Agent 012339 is back on duty. China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) has deployed its AI anchor once again, this time to warn citizens about the perils of “scaling the wall,” or fanqiang (翻墙) — Chinese internet slang for using VPNs to access blocked foreign websites. The uniformed digital spokesman delivers his message with characteristic earnestness: digital freedom, he says, is actually a trap that threatens both your bank account and the nation.

In late October, CMP reported on the launch of Agent 012339 by the MSS as a new form of messaging to the public.

The MSS WeChat post frames VPN use as a series of escalating dangers. First come the personal risks: stolen credit card information, compromised passwords, and identity theft. The ministry illustrates this with the tale of one user whose credit card was fraudulently charged “thousands of dollars” six months after using a VPN to pay for materials from a foreign institution.

Then comes the espionage angle: VPNs secretly controlled by “foreign forces,” or jingwai shili (境外势力), or even developed directly by foreign intelligence agencies, are designed to plant trojans and steal sensitive data. One employee at an unspecified “classified unit” who downloaded a VPN to access foreign academic forums, Agent 012339 explains, ended up having their phone and computer remotely controlled, leading to the theft of classified research materials and criminal prosecution.

But the ministry’s most revealing concern is ideological contamination. The post warns that citizens browsing foreign websites “without any precaution” are vulnerable to “fraudulent information, extremist ideology, and political rumors” — a cascade of consequences that can transform “curious browsing” into “active participation” in illegal activities. To illustrate, the MSS describes a state-owned enterprise employee who was arrested after regularly visiting “anti-China websites” overseas, watching videos containing “political rumors about us,” and downloading and spreading such content.

What to do instead? Reject VPNs entirely. Individuals and organizations with legitimate academic or business needs should use “legal and proper channels approved by the state” — though the post does not specify what those might be. Everyone else should stick to official media and authorized platforms, avoid downloading apps from unknown sources, and cultivate “healthy internet habits.”

And if you spot someone scaling the wall? Agent 012339 reminds you that the 12339 hotline is always open for tips. The Great Firewall isn’t just about keeping information out — it’s about keeping tabs on who’s trying to peek over.

Former Global Times editor-in-chief Hu Xijin (胡锡进) marked China’s Journalists Day on Saturday with an unusually pointed critique of local authorities’ handling of news coverage, warning that official “blue background” statements are marginalizing journalists and weakening society’s resilience.

In a Weibo post on November 8, Hu — who served as the Communist Party tabloid’s editor for more than a decade — urged local governments to grant reporters greater access to breaking news events. “Currently, in some places where incidents occur, local governments completely prevent media involvement, allowing only official agencies to investigate and then issue a brief statement in white on a blue background, effectively marginalizing journalists,” Hu wrote. “This is highly unacceptable.”

Hu’s reference to “blue background” statements points to the tongbao (通报), official notices increasingly used by local police and government agencies to announce incidents without allowing the most basic reporting, to say nothing of more in-depth journalistic investigation. These terse, formulaic “white on blue” (蓝底白字) announcements have proliferated across Chinese social media in recent years, often serving as the sole official word on accidents, deaths, and other sensitive local news events.

They are often picked up by prominent news outlets such as Shanghai’s The Paper (澎湃) and The Beijing News (新京报). While they may be attractive sources of free and politically safe content, they have no independent verification and are often worthless as information.

Hu Xijin argued that such rigid controls “sacrifice the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of communication, and more importantly, undermine society’s long-term resilience and capacity to withstand pressure.” He called on authorities to show greater confidence and reduce restrictions on journalists.

In a perfect illustration of the exclusive, lazy use of the blue background notice that now typifies much reporting in China today, Hu’s old newspaper, the Global Times, reported late last week on an investigation by the Chongqing Public Security Bureau into Taiwanese lawyer and legislator Shen Bo-yang (沈伯洋), who is also known as Puma Shen. The Global Times story began with the blue notice, after which a summary repeated the same information, without any additional reporting or context.

True to form, the veteran Global Times editor took a bow to the Party and its press control principles even as he decried the damage done to journalism by the rising tide of blue notices — making clear that he was not talking on China’s Journalists Day about the type of journalism practiced in free societies. He emphasized that journalists must be able to play their proper role under CCP guidance. “The community of journalists is a supporting force for orderly social governance under Party leadership, an organic and important part of it,” Hu wrote. “Once this force is weakened, the harm to society’s long-term harmonious operation will definitely outweigh the benefits.”

“Openness brings prosperity, closure brings decline.” This declaration opened a commentary in yesterday’s People’s Daily emphasizing China’s commitment to trade openness in the midst of President Trump’s visit to Asia this week, which is expected to culminate in a much-anticipated sideline meeting with Xi Jinping in Seoul, where a “framework” trade deal is on the agenda.

The commentary appeared under the pseudonymous byline Huanyu Ping (寰宇平), which translates something like “universal peace” — and in which the last character ping (平) is a homophone for “commentary,” or pinglun (评论), marking it as a specialized voice for key issues in global affairs. Like other pen names in the People’s Daily, this is not an individual author but rather a writing group (写作组) representing the consensus of the central leadership.

Addressing the upcoming APEC summit in South Korea, the commentary, “Gathering Asia-Pacific Strength to Continue Leading the Tide,” cited survey data from the People’s Daily showing that over 80 percent of respondents believe their countries benefit from APEC cooperation, and that 75 percent support deeper participation.

Interestingly, this same survey, conducted by the International News Department of the CCP’s flagship newspaper — under the direction of the Party’s Central Propaganda Department — was ceremoniously released earlier this month during the China-South Korea Media Cooperation Forum (中韩媒体合作论坛) in Seoul. That event, logged in our Lingua Sinica database, was a representative case in how China exploits ostensible media diplomacy to advance foreign policy objectives, often ahead of key diplomatic events.

In a written response to CMP following the event, Kim Jin-ho (金珍镐), a professor at South Korea’s Dankook University who was quoted in the People’s Daily, said his remarks at the Seoul forum were “carefully coordinated in advance with reporters from both the Maeil Business Newspaper and the People’s Daily.” Kim was quoted in the People’s Daily as remarking that media should “channel public opinion toward positive interaction” (引导舆论正向互动), language that echoes official CCP framing on media control, suggesting the primary role of media is to support bilateral relations.

Yesterday’s Huanyu Ping commentary emphasized that “open cooperation” has driven regional success over the past 30 years while warning that “protectionism has become one of the most severe challenges to regional development.” It quoted Chilean President Gabriel Boric as saying, in a clear but veiled reference to US President Donald Trump, that “launching trade wars leads nowhere.” These remarks were first reported in China’s state media back in May this year, when Boric made a visit to Beijing.

A second commentary yesterday appeared under the byline Zhong Sheng (钟声), or “Voice of China,” a homophone representing central leadership opinions on foreign affairs. This piece reported on US-China trade talks held October 25-26 in Kuala Lumpur, stating the two sides “reached basic consensus on arrangements to address respective concerns” on maritime logistics, shipbuilding tariffs, fentanyl enforcement, and agricultural trade. The commentary stressed the principle that “cooperation benefits both, while confrontation harms both,” a line that China has tread consistently, portraying itself as the voice of global responsibility in a time of turmoil.

The Zhong Sheng piece also referenced the recently concluded Fourth Plenum, which approved proposals for the 15th Five-Year Plan and called for “steadily expanding institutional opening, [and] maintaining the multilateral trade system.”

The deployment of both commentaries on the same day, using distinct pseudonymous voices standing in for the consensus view of the central leadership, exemplifies China’s messaging approach around major diplomatic events. The Seoul media engagement, survey release, and now these twin commentaries represent a coordinated narrative strategy — with the hope of preparing elite opinion ahead of the high-stakes diplomacy in Seoul.

In China’s digital landscape, even feelings can be subject to government regulation. On September 22, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) announced its latest “Clear and Clean” (清朗) campaign—this time targeting the “malicious incitement of negative emotions” (恶意挑动负面情绪) across social media, short video, and livestreaming platforms. The two-month campaign promises to crack down on everything from “group antagonism” to “excessive rendering of pessimistic emotions.”

How will run-of-the-mill negativity be distinguished from the incitement of negativity? Is feeling and speaking with positivity now the law of the land? The next enforcement step, naturally, will have to be vigilant policing of the use of extravagant positivity to maliciously poke fun at the leadership. Sound ridiculous? It is already policy elsewhere, in the Chinese Communist Party’s active posture toward “low-level red” and “high-level black” — more in this paper on the topic.

Just the latest absurdly overweening action by the CAC, the notice is a prime example of how political and legal enforcement operate under the CCP. Rather than relying on consistent, transparent rules applied uniformly across platforms, China’s officials and regulators turn to sweeping “special actions” (专项行动) announced throughout the year, granting officials across the country’s vast bureaucracy broad discretionary power to pursue vaguely defined violations and make examples of bad actors — all with the goal of instilling fear and reshaping online discourse.

And fear is the point — whether we are speaking about the ethos of the regulators themselves, or about their tactics. Fear is the fundamental tool applied by agencies like the CAC and offices like the Central Propaganda Department to enforce political controls. A fearful journalist or editor, unable to see the red lines, will think twice. A fearful platform, like RedNote or Bilibili, will turn up the pace on deletions and account suspensions to ensure they “comply.”

A lingering sense of anxiety forms the foundation of China’s media and information policy today — going back to the political upheaval of 1989 that fundamentally transformed the Party’s approach to press control.

The “special action” approach to governance also lays bare its own ineffectiveness. The most recent action from the CAC is to extend over two months. What then? An end to negativity? Surely not. But one thing you can be sure of: the necessity of the next, and then the next, “special action.”

___________