “openly insult others”. His acts “damaged social order” and he “should be held criminally responsible”, it added.
Pu, who has been detained for a year, was previously also charged with “inciting separatism” and “illegally obtaining personal information”. He was put in criminal detention in May last year after he joined an event marking the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown.
On Friday, his lawyer Shang Baojun said he was pleased that those charges had been dismissed, but said “he shouldn’t be indicted with a single charge”.
But he noted that Pu still faces a maximum jail sentence of eight years with the current two charges.
“He was incriminated for the opinions he expressed, just because he posted about 30 microblog messages – I don’t think this is acceptable,” Shang said.
Shang said Pu’s opinions should be within the parameters of free speech and should be protected by the constitution.
Shang earlier said Pu’s microblog messages from 12 Weibo accounts between 2011 and last year were used to indict him. His commentaries were mostly sarcastic criticisms of the Communist Party and its policies towards ethnic minorities and neighbouring countries.
Human rights advocates say Pu’s arrest is aimed at silencing him and is part of the wider crackdown on rights lawyers, activists and civil society under President Xi Jinping’s ideological campaign.
In his commentaries, Pu had been highly critical of the party. “From top to bottom, the Communist Party cannot survive without telling lies,” he said in one post.
He also poked fun at officials including Shen Jilan, an elderly legislator who claims never to have voted “no” in parliamentary sessions, and Mao Xinyu, the grandson of Mao Zedong and a major general in the People’s Liberation Army.
“Apart from luck and bloodlines,” Pu wrote, Shen and Mao held senior posts by “pretending to be a fool and being a real fool”.
He also criticised China’s ethnic policies in Xinjiang and Tibet.
He lambasted the hardline policies of former Xinjiang party chief Wang Lequan following the deadly knife attack at a Kunming railway station in March last year that was blamed on Uygur separatists.
“I can believe that the terror was created by Xinjiang pro-independence [forces] – but this is the outcome, not the cause,” he wrote. “Wang Lequan ... you’re most familiar with that place, tell me: Why? Who are they aiming at?”
Pu also criticised Beijing’s governance of Tibet, saying the rules ordering Tibetan monasteries to hang Chinese leaders’ portraits and prohibiting Muslim men from growing beards and women from wearing veils were “mad”.
While criticising Japan’s wartime atrocities in China, one of his posts said: “If China was ruled by Japan, it would have been 10,000 times better than now.”
William Nee, China Researcher at Amnesty International, said charges against Pu were "an act political persecution" and the chances of him receiving a fair trial were "close to zero”.
Pu has represented many government critics in high-profile rights cases, including artist Ai Weiwei.
“With this prosecution, the authorities are sending a warning to all lawyers that take up ‘sensitive’ cases: “fall in line or we’ll go after you". This harassment of those that defend the rights of ordinary citizens must end,” said Nee.
lovemeagainpls@******
May 15th 2015
6:39pm
US regime going to call him as" political detainee" and demand china govt to release him immediately ( asking china govt to interfere with judicial decision)
as usual, US regime dont have any respect for judicial independence and rule of law.
because there are contract between US regime and their funded dissident.
p90gundam
May 16th 2015
1:10pm
in USA, if any lawyer openly in social media says in USA or Israel:"“If US or Israel was ruled by WW2German, it would have been 10,000 times better than now.” i can guarantee that he would be killed by Jews or americans on street or at home. if he luckily survives, still by US immigration law, anyone voicing approval of wartime nazi german to this degree,his US citizenship or immigration status will be stripped,and exported back to country of origin. this guy is lucky to be alive in a mellower chinese public. only expats or china haters do not relate the seriousness of such offending statement which is criminal/detrimental in eyes of americans /Jews if equivalence applied to ww2 german & USA or israel.
mrswdk wrote:A trade deal between Taiwan province and the mainland.
No leader would dare try to regulate cross-dressing.
mrswdk wrote:It's a very good map, but I would like to request that the name of the territory titled 'Taiwan R.O.C.' be changed to 'Taiwan'.
None of the other territories have been given political names (e.g. 'North Korea' is not called 'DPRK'), so I feel it is a little unnecessary to use a political name for possibly the most contentious territory on the board.
'Taiwan' is a perfectly acceptable and politically neutral name for the territory. Maybe it wasn't the map-maker's intention to be provocative, but they have been and I would recommend that this is remedied out of consideration for those who may be offended by the use of the 'R.O.C.'.
mrswdk wrote:Votes just in. 1.3 billion people voted for Taiwan and Tibet to remain within the People's Republic. 0.1> billion people voted for independence.
Hooray for democracy. Group hug!
macbone
by mrswdk on Sat May 16, 2015 2:53 am
mrswdk
by mrswdk on Sat May 16, 2015 3:07 am
mrswdk
by _sabotage_ on Sat May 16, 2015 3:46 am
_sabotage_
by nietzsche on Sat May 16, 2015 4:25 am
nietzsche
by mrswdk on Sat May 16, 2015 8:05 am
nietzsche wrote:that's an awful lot of coincidences mrs wdk. you whore.
mrswdk
by Dukasaur on Sat May 16, 2015 9:07 am
mrswdk wrote:nietzsche wrote:that's an awful lot of coincidences mrs wdk. you whore.
Throw enough poop at your wife and some will stick.
Dukasaur
3
2
by AndyDufresne on Mon May 18, 2015 12:12 pm
AndyDufresne
by muy_thaiguy on Mon May 18, 2015 1:28 pm
AndyDufresne wrote:Can someone make a signature tally for how much income mrswdk accrues while posting?
--Andy
muy_thaiguy
by mrswdk on Mon May 18, 2015 9:54 pm
mrswdk
by AndyDufresne on Tue May 19, 2015 9:05 am
mrswdk wrote: by presenting balanced information
AndyDufresne
by mrswdk on Tue May 19, 2015 10:35 am
AndyDufresne wrote:mrswdk wrote: by presenting balanced information
That is a good one!
--Andy
mrswdk
by macbone on Wed May 20, 2015 3:56 am
macbone
by mrswdk on Wed May 20, 2015 4:22 am
macbone wrote:Mrs, at least you're living the dream! =)
Me, I'd rather be on a beach getting paid to read comics. Maybe in my next lifetime. =)
mrswdk
by khazalid on Wed May 20, 2015 11:06 am
khazalid
Users browsing this forum: jusplay4fun
|
|||||||
| Conquer Club is not associated with RISK online in any way. Copyright © 2006-2025 by Big Wham LLC | |||||||
