State Media Censors Child's Suggestion that President Xi Jinping Lose Weight

On December 17, 2014, the Zhengzhou Evening News published a story entitled “What Would Your Child Say if You Let Him Write a Letter to Uncle Xi?” (让你孩子给习大大写信，会写啥？). Some excerpts:

The author of the letter to the General Secretary was an elementary school student by the name of Niu Ziru, a fourth grader at the Best International School on Hangmu Road. . .  .
During last month's APEC meeting convened in Beijing, Niu Ziru saw Uncle Xi photographed together with all the other economic leaders, "I felt that Uncle Xi carried himself like a Chairman, and did credit to his countrymen, it was just that he was a bit fat." Therefore, at the end of the letter he wrote: "Ok, so lets talk about something a bit lighter. Uncle Xi, you could stand to lose some weight. You don't have to be as thin as Obama. It would be ok to just look like Putin."
给总书记写信的小学生名叫牛孜儒，今年9岁半，现在航海路贝斯特上小学四年级。
. . . .
上个月，APEC会议在北京召开，牛孜儒从电视上看到习大大和各经济体领导人集体合影，“感觉习大大很有主席范儿，为咱国人露脸了，就是有些胖了。”所以，在信的结尾，牛孜儒写道：“好了，我们谈点轻松的话题，习大大，您可以减减肥了。不用像奥巴马那么瘦，像普京一样就可以了。”

These screenshots were taken on December 18, 2014, and show that the article, which appeared on page A12 of the print addition and which was originally available here - http://zzwb.zynews.com/html/2014-12/17/content_622386.htm - was deleted from the Zhengzhou Evening News website.

This screen video shows that the article was reposted on many China-based news portals under the title “Elementary School Student Writes to Chairman Xi Encouraging Uncle Xi to Lose Weight” (小学生欲致信习总书记打趣建议习大大减肥), and that those websites also deleted it.

Baidu, Sina, and Tencent Censor Discussion About Toads and Rivers

On July 25, 2014, the state sponsored China Daily published an article entitled “Critics Busy as Giant Toad Floats Into Beijing.” An excerpt:

An inflatable golden toad that first appeared in Beijing earlier this month in an attempt to emulate the success in China of the Rubber Duck created by Dutch designer Florentijn Hofman has stirred controversy on the Internet.

Guo Yongyao, chairman of Ningbo Jinluban Carpentry Co, designed the toad in December and said his initial intention was to compete with Western art and raise funds for the protection of cultural relics.

These screenshots were taken on July 27, and show that Baidu had banned users from establishing  PostBar (Tieba 贴吧) forums on "Toads" (蛤蟆) and "Rivers" (江).

These screenshots were taken on July 23, and show that both Tencent and Sina Weibo were not censoring searches for “Gold Toad” (金蛤蟆), but was censoring searches for “Gold Toad River” (金蛤蟆 江).

People on Sina Weibo With Profile Photos of Cute Young Women Agree: Civil Rights Lawyer Pu Zhiqiang is Guilty and Should Be Punished

On June 13, 2014, the Beijing Public Security Office posted a notice on its official Sina Weibo saying:

Following authorization from the Procuratorate, on June 13, 2014, the Beijing Public Security Bureau has arrested Pu Zhiqiang on suspicion of the committing the crimes of picking quarrels and illegally obtaining people's personal information. The Public Security Bureau is currently carrying out further investigation into other crimes that Pu Zhiqiang is suspected of committing.
经检察机关批准，2014年6月13日，北京市公安局以涉嫌寻衅滋事罪、非法获取公民个人信息罪对浦志强依法执行逮捕。对浦志强涉嫌的其他犯罪事实，公安机关正在进一步侦查中。

This screenshot shows the Beijing PSB's Sina Weibo posts, along with translations of some comments left by Weibo users.

On June 11, 2014, several Sina Weibo users who did not use images of cute young women as their profile photos, for example lawyer Luo Changping (罗昌平) and Lawyer's Digest (律师文摘), posted an account of a recent meeting between Pu and his Lawyer Zhang Sizhi (张思之), but it was quickly deleted.

Original URLs:

• Luo Changping: http://www.weibo.com/p/1001603720380467554182 
• Lawyer Digest: http://weibo.com/p/1001603720302038265029

Similarly, Zhang Xuezhong (张雪忠), another lawyer representing Pu Zhiqiang, published an essay entitled "What Crime Has Lawyer Pu Zhiqiang Committed?" (浦志强律师何罪之有？). As this screenshot shows, searches for the title of that essay on Sina Weibo returned no results, just a censorship notice.

Sina Weibo Censors Title of Science Fiction Video

This screenshot shows that on March 24, 2014, Sina Weibo was censoring searches for “Hong Kong Will Be Destroyed After 33 Years” (香港将于33年后毁灭).

“Hong Kong Will Be Destroyed After 33 Years” is the title of a short science fiction video, which can be viewed here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YzCXjm2yOU.

This screenshot was taken on April 5, 2014, and shows that a search on Baidu Video for the title of the film returned no results.

More on Baidu's Victory Over the Those Who Would Deny It Its Right to Free Speech

Previous post on this topic: US Court Rules Baidu Enjoys Freedom of Speech, Baidu Bans Forums on “Freedom of Speech”

On March 27, 2014, Judge Jesse Furman of the US District Court in New York issued an opinion granting Baidu’s motion to dismiss the complaint against it by eight “New York residents who advocate for increased democracy in China.” The full opinion is available here - http://www.scribd.com/doc/214981183/Zhang-et-al-v-Baidu-Com-Inc-et-al.

The plaintiffs complained that Baidu:

censor[s] and block[s] from search engine results any article, publication, video, audio and any information in whatever format if its content deals with the Democracy movement in China or any of the following topics that are related to the Chinese Democracy Movement: The June 4th Movement, The Jasmine Revolution, The Jasmine Movement; The China Democracy Party National Committee and the Tiananmen Square Incident or movement.

Screenshots showing Baidu censoring search results for "China Jasmine Revolution"
and "Tiananmen Square Massacre" taken on March 31, 2014. Credit: Feichangdao.

The plaintiffs claimed that Baidu engaged in that censorship at the behest of the People’s Republic of China.
The judge stated in a footnote:

That Plaintiffs allege that Baidu exercises editorial judgment “in cooperation with and according to the policies and regulations of” China makes no difference to the analysis. Plaintiffs allege that Baidu “purposely designs its systems and search engines to exclude” specific content. Whether it does so at the behest, or in furtherance of the interests, of China does not bear on the nature or extent of Baidu’s First Amendment rights.

Andy Atkins-Krüger interviewing Baidu spokesperson Kaiser Kuo
Credit: Searchengineland, August 30, 2011.

The judge went on to say:

In short, Plaintiffs’ efforts to hold Baidu accountable in a court of law for its editorial  judgments about what political ideas to promote cannot be squared with the First Amendment. There is no irony in holding that Baidu’s alleged decision to disfavor speech concerning democracy is itself protected by the democratic ideal of free speech. As the Supreme Court has explained, “[t]he First Amendment does not guarantee that . . . concepts virtually sacred to our  Nation as a whole . . . will go unquestioned in the marketplace of ideas.” For that reason, the First Amendment protects Baidu’s right to advocate for systems of government other than democracy (in China or elsewhere) just as surely as it  protects Plaintiffs’ rights to advocate for democracy. Indeed, “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Thus, the Court’s decision — that Baidu’s choice not to feature “pro-democracy political speech” is protected by the First Amendment — is itself “a reaffirmation of the principles of freedom and inclusiveness that [democracy] best reflects, and of the conviction that our toleration of criticism . . . is a sign and source of our strength.”

US Court Rules Baidu Enjoys Freedom of Speech, Baidu Bans Forums on “Freedom of Speech”

According to a March 27 report by Reuters:

Chinese Internet company Baidu Inc on Thursday won the dismissal of a U.S. lawsuit by pro-democracy activists who complained that Baidu illegally suppressed political speech on China's most widely used Internet search engine.

Eight New York writers and video producers had accused Baidu of creating search engine algorithms, at the behest of China, to block users in the United States from viewing articles, videos and other information advocating greater democracy in China.
. . . .
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan, however, concluded that the results produced by Baidu's search engine constituted protected free speech under the U.S. Constitution, warranting dismissal of the May 2011 lawsuit.

"The First Amendment protects Baidu's right to advocate for systems of government other than democracy (in China or elsewhere) just as surely as it protects plaintiffs' rights to advocate for democracy," the judge wrote.

Furman likened a search engine's "editorial judgment" to that of a newspaper editor who decides which stories to publish.

The case is Zhang et al v. Baidu.com Inc, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 11-03388.

This screenshot, taken on March 27, shows that Baidu has banned users from establishing a PostBar (贴吧 Tieba) forum on the topic of “Freedom of Speech” (言论自由), and that a search for that phrase on Baidu’s Library (Wenku 文库) product yields no results.

2013 Year in Review: Top Examples of State Media Editorials on Free Speech - With Interpretive Memes

In this post the text in italics is from the cited source. The images are courtesy of this blog.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, "Southern Weekend's 'Letter to Readers' Truly Makes One Ponder" (南方周末“致读者”实在令人深思), January 7, 2013:

Whether these people like it or not, this is common sense: given the current state of China's society and government, the kind of "free media" that these people yearn for in their hearts simply cannot exist.
不管这些人愿不愿意，有一个常识是：在中国今天的社会政治现实下，不可能存在这些人心中向往的那种“自由媒体”。

Subsequently deleted from:

• http://opinion.huanqiu.com/editorial/2013-01/3457134.html
• http://opinion.huanqiu.com/editorial/2013-01/3454091.html

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, “US Tech Website Back Online,” January 24, 2013:

GitHub was not the only programming website that had been kept away from Chinese mainland users. Google Code, Google App Engine, SourceForge and several other renowned technical websites have been blocked at times. 

"Some of them were blocked because they contained codes of virtual private network, or VPN, a kind of software that allows users to get over the Great Firewall. Others contained 'sensitive' comments that reveal political opinions," Huang Weilian, a programmer and a renowned IT blogger, told the Global Times, adding that blocking these websites increased the cost of software product development for many Chinese start-up companies. 

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Ren Xianliang (任贤良), "Target the Two Venues of Public Discourse, Solidify the Positive Energy of Society" (统筹两个舆论场 凝聚社会正能量), writing in Red Flag Journal (红旗文稿), April 10, 2013:

The Party controls the media, the Party controls public discourse, these are unshakeable fundamental principles for maintaining the Party's leadership, no less than the Party  controls the military and the Party controls the barrels of the guns. And given current circumstances it can only be strengthened, it cannot be relaxed.. . . .When it comes to control, it is necessary to boldly confront all obstacles, even those powerful media outlets, famous web sites, bloggers, and micro-bloggers. Warn those who need warning, ban those who need banning, and silence those who need silencing.

党管媒体、党管舆论，如同党管军队、党管枪杆子，是坚持党的领导不可动摇的基本原则，尤其是在当前形势下只能加强、不能放松。. . . .即使对那些强势媒体、知名网站和名人博主、微博大V，在管理上也必须敢于碰硬，该警告的警告，该禁言的禁言，该关闭的关闭。

After publishing this article, Ren was promoted to Deputy Director, State Internet Information Office.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, “Hackers, Bloggers and Professors Team Up to Tap into Blocked Microblog Content ,” July 28, 2013:

China's regulation on Internet information lists nine types of banned content, most of which concerns national security, state unity, rumors, pornography and violence. But in practice it isn't always clear where the line is and in the event of a breaking incident, certain words or phrases that are otherwise normal might become sensitive for a period of time.

Subsequently deleted from http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/799621.shtml.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, “Hengqin New Area Aims to Skirt Firewall,” July 24, 2013 :

Local authorities of the Hengqin New Area in Zhuhai, Guangdong Province confirmed Tuesday that they are planning to bypass the Great Firewall by opening special access to the Internet. . . .

If passed, Hengqin will be the first region on the Chinese mainland where local residents can skirt the firewall and get access to blocked websites including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, “New Freedoms for Banned Books,” July 25, 2013:

The so-called banned books are mainly works by Chinese authors that have been outlawed by the authorities, such as Yang Jisheng's Tombstone: The Great Chinese Famine, 1958-1962, in which the author spent 20 years investigating the reasons that led to mass starvation, including the death of his own father. They can also be books that had some politically sensitive content removed from mainland versions, such as historian Zhang Yihe's The Memories Haven't Vanished, in which she tells the stories of prominent intellectuals who suffered from brutal attacks during the Cultural Revolution (1966-76.)Many mainlanders who buy political books at the Book Fair told the Global Times that they did not feel comfortable talking about it as they were afraid their comments might land them in hot water.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Seeking Truth, "Take Up the Cause of Insisting on a Marxist Approach to News" (自觉坚持马克思主义新闻观), August 16, 2013:

Perhaps the degree of freedom enjoyed by China's traditional media is slightly less than that enjoyed by the media in developed Western countries, in particular the reporting by the Party's newspapers, magazines, radio, and television outlets.
. . . .
At its current stage, China could not endure the consequences of losing control over public discourse. . . . The overall quality of government agency administration and the ranks of Party officials is not high enough, and they are finding it very difficult to adapt to the challenges posed by excessively open public discourse. . . .
也许，现在中国的传统媒体，主要是党报党刊、电台电视台报道的自由度，要比西方发达国家媒体的自由度小一些。
. . . .
现阶段的中国，承受不了舆论失控的后果。. . . . 各级政府机关的管理水平和干部队伍的整体素质还不高，很难适应舆论过度开放带来的挑战. . . .

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, “Legal Basis Needed for Dissenting Voices,” August 18, 2013:

A human rights advocate from Guangzhou, Yang Maodong, better known by his pen name, Guo Feixiong, was detained recently. Xu Zhiyong, an activist and legal scholar based in Beijing, was also detained recently. Overseas voices have connected the two incidents and believed the Chinese mainland is conducting a "decapitation" campaign against the human rights movement. Meanwhile, they glorify what Guo and Xu did by calling them "pro-democracy activists." . . . .

Obviously, China has not found a mature way to deal with these confrontational individuals. On the one hand, they play a new role in society and what they do is not all negative. But on the other hand, they pose a danger to the current social governance system and long-term social stability.

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: Global Times, "Is Chinese Public Opinion Really Constricting?" (中国舆论真的在收紧吗), September 6, 2013, by Zhang Yiwu (张颐武), a professor of Chinese Studies at Beijing University:

Given today's Internet environment, any move toward social governance will almost inevitably be met with debate and consternation. There is nothing at all odd about this. But the fact is that this does not in any way mean that the development of online opinion in China is being subjected to restrictions. On the contrary, this is a step toward "normalization" of online opinion in China, and it is laying the foundation for a flourishing and dynamic Internet for China.
在今天的互联网环境下，任何一个社会治理的行动都会难免遭遇议论纷纭的状况，这毫不奇怪。但实际上它决不意味着中国互联网舆论的发展受到限制，相反是中国互联网舆论走向“常态化”的重要一步，也为中国互联网繁荣和活跃奠定坚实基础。

Source: Feichangdao.com

Source: China Daily, "'Like an online king' - celebrity blogger Xue's story'," September 15, 2013:

The noted venture capitalist [Xue Manzi] was detained last month for alleged group sex with prostitutes. His detention sent ripples across the Chinese cyberspace as he was a star blogger with 12 million followers on Sina Weibo, Chinese leading twitter-like blogging service, and was seen as an "online crusader for justice".
. . . .
"My irresponsibility in spreading information online was a vent of negative mood, and was a neglect of the social mainstream," Xue said [in an interview broadcast on China Central Television]. His sober demeanor was different from the arrogance of two weeks ago when he was taken into detention.

Referring to China's latest move to criminalize online rumors spreading, Xue said "freedom of speech cannot override the law".

Source: Global Times, “China Can't Cede Agenda-setting to Western Media,” December 17, 2013:

Source: Feichangdao.com

Columnist Thomas L. Friedman of The New York Times has written an open letter to the Chinese president, demanding China remove the block on Bloomberg's website, and some Chinese-language websites of mainstream Western media such as the NYT and The Wall Street Journal. He also requested visa renewal for correspondents of the NYT and Bloomberg. Their sensitive reports, according to Friedman, are "a warning heart attack."
. . . .

In the past two years, with the development of China's Internet and the public's wider participation in the country's political affairs, many mainstream Western media have been trying to make breakthroughs from topics that the Chinese public is most concerned about. They would create quite a stir or directly set China's political agenda. If successful, they will be at the center of China's public opinion sphere.

No matter if these reports are the result of Western journalists' individual impulse, or collective efforts of the newsroom, they highly conform to the West's strategy in interfering China's political agenda-setting and future policy orientation.
. . . .

Friedman should understand that Chinese authorities are breaching their duty if they allow Western media to work in China unchecked.

State Media Deletes Editorials Espousing the Benefits of Air Pollution

These screenshots were taken on December 9, 2013, and show that, during the preceding two days, levels of PM 2.5 pollutants in both Shanghai and Beijing had exceeded 400. Anything above 300 is considered “Hazardous.”

Shanghai

Beijing

On December 6, 2013, the state sponsored China Daily published an article entitled “Shanghai Lowers Air Quality benchmark to Reduce Alerts.” Some excerpts:

The Shanghai environmental authority announced on Thursday that it has adjusted its air pollution standards to reduce the number of alerts, adding that they will still be frequent in winter.

Experts say the move was a reluctant tacit acknowledgment of the city's poor air quality.

The municipality's Environmental Protection Bureau will now lift air pollution alerts when the concentration of PM2.5 — particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns in diameter that can penetrate deep into human lungs — falls below 115 micrograms per cubic meter.

Previously, the bureau lifted alerts after the concentration of PM2.5 dropped below 75 micrograms per cubic meter.

On December 8, 2013, China’s official news agency Xinhua published an English language  article entitled “Smog Not to Smother Road Toward Chinese Dream: Experts.” Some excerpts:

Smog these days has covered most of China with visibility in some regions lower than 50 meters, and its the hot topic at home and abroad.

Shanghai mayor Yang Xiong told a two-day forum called International Dialogue on the Chinese Dream on Saturday that Shanghai had the worst air pollution, "but it will be fine in the following days."

The Air Quality Index (AQI) topped 500 in certain areas of Shanghai on Friday.

On December 8, China’s state run television network published an editorial on its web site by one of its editors, Wang Lei (王磊), entitled “The Five Unexpected Benefits That Smog Brings” (雾霾带来的五大意外收获).

Wang's Article as it Originally Appeared on CCTV's Website

According Wang, the five benefits are:

1. The smog makes Chinese people more united. (雾霾让中国人更团结)
2. The smog makes Chinese people more equal. (雾霾让中国人更平等)
3. The smog makes Chinese people more aware. (雾霾让中国人更清醒)
4. The smog makes Chinese people more humorous. (雾霾让中国人更幽默)
5. The smog makes Chinese people more knowledgeable. (雾霾让中国人长知识)

 The article, originally available here - http://opinion.cntv.cn/2013/12/08/ARTI1386507346057774.shtml  - was removed from the CCTV web site on December 9. These screenshots show that Xinhua published, and deleted, the article on the same day.

On December 9, the state sponsored Global Times published an article entitled “Smog Has a Major Impact on Weapons, Surveillance Becomes Unclear, and Guided Missles Lose Accuracy” (雾霾对武器影响多大：侦察看不清导弹打不准). Some excerpts:

Recently, the smog in most regions in China has grabbed everyone’s attention. Smog not only impacts physical health and normal travel, it also has an influence on military activities: it can significantly reduce the effectiveness of surveillance equipment, and can also cause guided missiles to become inaccurate. Smog is major enemy of those who make their living off the air force. However, on the battlefield, smog can also benefit the military activities of defense forces. 

近日中国大部分地区出现的雾霾引起了人们的广泛关注。雾霾不仅会影响人体健康和正常出行，同样会影响作战行动：它会令很多侦察装备的效果大打折扣，也会让一些导弹瞄不准目标，对于靠天吃饭的航空兵来说，雾霾更是大敌。不过，在战场上，雾霾也有利于防守方的军事行动。

The article, originally available here - http://mil.huanqiu.com/paper/2013-12/4642262.html - was subsequently deleted, as shown in this video.

On April Fools Day Global Times Says America Should Acknowledge Mao, While Baidu Bans Forums on Mao

At just before midnight on April Fools Day, the state-sponsored Global Times published an article entitled "Mao Furor Shows Truth of US Free Speech." （美国对毛泽东禁言，“言论自由”挂了） An excerpt:

The National Center for Education Statistics under the US Department of Education found itself in some trouble recently. On March 22, it pulled a quote from former Chinese leader Mao Zedong, which read, "Our attitude toward ourselves should be 'to be insatiable in learning' and toward others 'to be tireless in teaching'." Some US senators demanded that the department explain why they cited the words of a communist. The quote was reportedly replaced by one from Abraham Lincoln. 

The US, which prides itself in freedom of speech, can't even tolerate a quote from Mao. It shows how narrow-minded the American political system is in the face of the diversity of global culture.  

It would not be a problem if words from an American president or even Douglas MacArthur, an anti-communist general, were published in Chinese media nowadays.
. . . .
Mao was a pioneer of the new global geopolitics. Americans will acknowledge this man sooner or later when they overcome their narrow-mindedness.

美国教育部下属机构国家教育统计中心网站近来“闯了祸”。该网站3月22日在“每日语录”一栏中引用毛泽东“对自己，‘学而不厌’；对人家，‘诲而不倦’”的名言，国家教育统计中心因此遭到猛烈抨击。有美国参议员出面表示，教育部必须解释为何引用“共产主义者”的话。该中心网站被迫删除毛泽东的这句话，换成了林肯的一个警句。美教育部代理新闻秘书还专门公开表示这次引用“很糟糕”，像是在道歉。
美国如此“言论自由”的国家，容不下毛泽东的一句语录，显示了美国政治制度在世界多元文化面前的小气。看来不断有人揭露美国的“言论自由”是冒牌货，有他们的道理。
任何一位美国总统及名人的话，哪怕是与中国军队曾经交战的麦克阿瑟的话如今登上中国媒体，大概都不会有障碍。
. . . .
毛泽东是一位世界性新地缘政治的开创者，也是中华民族走向复兴的关键性启动者。美国人终将跳出他们目前的狭隘视角，重识这位东方政治巨人。

As far as acknowledging Mao goes, these screenshot were taken on April 1, 2013, and show that Baidu bans users from setting up PostBar (贴吧) forums on "Mao Zedong," (毛泽东), "Great Leap Forward," (大跃进) and "Great Cultural Revolution." (文化大革命)  Users are told "Apologies, in accordance with relevant laws, regulations, and policies, this bar cannot be opened at this time." (抱歉，根据相关法律法规和政策，本吧暂不开放。).

As for discussions of Communism and the "words of an American president," these screenshots show Baidu also bans PostBars on "Communist" and "Obama."

"Santa Claus" Not a Sensitive Term, But What About "Snuffleupagus"?

Aloysius Snuffleupagus, also known as "Mr. Snuffleupagus" or "Snuffy," is a recurring character on the American television program Sesame Street. He resembles a woolly mammoth with a long thick pointed tail, brown hair, and a trunk, or "snuffle," that drags along the ground.

Snuffy is, by Muppet standards at least, a controversial and divisive figure. For many years he was a source of tension on Sesame Street, as Big Bird was the only character who could see him. Then in 1992 it was revealed that his parents had divorced. Sesame Street originally planned to address the affair, going so far as to film an episode on the subject. That episode proved so controversial that it has been extensively censored in the United States and Canada.

This screenshot, taken on December 16, 2012, show that a search on Baidu for "Snuffleupagus" returns apparently uncensored results.

However, these screenshots show that when a user tries to search for Snuffleupagus and the names of members of the Communist Party Politburo Standing Committee, Baidu returns no results, only a notice saying "Search results may not comply with relevant laws, regulations, and policies, and have not been displayed. We suggest trying other related words." (搜索结果可能不符合相关法律法规和政策，未予显示。建议尝试其他相关词。)

Searches for "Snuffleupagus" and "Xi Jinping," "Li Keqiang," and "Zhang Dejiang"
return no results, just a censorship notice.

This screenshot shows Baidu is also completely censoring searches for "Xi Jinping Snuffy" and "Xi Jinping 史纳菲" (Snuffy's name in Chinese).

These screenshots show that similar searches on Baidu for other (arguably) fictional characters are not similarly censored.

Searches for "Xi Jinping Mickey Mouse" and "Xi Jinping Santa Claus"
return dozens of results.

Baidu's censorship extends to the names of some, but not all, controversial political figures. For example, these screenshots show that, when a user searches for "Bo Xilai Snuffleupagus" (薄熙来) Baidu returns a censorship notice. But when a user searches for "Wang Lijun Snuffleupagus" (王立军) Baidu simply says it is unable to find any results.

Baidu also seems to be censoring results that connect Snuffy to certain controversial events.  These screenshots show that when a user searches for Snuffleupagus and "Jasmine Revolution" (茉莉花革命) and "Six Four" (六四) Baidu returns only a censorship notice. But a search for "18th Party Congress Snuffleupagus" (十八大) returns almost 100 results, and a search for "Mid-Autumn Moon Festival Snuffleupagus" (中秋节) returns a notice saying no search results can be found (but there is no censorship notice).

It is difficult to say whether there is any connection between these incidents and Baidu's censorship. It is also unclear why Baidu is singling out the relatively obscure Mr. Snuffleupagus for complete censorship, while still returning censored results for queries containing the names of far more infamous figures, such as the sadistic Wile E. Coyote (Super Genius) and Legion of Doom member Gorilla Grodd.

Baidu restricts search results for "Xi Jinping Wile E. Coyote" and
"Xi Jinping Gorilla Grodd" to is broad white list.

This is all the more puzzling because Snuffy features prominently on the China-based http://www.sesamestreetchina.com.cn, appearing on the home page and having his own profile. But it might be possible to read something into the fact that Snuffy's profile is listed last, even coming after Zoe, who is well-known for her bourgeoisie obsession with ballet.

If you're still reading - yes, this post is intended to be tongue-in-cheek. The screenshots are all real (no photoshopping), but the most likely explanation is that Snuffy is a victim of collateral censorship, not the target of actual censorship.