The following post by scholar and former journalist Guo Yukuan (郭宇宽) about his witnessing of the arrogant use of an expensive luxury vehicle with official military plates was deleted from Sina Weibo sometime before 1:36pm Hong Kong time on April 16, 2012. Guo Yukuan currently has just under 22,000 followers, according to numbers from Sina Weibo. [More on deleted posts at the WeiboScope Search, by the Journalism and Media Studies Centre].

Today is the weekend, and at the Minsu Temple in Luoyang, which was overflowing with people, and people were suddenly ordered around and berated, told to make way. It turned out this was for the mount [vehicle] of an old military official, the road cleared before him and a retinue following. As the crowd looked on, an attendant stood at the door, and a small old military official emerged. First, as a fan of Henan Opera [with which the temple is associated], they disturbed my aesthetic mood. Second, as a taxpayer, I felt out of sorts. And finally, as there was also a child [in the vehicle], I felt pained for unfortunate impact this kind of family would have on the child’s upbringing.

The post was accompanied by the following photo taken by Guo Yukuan.

The original Chinese post by Guo Yukuan follows:

今日是周末，洛阳民俗庙会人山人海，忽有马弁开道呵斥众人肃静回避，原来是一位军爷的坐骑，前有开道，后有扈从，众人侧目之际，侍从手挡车门，迎下的原来是一位小军爷。 一是作为豫剧爱好者，他们扰了我的雅兴。 二是作为纳税人，我很不爽。 三作为也有孩子的，我痛心这样的家庭对儿童成长不利。

NOTE: All posts to The Anti-Social List are listed as “permission denied” in the Sina Weibo API, which means they were deleted by Weibo managers, not by users themselves.

The following post by writer and traditional culture expert Wuman Lanjiang (雾满拦江) dealing with political secrecy in China was deleted from Sina Weibo sometime before 6:34pm Hong Kong time yesterday, April 17, 2012. Wuman Lanjiang currently has more than 164,000 followers, according to numbers from Sina Weibo. [More on deleted posts at the WeiboScope Search, by the Journalism and Media Studies Centre].

Yang Hengjun (杨恒均) wrote on his blog: in bookstores in the Hong Kong airport, you can see a huge section of the shelves all devoted to inside secrets of the Chinese government, insider looks at political affairs, and at the lives of leaders. If these disclosures were happening in Western countries, you could go right to the government archives and have a look at them, but in China they’ve become secrets . . . Another article said that in our country the people’s right to know is so insignificant as to be pathetic, and we live in a world where we cannot know.

The post was accompanied by the following cartoon, in which a probing journalist trying to report on government affairs — in the background, an official leaps up across a serious of bigger and bigger official red stamps representing power — is shielded from the facts.

The original Chinese post by Wuman Lanjiang follows:

杨恒均在他的博客里说：在香港机场逛书店，看到整整一大片书架上，几乎全部都是揭秘中国政府、政务内幕、领导人情况的，而这些揭露的内幕如果放在西方国家的话，你都可以到政府档案馆去查阅，在中国却成了秘密……另有文章称：我国民众的知情权少得可怜，活在一个不可知的世界上。要不犯傻，要不犯法。

NOTE: All posts to The Anti-Social List are listed as “permission denied” in the Sina Weibo API, which means they were deleted by Weibo managers, not by users themselves.

In 2006, one year before the Chinese Communist Party’s 17th Congress, Yu Keping (俞可平), a political scholar generally seen as part of President Hu Jintao’s inner circle of theorists, leapt into China’s spotlight with a book called Democracy is a Good Thing. This week, in the wake of last week’s turbulent removal of Bo Xilai — and just six months from the crucial 18th Congress — Yu Keping is in the spotlight again.
Last month, Yu Keping released a new book called Democratic Governance and Political Reform in China (敬畏民意：中国的民主治理与政治改革). The English-language title on the book’s jacket is in fact a partial translation of the Chinese title. The full title should read something like: Prizing the Will of the People: Democratic Governance and Political Reform in China.

In the book, Yu discusses a set of key points about Chinese society and politics in recent years, and argues (as Premier Wen Jiabao often has in recent months) that China stands at an important crossroads on the question of whether and how a basic consensus on reforms, both economic and political, can be maintained.
Yu Keping’s Chinese title, Prizing the Will of the People, in fact expresses the core idea of his book, that the popular will as expressed in public opinion is the only true basis for the legitimacy of political leadership in China.
Yu, the deputy director of the Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, is one of China’s most prominent political scholars, his research covering such areas as political philosophy, comparative politics and civil society development. Yu, who is closely associated with the Hu-Wen administration, sparked debate in China about “democratic politics” in 2006 with the publication of his book Democracy is a Good Thing.
In the essay that provided the foreword to Democracy is a Good Thing Yu Keping wrote [a nod once again to Roland Soong for his translation]:

Democracy is a good thing, and this is not just for specific persons or certain officials; this is for the entire nation and its broad masses of people. Simply put, for those officials who care more about their own interests, democracy is not only not a good thing; in fact, it is a troublesome thing, even a bad thing. Just think, under conditions of democratic rule, officials must be elected by the citizens and they must gain the endorsement and support of the majority of the people; their powers will be curtailed by the citizens, they cannot do whatever they want, they have to sit down across the people and negotiate. Just these two points alone already make many people dislike it. Therefore, democratic politics will not operate on its own; it requires the people themselves and the government officials who represent the interests of the people to promote and implement.

The following is a partial translation of the transcript of an interview Yu Keping gave recently to Huashang Bao, in which he discusses his new book:

Huashang Bao: You’ve just recently come out with a new book. I’ve found something quite interesting, which is that the full name of the book is Prizing the Will of the People: Democratic Governance and Political Reform in China, but in the publicity the book has gotten everyone seems to have simply called the book Prizing the Will of the People. It seems right to suggest that this overlooks a much more concrete sense of the book [and its content] and that is “democratic governance and political reform in China.” Do you think that in China today, just as with this process of publicizing [your book], democratic governance and political reform and such questions have been consciously or unconsciously ignored, or insufficient attention paid to them?
Yu Keping: No, not at all. Emphasizing “prizing the will of the people” is in fact my intent. It is the root of democratic politics. As I’ve said before, the Chinese Communist Party defines as its purpose “establishing the Party for the public, governing for the people” (立党为公，执政为民). It takes the power by the people (人民当家作主) of people’s democracy (人民民主) as the very life of socialism. For the Chinese Communist Party, the interests of the people should be the core value to be pursued, and the will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of governance. Regardless of whether this is about “all rights for the people” (权为民所有) and “power for the people” (权为民所赋), or about “power exercised for the people” (权为民所用), we can’t step around these two words “popular will” (民意) [or “will of the people”]. If you depart from the popular will, there’s no such thing even as “taking charge for the people” (为民做主), not to mention “exercising power for the people”.
But as you’ve just said, Prizing Public Opinion encapsulates my thinking over the past few years about democratic politics and political reform in our country. In Democracy is a Good Thing, Let the People Make China Prosper (让民主造福中国) and Thought Liberation and Political Progress (思想解放与政治进步), I’ve continued to argue that democracy is a good thing, and I’ve talked about such concepts as “increasing democracy” (增量民主), “dynamic stability” (动态稳定), good government and good leadership, civil society and “renewing the government” (政府创新). . . I’ve indicated strongly that in this key areas, we must have a breakthrough on political reform. Otherwise, our project of modernization will suffer setback, the cost of development will constantly rise, and the pressures on governance will rise dramatically.
I’ve also tried to raise some new methods and new ideas about possible solutions. For example, I think that “to rule the country by law we must first rule the Party by law” (依法治国必先依法治党), that “we must innovate social management and at the same time prioritize the self-governance of society” (既要创新社会管理，又要重视社会自治), that “mutual governance by the government and the people is the basic path to good governance” (官民共治是通向善治的基本途径), etcetera.
Huashang Bao: My impression is that among high-level officials you’re the one who talks most publicly about reform and about democracy. Where did these convictions of yours come from?
Yu Keping: They have a lot to do with my family and background. I was born into a poor farming household. I used to graze the cattle, and I once served as a cadre in a rural production brigade. My parents and my brothers and sisters are still in the countryside. I know the hardships among the people, and I know that only democratic politics can allow every ordinary citizen to enjoy lives of fairness, justice and prosperity. Besides this, there is my professional background. I am a political scholar. In fact, I was the first political studies PhD that China fostered all on its own. It is my responsibility to promote democratic politics and to share a knowledge of democracy with all.
In my study of the development of political principles in China and beyond, from ancient times to the present, I’ve come to have a deep understanding that an advanced state of democracy and rule of law is the only true way to achieve the great revitalization of the Chinese people, and it is where the basic nature of socialism lies. I believe that any scholar or official who cares for China’s fate and has a responsible attitude toward the people will feel the same profound sense of historical responsibility and gravity that I feel.
Huashang Bao: Nevertheless, it can’t be denied that there are some officials that really do have no interest at all in these things that you care about and advocate. All they care about is there own power and their own interests. How do you view this?
Yu Keping: If you care only for your own interests and power, that shows not just that you have no interest at all in democracy and rule of law but even worse that you will do your utmost to vilify and harm the democratic undertaking. In clear anticipation of exactly this situation, I made a point of adding in a “note”: seeing these words, some officials will laugh narrow-mindedly to themselves; some scholars will turn up their noses; some readers will dismiss what I say as empty chatter. Knowing this only too well, I reaffirm my views? Why? Because I deeply believe that there will be more people who cherish their rights, there will be more scholars who hold on to their ideals, and there will be more officials who prize public opinion. Where the public will goes, so trend the times.

According to recent reports in Chinese media, products from 13 pharmaceutical companies including Xiuzheng Pharmaceutical (修正药业) were recently found to contain excessive amounts of chromium, with products in some cases having 90 times the accepted levels of chromium. The companies, which are now being investigated by the State Food and Drug Administration, are alleged to have manufactured capsules for medicinal products by using industrial gelatins made from recycled leather and other waste products processed with quicklime.
In this cartoon, posted by artist Shang Haichun (商海春) to his blog at QQ.com, a homegrown pharmaceutical manufacturer — apparently perspiring with guilt — throws old shoes into the top of an old-fashioned meat grinder and medicinal capsules pop out the other end.

CMP has confirmed that daily newspapers across China — including Party papers (党报) and commercial spin-offs (子报) — were instructed by propaganda authorities to publish today’s front-page People’s Daily editorial reiterating that China is “a nation of rule of law and that the dignity and authority of the law cannot be trampled.”
Newspapers were told to give the editorial prominent positioning, and to clearly mark it as coming from the People’s Daily.
The editorial, much of which parrots the April 11 People’s Daily piece that accompanied the announcement of Bo Xilai’s removal from the Central Committee, is the latest salvo in an ongoing campaign by China’s top leadership to firm up support for Bo’s ouster and bridge divisions within the Party (and the general population) ahead of the 18th Congress later this year.

“Regardless of who is implicated, if there is a breach of the law it will be handled according to the law, without indulgence.” Recently, the CCP Central Committee’s investigation and prosecution of the serious discipline violations of Comrade Bo Xilai (薄熙来), and the Public Security Bureau’s announcement of the results of its legal re-investigation into the death of Neil Heywood and transfer of the criminal suspects to judicial organs, has received the earnest support of Party members and the masses, and conscientious observation of Party discipline and national laws has become a general consensus throughout the Party and the people of the nation, coalescing into a powerful force for reform, development and stability.

This forced placement of an editorial from the CCP’s flagship newspaper is a highly irregular move, and sends a clear message that the leadership is tightening propaganda controls across media — from social media sites and news websites to traditional media.
The move also reflects the Party’s determination to convey its messages directly through commercially operating Chinese media, a tactic that formally became a part of media policy four years ago.
Back in June 2008, in his first full-fledged speech on media policy, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡锦涛) spoke of the need for the Party to shift its information tactics. Under the “new circumstances” of a rapidly changing information landscape, it was no longer sufficient to simply “control” information — snuffing out the sparks of public scandal before they blazed into full-fledged crisis. The Party now had to take a more active posture, shaping stories and agendas through the very media that were now, after more than a decade of change (viz., media commercialization and new technologies), posing a challenge to its project of “guiding public opinion.”
This shift meant the Party had to complement “control”, or guanli (管理), with “use”, or liyong (利用). The policy, in fact, was presaged in Hu’s January 2007 campaign to “cleanse” the internet, in which he talked about the need to combine “control” and “use”.
This week, as top leaders push the message of unity, and of loyalty to the central Party leadership — all baked in a moralistic meringue about the Party’s commitment to clean governance and rule of law — they have been actively utilizing media of all stripes.
Today’s People’s Daily is just the latest example. But the active “use” of the media could certainly also be glimpsed in the prominent play given on April 11 in newspapers and websites to the three official Xinhua News Agency releases concerning 1) Bo Xilai’s removal from the Central Committee, 2) his wife’s detention as a chief suspect in the alleged murder of British national Neil Heywood and 3) the People’s Daily editorial on “Strongly Supporting the Correct Decisions of the Party Central Committee.”
A number of examples follow of newspapers today and how they have played the People’s Daily editorial. The chief difference seems to be that while some papers (as Southern Metropolis Daily) have included prominent mention of People’s Daily in bold headlines, others have placed the attribution in a smaller subhead (as The Beijing News).

[ABOVE: Today’s front page at Nanfang Daily, the official newspaper of the top Party leadership in Guangdong province.]

[ABOVE: Today’s front page at Southern Metropolis Daily, a commercial spin-off of Nanfang Daily.]

[ABOVE: Today’s front page at Henan Daily, the official newspaper of the top Party leadership in Henan province.]

[ABOVE: Today’s front page at Dahe Daily, a commercial spin-off of Henan Daily.]

[ABOVE: Today’s front page at The Beijing News.]

The following re-post by Chinese scholar Liu Junning (刘军宁) dealing with China’s policy of stability preservation and the unstable nature of autocratic power was deleted from Sina Weibo sometime before 7:43pm Hong Kong time yesterday, April 9, 2012. Liu Junning currently has just over 44,000 followers, according to numbers from Sina Weibo. [More on deleted posts at the WeiboScope Search, by the Journalism and Media Studies Centre].

//@WindsLiangPing: //@LaoCanJiayouzhan: //@JDaGeLao: //@LiuLangGongHeZhangJianjian: Stability preservation’s greatest factor of instability is not rumor, and is not the voice of opposition, nor is it the hostile forces (敌对势力) [from overseas]. Stability preservation’s greatest factor of instability is autocracy itself! @XueManzi @LiChengpeng @XiaoShu @LiuJunning @WoChenmoBenFeiyang: The separation of politics and law, judicial independence (司法独立) and the building of non-governmental supervision mechanisms //@DaBieShanJu:

The original Chinese re-post by Liu Junning follows:

[话筒] //@winds凉平: //@老饕加油站: //@J大哥佬: //@流浪共和张建建: 维稳的最大不安定因素不是谣言，不是反对的声音，也不是敌对势力，维稳的最大不安定因素就是专制本身！ @薛蛮子 @李承鹏@刘军宁 @笑蜀@何兵 //@我沉默本飞扬:政法分离，司法独立，并建立民间监督机构 //@大别山居:

NOTE: All posts to The Anti-Social List are listed as “permission denied” in the Sina Weibo API, which means they were deleted by Weibo managers, not by users themselves.

Topping the headlines across China’s media today is the removal of Chongqing’s former Party chief, Bo Xilai (薄熙来), from his posts in the Politburo and in the larger Central Committee [See AFP report in English here]. According to a news release, or tong’gao (通稿), posted by the official Xinhua News Agency late last night, “Comrade Bo Xilai” now faces investigation for “serious discipline violations.”
According to a separate Xinhua release made last night at 11pm and also being posted across major internet portals today (in some cases patched with the release on Bo Xilai), these “discipline violations” stem from the February 6 “Wang Lijun incident” (王立军事件) and the apparent murder in November 2011 of British national Neil Heywood in Chongqing.
As of 11:14am today, the Xinhua News Agency website still features the Bo Xilai release in its prominent “Xinhua Headline” section above the day’s main news stories.

Readers who click on the Xinhua headline, “Party Central Committee Decides to Investigate Comrade Bo Xilai for Serious Discipline Violations,” are taken to last night’s brief Xinhua release:

Given serious discipline violations involving Comrade Bo Xilai (薄熙来), the Central Committee of the CCP has decided, according to stipulations made in the Constitution of the Communist Party of China and Inspection Regulations for CCP Discipline Inspection Bodies (中国共产党纪律检查机关案件检查工作条例), to terminate [Bo Xilai’s] service in posts in the Political Bureau of the Central Committee and as a member of the Central Committee, and to carry out an investigation [of Bo’s conduct] through the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection.

QQ.com, the popular internet portal site run by Tencent, has posted the Xinhua release on Bo Xilai’s removal from the Politburo and tacked on the separate release on the investigation into the death of British national Neil Heywood.
So here is how QQ.com’s coverage of the story looks today on the front page of the news section, followed by a full translation of the combined Xinhua releases:

Central Committee Decides to Launch Investigation of Comrade Bo Xilai for Serious Discipline Violations
April 10, 2012, 11pm, Xinhua News Agency
Xinhua News Agency, Beijing, April 10 dispatch — Given serious discipline violations involving Comrade Bo Xilai (薄熙来), the Central Committee of the CCP has decided, according to stipulations made in the Constitution of the Communist Party of China and Inspection Regulations for CCP Discipline Inspection Bodies (中国共产党纪律检查机关案件检查工作条例), to terminate [Bo Xilai’s] service in posts in the Political Bureau of the Central Committee and as a member of the Central Committee, and to carry out an investigation [of Bo’s conduct] through the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection.
Public Security Organs are Re-opening an Investigation into the death of Neil Heywood
The Xinhua News Agency learned from relevant departments that after the February 6 incident in which Wang Lijun personally entered and was held (滞留) at the American consulate in Chengdu, public security organs gave a high level of priority to the case mentioned by Wang Lijun of the November 15, 2011, discovery of the death of British national Neil Heywood in Chongqing, and they formed a review team to investigate according to the law, with a factual mindset.
That investigation revealed that Bogu Kailai (薄谷开来) — the wife of Comrade Bo Xilai — and her son had previously had a strong relationship with Neil Heywood, but due to issues of economic interest tensions [between both sides] gradually worsened.
Through a process of review, the current evidence proves that Neil Heywood was murdered, and Bogu Kailai and Zhang Xiaojun (张晓军) — a servant in the Bo household — are the major criminal suspects.
Bogu Kailai and Zhang Xiaojun have already been transferred to judicial organs on suspicion of the crime of intentional homicide.
Responsible persons at relevant organs say that our nation is a country of socialist rule of law, and the dignity and authority of the law cannot be trampled. Regardless of who they involve, all violations of the law will be handled according to the law, without tolerance.

Sohu.com, another popular internet portal, ran the official Xinhua release on Bo’s removal from the Central Committee along with a People’s Daily editorial dated today, April 11, but released late yesterday by Xinhua. The editorial was titled: “Strongly Supporting the Correct Decisions of the Party Central Committee” (坚决拥护党中央的正确决定).

The People’s Daily editorial is clearly marked as released by Xinhua on April 10, but was posted by a number of sites like Sohu just after midnight. The obvious implication is that all three releases — 1) on Bo Xilai’s removal and investigation, 2) on the investigation into the apparent Neil Heywood murder and 3) the People’s Daily editorial — were timed to top today’s news, precisely as they are doing.
These should be read as three separate shots fired in a single salvo by the current top leadership under, as the official releases drum home, “Comrade Hu Jintao as general secretary.”
On its website, Guangzhou’s Southern Metropolis Daily newspaper patches together all of the releases in exactly the order given above.
A translation of the People’s Daily editorial follows:

Xinhua News Agency, Beijing, April 10 dispatch
April 11 People’s Daily commentary (评论员文章): Strongly Supporting the Correct Decisions of the Party Central Committee
On April 10, the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party initiated an investigation into serious violations of discipline by Comrade Bo Xilai, and public security organs released the results of its investigation into the death of Neil Heywood and transferred the criminal suspect to judicial organs. This thoroughly evinces the spirit of an emphasis on the facts and abiding by rule of law, it is entirely in accord with our Party’s basic requirement of strict governance of the Party (严治党) and the ruling concept of governing the nation according to rule of law. Moreover, it shows that our Party is resolute in maintaining its own purity, it highlights the Party and the government’s resolute preservation of the bright attitude of Party discipline and the laws of the state, and highlights the Party and the government’s purpose of faith in resolutely preserving the fundamental interests of the people . . .
From the facts as they are presently known, we can see that the Wang Lijun incident (王立军事件) is a serious political incident with baneful influence both inside and outside our country. The death of Neil Heywood is a serious criminal case implicating the family members and close colleagues of national leaders, and Bo Xilai’s conduct is in serious violation of Party discipline, resulting in damage to the business of the Party and the state, and having a major damaging impact on the image of the Party and the state. Through the decisions of the Central Committee of the CCP with Hu Jintao as general secretary, a thorough investigation of this incident is being conducted, and is being handled in the strictest fashion, with the circumstances to be revealed in a timely manner. This is a mark of highest responsibility to the cause of the Party and the people, and it is a resolution preservation of socialist rule of law. As the facts testify, our Party represents the interests of the people, and accepts the supervision of the people, and it will not appease acts of corruption but will explore violations of the law and of [Party] discipline.
Our nation is a nation of socialist rule of law, and the dignity and authority of the law cannot be trampled. Regardless of who it involves, or however high their position, if there are violations of Party discipline and the laws of the nation, we will not abide them and will investigate and handle them all. No citizens are accorded special privileges before the law, and the Party does no permit privileged Party members who place themselves above the law. No person can interfere with the process of the law, and any person who has violated the law can be allowed to exist outside the law. Adhering to factual evidence, with the law as the yardstick, a clear and thorough investigation of the Wang Lijun incident, the death of Neil Heywood and the serious discipline violations of Bo Xilai will be carried out in accord with the law and discipline, and the people will see from this our Party’s determination to preserve Party discipline and to rule the nation according to the law.
We must conscientiously unite our thoughts to the spirit of the Central Committee of the Party, closely uniting around the Central Committee with Comrade Hu Jintao as general secretary, holding high the great banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics, directed by the important ideologies of Deng Xiaoping Theory (邓小平理论) and the “Three Represents” (三个代表), carrying out to the full the scientific view of development (科学发展观), keeping to the general working tone of steady advancement (稳中求进), concentrating our energies on construction (聚精会神搞建设), putting our undivided attention toward achieving development, overcoming difficulties through human resourcefulness, working to preserve a favorable situation for reform, development and stability, capturing the victory of the comprehensive building of a moderately prosperous society (小康社会), accelerating the advancement of socialist modernization, greeting the successful convening of the 18th Party Congress with great achievements.

China has come down hard on domestic social media platforms this week, disabling comment functions on major platforms like Sina Weibo and QQ Weibo for a period of 72 hours ending tomorrow, April 3, at 8am.
While comment functions seemed to have been disabled without explanation by Sina, users of the Weibo service at QQ were greeted with the following message notifying them of the ban.

Users and Friends:
Recently, rumors and other illegal and harmful information spread through microblogs have had a negative social impact, and harmful information has been relatively predominant in comment sections, requiring concentrated cleansing. For this purpose, this site has decided to temporarily suspend the comment function on microblogs from 8am March 31 to 8am April 3. We express our apologies for any inconvenience.
Tencent
March 31, 2012

The Tencent announcement suggests this was a decision undertaken by the service itself, but this is undoubtedly an action taken by the central leadership through the agency of the State Internet Information Office (国家互联网信息办公室).
The catalyzing incident seems to have been rumors on and after March 20 of a coup attempt in Beijing, but the campaign against “rumors”, which has intensified since August 2011, in fact signals a broader tightening of China’s stance on social media.
We won’t repeat our past arguments here about the bogus nature of the anti-rumor campaign, and its feigned interest in truth and accuracy when in fact the underlying principal is the political control of information. Here are seven different CMP pieces dealing with “rumors”, press control policies and social media since August last year:
1. “China tackles the messy world of microblogs” — August 11, 2011
2. “Busting the bias of the rumor busters” — August 12, 2011
3. “Control, the soil that nurtures rumor” — August 15, 2011
4. “Big oops leaves state media red-faced” — August 16, 2011
5.”Why do rumors explode in China?” — September 27, 2011
6. “Rumor Fever” (International Herald Tribune) — December 12, 2011
7. “In China, the bats of rumor take wing” — March 22, 2012
In particular, we encourage readers to revisit “Control, the soil that nurtures rumor“, written by CMP fellow and Peking University professor Hu Yong, one of China’s leading experts on social media.
Adding grist to the conversation, we include this translation of an editorial run yesterday by the official Xinhua News Agency:

“[We] Must Firmly Say ‘No’ to Rumor Spreaders”
April 1, 2012
Xinhua News Agency
Relevant [government] departments have released the results of an investigation into recent online rumors and have detained 6 suspects according to the law for fabricating rumors, and carried out education and censure on others who broadcast related rumors online. The response online has been positive, with web users saying “those who fabricate or spread rumors are detestable, and they should be punished.” There has also been debate. Some have said that “those who fabricate rumors should be punished, but those who spread rumors should be dealt with leniently.” Immediately some people shot back, “It’s true that the fabricators of rumors are detestable, but those who spread rumors are just as disreputable.”
I support the latter view.
Spreading rumors is about following along. . . The fabricators of rumors are the source, those who follow along in spreading rumors boost them, making rumors spread far and wide.
One characteristic of those who follow rumors is that they enjoy idle reports, and they take things too literally. The smallest thing, a few isolated words or phrases, are amplified and built up layer after layer by the rumor transmitters, until in the end they become major events, just like the saying that “the smallest deviation can result in the widest divergence” (失之毫厘，谬之千里).
According to online media, the rumor of “gunshots fired in Beijing” that spread around this time originated with the dialogue written by a certain writer for a television program: “The sound of gunfire, and tomorrow it will be major news.” This was posted to his own microblog. And this empty sentence was subjected to the limitless guesswork of well-meaning people who made up their own versions until it became, “Gunshots fired in Beijing, something major has happened.”
It so happens there is a precedent. A few months back, media revealed that relevant [government] departments had investigated a number of classic cases of online rumors: a certain military affairs website editor saw a post with a couplet that read, “An iron bird in the radiance of the setting sun, a puff of blue smoke,” and cobbled together the random remarks of web users to suggest the explosive news that, “The air force has lost an airplane.” This information was then widely spread about by some overseas media which enjoy the “heady taste” of rumors, having an extreme negative impact.
This rumor and the rumors of gunshots in Beijing are so much alike in how they were concocted! So to a large extent, those who pass along rumors are also rumor fabricators.
. . .
Rumor fabricators and rumor spreaders have one thing in common, and that is a weak concept of the law. In the public opinion space of the internet everyone has the right to post speech online, but everyone must take responsibility for what they say. Whether it means fabricating rumors or spreading rumors, “finding amusement” in this important matter of social safety and stability is not only an expression of irresponsibility toward oneself and one’s society, it is extremely damaging.
In other countries of the world too such behavior will not be tolerated. Not long ago some media reported that two British youth planned a trip to the United States, and before they went one posted on the American microblog site Twitter that he would “blow Los Angeles to the ground” and would “dig up Marilyn Monroe.” [NOTE: the British would-be tourist, Leigh Van Bryan, actually wrote: ““Free this week for a quick gossip/prep before I go and destroy America?” Bryan wrote to Twitter user @MelissaxWalton. “3 weeks today, we’re totally in LA p—ing people off on Hollywood Blvd and diggin’ Marilyn Monroe up!”].
As a result the two were detained by American authorities at the Los Angeles International Airport. While the two insisted it was all just a joke, they were still detained for 17 hours and send back to their home country the next day. Should the masses of web users not find this incident enlightening?
To sum up, following along in passing on rumors is undesirable. Fabricating rumors is illegal, and passing rumors on is just as illegal.

[Frontpage photo: Chinese flee from the specter of “rumor fabrication” in this February 2012 cartoon published in the official Shanxi Daily newspaper.]

The following English-language post by Chinese historian Lei Yi (雷颐) was deleted from Sina Weibo sometime before 3:32am Hong Kong time today, April 2, 2012. Lei Yi currently has just over 92,000 followers, according to numbers from Sina Weibo. [More on deleted posts at the WeiboScope Search, by the Journalism and Media Studies Centre].

Mr. Heywood’s relationship with the family became especially close after he played a key role in organizing a place for Mr. Bo’s son, Guagua, at Harrow, an exclusive British private school that usually requires entrants to be on a waiting list from birth, and helping to …

Lei Yi’s post is an English excerpt from a Wall Street Journal report about the suspicious death in Chongqing in November last year of British national Neil Heywood, who was believed to be close to the family of Chongqing’s former top leader, Bo Xilai (薄熙来).
The deletion of this English-language post can be read as an indication that while Chinese-language information remains the chief priority for censors on social media, English-language content is also reviewed.

NOTE: All posts to The Anti-Social List are listed as “permission denied” in the Sina Weibo API, which means they were deleted by Weibo managers, not by users themselves.

The following post by Charles Mok (莫乃光), a Hong Kong internet entrepreneur and chairman of the Internet Society of Hong Kong, was deleted from Sina Weibo sometime before 10:35pm Hong Kong time yesterday, April 1, 2012. Charles Mok currently has just under 72,000 followers, according to numbers from Sina Weibo. [More on deleted posts at the WeiboScope Search, by the Journalism and Media Studies Centre].

I’m at the Central Government Liaison Office [in Hong Kong]. Things are really happening at the Central Government Liaison Office today.

Mok’s post refers to protests by thousands of people in Hong Kong yesterday objecting to what many see as Beijing’s interference in the recent selection of Hong Kong’s next chief executive. According to the Washington Post, Hong Kong police used pepper spray on some protesters as the tried to get through barricades outside the liaison office of China’s central government. Protestors shouted pro-democracy slogans.
The following is Charles Mok’s original Chinese-language post:

我在中聯辦。中聯辦今天熱鬧了.

NOTE: All posts to The Anti-Social List are listed as “permission denied” in the Sina Weibo API, which means they were deleted by Weibo managers, not by users themselves.