Reverse-engineering censorship in China Randomized experimentation and participant observation

• Published in: Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) Vol. 345; no. 6199; p. 891
• Main Authors: King, Gary, Pan, Jennifer, Roberts, Margaret E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Washington American Association for the Advancement of Science 22.08.2014; The American Association for the Advancement of Science
• Subjects: Censorship; China; collective action; Computers; Digital media; Documentation; Experimentation; Government (Administrative Body); Governments; Leaders; Networks; Observation; Observational studies; Participant Observation; Public policy; RESEARCH ARTICLE SUMMARY; Reverse engineering; Social Media; Social networks; China
• ISSN: 0036-8075; 1095-9203
• DOI: 10.1126/science.1251722

Figuring out how many and which social media comments are censored by governments is difficult because those comments, by definition, cannot be read. King et al. have posted comments to social media sites in China and then waited to see which of these never appeared, which appeared and were then removed, and which appeared and survived. About 40% of their submissions were reviewed by an army of censors, and more than half of these never appeared. By varying the content of posts across topics, they conclude that any mention of collective action is selectively suppressed. Science , this issue 10.1126/science.1251722 China censors online posts that advocate collective action. Existing research on the extensive Chinese censorship organization uses observational methods with well-known limitations. We conducted the first large-scale experimental study of censorship by creating accounts on numerous social media sites, randomly submitting different texts, and observing from a worldwide network of computers which texts were censored and which were not. We also supplemented interviews with confidential sources by creating our own social media site, contracting with Chinese firms to install the same censoring technologies as existing sites, and—with their software, documentation, and even customer support—reverse-engineering how it all works. Our results offer rigorous support for the recent hypothesis that criticisms of the state, its leaders, and their policies are published, whereas posts about real-world events with collective action potential are censored.