Tencent's Weixin Censors 1980's People's Daily Article on Cult of Personality

On September 3, 2023, an article titled "People's Daily: Exaggerating the Personal Role of Leaders to an Extreme Level will Lead to Superstitious Belief in the Individual" (人民日报：把领袖个人的作用夸大到极端的程度，就会出现对个人的迷信) was posted on the "The Reading Drawer" (抽屉读书) public Weixin account. It was censored within 24 hours and replaced with a notice saying: "This content cannot be viewed due to violations. Complaints were made by users and audited by the platform. This involves the use of words, pictures, videos, etc. that exaggerated, seduced and violated objective facts to maliciously incite, confuse and mislead users. Check the corresponding rules."

• Original URL: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/bS50iboCf-nLMkbZ8AmHPA
• Archives: https://archive.li/https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/bS50iboCf-nLMkbZ8AmHPA

I checked, and the Weixin article is a word-for-word copy paste of the referenced People's Daily article, which was published on Page 2 of the July 4, 1980 edition, according to the copy I found here: https://cn.govopendata.com/renminribao/1980/7/4/2/#542014 - with one exception, which I don't this is material:

• Weixin Article: 马克思主义者要承认个人权威，重视个人权威的，但是，我们首先要强调的还是集体的权威。
• govopendata: 马克思主义者是承认个人权威，重视个人权威的，但是，我们首先要强调的还是集体的权威。

The only other difference is the addition of the photo at the top of the Weixin article. Based on some online research, this is a photo of Nikita Khrushchev during his trip to the United States in 1959. 

Below are selected translations from the article (emphasis added by me).

Deification of, and superstitious belief in, the individual begins with exaggerating the role of the individual. Lin Biao and the "Gang of Four" engaged in modern superstition, not only taking advantage of people's simple feelings, but also taking advantage of these loopholes in people's understanding.

A Profound Lesson in Personal Deification

The communist movement and our own experience show that when the role of individual leaders is exaggerated to an extreme level, superstitious belief in individuals will emerge.

For many years, we have been accustomed to using superstition to explain the history of our struggles. Now, as Marx said, we should "use history to explain superstition." (The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. 1, p. 425) That is to say, we should take a look at history, how did a man become a "god"? How did people come to deify and superstitiously believe in individuals? In this way, the necessary lessons can be drawn. This is a rather complex and difficult task. Here are just a few examples, briefly.

. . . .

Our Party is organized according to the principle of democratic centralism. According to this principle, the Party line must be discussed and formulated by the Party's national congress or central authority. Although the Party's line is sometimes put forward by a certain person, once it is decided, it becomes the Party's line and cannot be attributed to an individual, it is called the line of so-and-so. Of course, when summing up historical experience, calling the opposing lines the lines of a certain person, and comparing and analyzing them will help distinguish right from wrong and educate the entire Party. But this is a special situation. From the perspective of organizational principles, within the Party, all Party members must implement the Party's line, rather than the entire Party following the line of a certain individual.

However, for a period of time, people have often attributed the Party's line to individuals, and also promoted all the opinions and propositions of individual leaders as lines, or believed that they have the same authority as the Party's line, and the whole Party must unconditionally implement it. In this way, in the life of the Party, in fact, some abnormal practices gradually took shape: obeying the Party's leadership means listening to a certain person, implementing the Party's line means doing what a certain person says, and thinking that as long as you act "in accordance with every sentence," you will be invincible. This actually regards the individual as a sacred authority over the entire Party.

. . . .

We must be highly conscious and take various measures to prevent the situation where the top leaders look down at the masses from above, while the masses can only squint and look up at the leader from below, so as to prevent the leader from becoming a figure that ordinary people cannot approach. The guidelines for political life within the Party passed by the Fifth Plenum of the Party Central Committee have made a series of specific regulations to prevent leaders from becoming special in their political life and from praising leaders without principle. This is undoubtedly necessary. However, in order to achieve what Lenin said, to make the leaders and the class, and the leaders and the masses form a whole, we still need to make efforts in many aspects and have a series of effective methods. For example, restore the system that our Party advocates that senior leading cadres must spend a certain amount of time at the grassroots level in a year; establish a system for leaders to communicate directly with the people; put senior leaders in fixed electoral districts to maintain regular contact with voters and accept voter supervision; cancel all kinds of unreasonable regulations that completely separate senior leaders from ordinary cadres and the masses in daily life (such as housing, transportation, shopping, entertainment, etc.); and we must use newspapers and radio to exert the supervisory power of public opinion, etc. In short, we should continue to adhere to the methods that have worked well in the past, and at the same time, we should continue to adopt some new methods based on new situations. 

. . . .

To gather the experience and opinions of the broad masses and the entire Party and form correct leadership ideas and opinions, it is necessary to adopt democratic centralism and collective research and discussion. The view that "the first secretary has absolute truth, the second secretary has relative truth, and the others have no truth" is not in line with the facts.

. . . .

Second, we must treat the right of one vote correctly. In the leadership team, the top leader has more responsibilities but no greater power. He has only one vote in deciding major issues, while other members have the same vote. Why do some leadership groups form a "one-man-talk" situation? The first is that the top leader lacks a democratic style and engages in personal arbitrariness. At the same time, it is also an important reason why each leading member cannot exercise his right to vote seriously and responsibly. If every leading member can responsibly exercise his right to one vote, especially when some people put forward wrong propositions, everyone can stick to the principles and not support or veto them, then can "one word" be achieved? Can personal arbitrariness prevail unimpeded? Can those wrong and confusing decisions be made easily? Therefore, every leading member must exercise his right to vote with the utmost solemnity when deciding major issues.

. . . .

Marxists must recognize and value individual authority, but the first thing we must emphasize is collective authority. Only when personal authority is combined with collective authority can it play its role better.

神化个人、迷信个人，是从夸大个人的作用开始的。林彪、“四人帮”大搞现代迷信，除了利用人们的朴素感情外，也钻了人们在认识上的这些空子。

神化个人的深刻教训

共产主义运动和我们自己的经验说明，把领袖个人的作用夸大到极端的程度，就会出现对个人的迷信。

多年来，习惯于用迷信来说明我们的斗争历史，现在，应该象马克思说的那样，“用历史来说明迷信”。（《马克思恩格斯全集》第１卷第４２５页）这就是说，应当从历史上看一看，人是怎样成为“神”的？人们是怎样神化个人、迷信个人的？这样，才能得出必要的经验教训。这是一项相当复杂而艰巨的任务。这里仅举几个例子，简略地说一下。
. . . .
我们的党是按照民主集中制的原则组织起来的。根据这个原则，党的路线必须由党的全国代表大会或中央权力机构讨论制定。党的路线尽管有时是由某个人提出来的，但一经作出决定，就成了党的路线，而不能归之于个人，称为某某人的路线了。当然，在总结历史经验时，把对立的路线分别称之为某某人的路线，加以对比分析，这样做，有利于分清是非，教育全党。但这是一种特殊的情况，从组织原则说，在党内，所有党员必须执行党的路线，而不是全党执行某一个人的路线。

但是，一个时期以来，人们却常常把党的路线归之于个人，而且，又把领袖个人的一切意见主张都上升为路线，或认为具有党的路线那样的权威性，全党必须无条件地执行。这样，在党的生活中，实际上就逐渐形成了某些不正常的准则：服从党的领导就是听某一个人的话，执行党的路线就是照某一个人说的去干，而且认为，只要“句句照办”，就能无往而不胜。这实际上是把个人看成为凌驾于全党之上的神圣权威了。
. . . .
我们要以高度的自觉，采取各种措施，防止出现领导上层从上面向下看群众，而人民群众只能眯着眼睛从下面向上望领袖的状况，防止领袖成为普通群众无法接近的人物。党的五中全会通过的党内政治生活准则，对防止领导人政治上生活上的特殊化，防止对领导人无原则的歌功颂德，已经作了一系列具体的规定。这无疑是很必要的。但是，要做到列宁讲的，使领袖与阶级、领袖与群众结成一个整体，则还要作多方面的努力，还要有一系列有效的办法。比如，恢复我们党提倡的高级领导干部一年要有一定时间下基层的制度；建立领导者与人民群众直接对话的制度；把高级领导人放到固定选区保持与选民的经常联系并接受选民监督；取消在日常生活中（如住房、坐车、购物、娱乐等）把高级领导人与一般干部和群众完全分开的种种不合理规定；各种代表大会作为权力机构，要切实加强对领导工作人员的监督，并要利用报纸、广播，发挥舆论的监督力量，等等。总之，凡是过去行之有效的办法应当继续坚持，同时，要根据新的情况，不断采取一些新的办法。
. . . .
要把广大群众和全党的经验、意见集中起来，形成正确的领导思想和领导意见，就必须通过民主集中制，通过集体研究讨论。那种“第一书记有绝对真理，第二书记有相对真理，其他人没有真理”的看法，是不符合事实的。
. . . .
第二，要正确对待一票的权利。在领导班子中，第一把手负有更多的责任，但并没有更大的权力，在决定重大问题时，他只有一票的权利，而其他成员也有同样一票的权利。为什么有的领导班子形成“一言堂”的局面呢？首先是第一把手缺乏民主作风，搞个人专断。同时，各个领导成员不能严肃负责地行使自己一票的权利，也是一个重要原因。如果每一个领导成员都能负责地行使自己一票的权利，特别是在某些人提出错误的主张时，大家都能坚持原则，不予支持，或给以否决，“一言堂”能搞得起来吗？个人专断能畅行无阻吗？那些错误的、颠倒是非的决定，能够轻而易举地作出来吗？因此，每一个领导成员，在决定重大问题时，一定要以极其郑重的态度行使自己一票的权利。
. . . .

马克思主义者要承认个人权威，重视个人权威的，但是，我们首先要强调的还是集体的权威。个人权威只有与集体权威相结合，才能更好地发挥其作用。

After Arrest of "Rights Defense" Activist Wu Gan, State Media Launches Smear Campaign

On May 19, 2015 Wu Gan" (吴淦) was ordered held in administrative detention for 10 days on the grounds that he violated clauses 1 and 2 of Article 23 of the Public Security Administration Punishments Law (中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法), which make it illegal to:

1. disturb the order of government departments, public organizations, enterprises or institutions, thus making it impossible for work, production, business operation, medical care, teaching or scientific research to go on normally but not having caused serious losses; 
2. disturb the public order at stations, ports, wharves, airports, department stores, parks, exhibition halls or other public places.

Among Wu Gan’s actions cited in the sentencing document was his “insulting the head of this court, Zhang Zhonghou.” (辱骂该院院长张忠厚).

On May 27, Wu Gan, who often uses the online name "Super Vulgar Butcher," was formally arrested by Fujian police.

China's search engines and social media censored search results about Wu Gan and restricted information that Internet users could find to news media outlets licensed by the central government. See: Wu Gan Jailed for Insulting Judge, Baidu and Sina Weibo Censor Search Results for "Wu Gan" 

On May 28, 2015, the People's Daily, the official mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, published an article on page 11 of its print edition entitled "Wu Gan Arrested on Suspicion of Committing the Crimes of Provoking Quarrels and Defamation: Revealing the True Face of the 'Super Vulgar Butcher" (涉嫌寻衅滋事罪、诽谤罪的吴淦被依法刑拘: 揭开“超级低俗屠夫”真面目).  The subheadings of the article were:

• What Has He Been Up To? (他干过怎样的事？)
• What Tricks Does He Typically Use? (他惯用哪些伎俩？)
• What Kind of Person Is He? (他是个啥样的人)

Some excerpts:

He held a job as a real estate agent and started some companies with friends, and they all ended in failure. Incapable of doing any real business, he started immersing himself online on forum and writing blogs.
. . . .
Wu Gan sprang to fame during the Deng Yujiao incident after he entered the hospital and had his picture taken with Deng Yujiao and posted it online. Having gotten a taste of fame, Wu Gan became fond of chasing after popular events.
. . . .
Wu Gan made certain leading cadres fear he would cause trouble and blow things out of proportion, and he often began with Party and government officials in charge, and exerted pressure on the government involved in handling an affair.
. . . .
In 2012 the Fuqing police investigated a case involving one of Wu Gan's relatives. In order to further his personal interests, Wu Gan insulted the police station's leaders, and threatened to "set up a mourning hall for the officer's entire family so that Fuqing's petitioners could come and pay their respects." In addition to this, he also blackened the good name of Lin Wanlin, who had been named by a Model Hero in the Second Degree of the State Public Security System for sacrificing for the public good. . . .
. . . .
Its not hard to see that, in order to put pressure on leaders and achieve his personal goals, it can be said there was nothing that Wu Gan would not do, and even children were not out of bounds.
. . . .
"Wherever there was excitement, that's where he'd go, like some kind of promiscuos fly, he would flutter off anywhere, and the only thing he feared was peace: Mr. Chen, who had personally witnessed Wu Gan raising the flag of "Rights Defense" to further the personal interests of his relatives in Jinan, Fuzhou, says he has nothing but contempt for people like him.
. . . .
News that the Internet user "Super Vulgar Butcher" Wu Gan had been arrested did not come as much of a surprise to folks from his home town. "Wu Gan's home environment had quite an influence on him." A village elder expressed a certain degree of pity: "He was too mouthy, and was bound to have an 'incident' sooner or later."
. . . .
When they speak of Wu Gan's family, most neighbors shake their heads. His father was a live-in-son-in-law, and his mother died of illness when he was 14. In 1998, his father was sentenced to three years imprisonment after he organized a group of smash a chicken farm, and attacked police who had been sent to deal with the situation. . . . . His brother is still wanted by the police in connection with a 2006 scheme to abscond with over 710,000 yuan in funds obtained through a fraudulent subcontracting manufacturing arrangement.
. . . .
Two of Wu Gan's former coworkers had similar assessments: He once wrote a novel on the company Intranet, but it was vulgar; his work was generally sloppy, and several times it almost led to his being fired.
. . . .
A court judgment in a civil lawsuit states "he is almost never home," "in 2002 he was discovered to have had an affair," his first wife divorced him. . . .
. . . .
According to public security agencies, Wu Gan has been subjected to administrative detention three times for falsifying documents, driving without a license, and disturbing public order.
. . . .
他干过房产中介，也和朋友合伙开过公司，都以失败告终。正事干不成，他就开始在网上泡论坛、写博客。
. . . .
在湖北邓玉娇事件中，吴淦进入医院与邓玉娇拍照合影、上网发布，在网络上一举成名。尝到甜头后，吴淦就特别热衷关注热点事件。
. . . .
吴淦抓住一些领导干部怕惹事、怕炒作的心理，常常从党政机关主要领导“下手”，给涉事政府施加压力。
. . . .
2012年，福清市公安局侦办一起涉及吴淦亲属的案子。吴淦为了达到他的个人目的，就对该局领导进行辱骂，并威胁“为局长全家设灵堂让福清访民来祭拜”。此外，他还抹黑该局因公牺牲的全国公安系统二级英模林万霖 . . . .
. . . .
不难看出，为了给领导施压，达到个人目的，吴淦可谓无所不用其极，甚至连孩子也不放过。
. . . .
“哪里热闹他就往哪里跑，就像逐臭的苍蝇，到处飞来飞去，唯恐天下不乱。”曾经目睹吴淦在福州晋安区打着“维权”旗号、为亲戚牟利的全过程，陈先生表达了他对这种人的无比厌恶.
. . . .
网民“超级低俗屠夫”吴淦被拘留的消息并没有让乡亲们感到太大的意外。“家庭氛围对吴淦的影响不小。”村里年岁大的老人有些惋惜；“他的言行太过分，迟早会‘出事’。”村里爱上网的年轻人早有预感。
. . . .
谈及吴淦的家庭，村民大多摇头。他父亲徐某某是上门女婿，母亲在他14岁时病逝； 1998年，他父亲因组织一帮人打砸养鸡场，并围攻前去处置的民警，被判处有期徒刑3年，又因在服刑期间越狱增加刑期1年；他哥哥在2006年以代加工半成品为由，伙同他人骗取贷款71万余元后潜逃，目前还是公安机关网上追逃对象。
. . . .
这两位前同事的评价差不多：在公司内网上写过一篇所谓的长篇小说，但很低俗；平时工作吊儿郎当，几次差点到了被开除的地步。
. . . .
法院的一份民事判决书显示：“经常不着家”“2002年发现他有外遇”，前妻要与他离婚. . . .
. . . .
据公安机关介绍，吴淦曾因伪造证件、无证驾驶和扰乱公共秩序，先后3次被公安机关行政拘留。

Also on May 28, 2015, the front page headline of the Police Daily, the official mouthpiece of China's Ministry of Public Security, read: "Suspected of Committing the Crimes of Provoking Quarrels and Defamation, Doubts are Raised about Satirical 'Rights Defense'" (涉嫌寻衅滋事罪和诽谤罪 恶搞式“维权”遭质疑). Most of the sources cited in the article came from anonymous Internet posters. Some excerpts:

On May 27, the Internet user Wu Gan "Super Vulgar Butcher," who had previously been subjected to administrative detention for disturbing order at a work unit and publicly insulting others, was formally arrested by Fujian police on suspicion of picking quarrels and defamation. Currently, police are carrying out an investigation.
. . . .
Although this time the police only publicized Wu Gan's actions in the Nanchang disturbance, some Internet users have compiled lists of a series of satirical so-called "rights defense" actions that he has participated in over the years. One Internet user said "kindness and tolerance has allowed this petty clown 'Butcher' to step into the limelight time and again to manufacture farces." Another Internet user said "The 'Butcher' is just another troublemaker looking to 'stir shit up.' Wherever there are people gathering to make noises, that's where you will find him looking for an opportunity to hype-up the situation." Internet user "I Love the Lady in the Moon" said on one forum: "Over the past few years there has been a constant stream of information about Wu Gan cheating people's money. Now that they are punishing him, its like a lesson for all Internet users."
. . . .
One Internet user summed up Wu Gan's approach to rights defense as "Right Defense Day Trips": "At the moment things get going he rushes to scene where people are gathering, takes some photos with them, and then heads to the relevant 'government office' to wander around. If its possible he'll submit some bullshit made-up 'application' or 'letter of complaint' and then post these images online along with some superficial explanations. Finally, at the critical moment he'll announce he's taking donations in a certain bank account, and call on Internet users to make a contribution." The Internet user points out that Wu Gan's goal in participating in every event "is making money."

On the Kaidi Forum, from May to November 2009 an Internet user published over 10 posts casting suspicions on "the Butcher," pointing out that "the Butcher" had insulted reporters and others, was already under suspicion of committing crimes, and noted that a series of actions taken by "the Butcher" had been done in order to collect donations.

5月27日，此前因扰乱单位秩序、公然侮辱他人被行政拘留的网民“超级低俗屠夫”吴淦，因涉嫌寻衅滋事罪和诽谤罪，被福建警方依法刑事拘留。目前，警方正在做进一步调查。
. . . .
虽然此次警方只是公布了吴淦在南昌闹事的行为，但还有网民列举了其多年来参与恶搞的一系列所谓“维权”行动。有网民称“善良和宽容，让‘屠夫’这种跳梁小丑一再登台亮相、制造闹剧”，还有网民称“‘屠夫’就是个唯恐天下不乱的‘搅屎棍’，哪里有热点，哪里就有他借机炒作”。网民“我爱嫦娥”在评论中说，“这几年关于吴淦骗钱的消息从未间断过，这次对其依法处理，算是给所有网民一个交待了”。
. . . .
有网民总结了吴淦的维权轨迹，将其称为“维权一日游”：“第一时间冲到当事人所在地，先合影，然后到相关‘衙门’走一圈，如有可能还会递交一些狗屁不通、涂涂改改的所谓‘申请书’、‘控告信’，再然后将这些照片发到网上，加几句不痛不痒的话，最后就到了最关键的环节，公布捐款账号，呼吁网民捐款。”指出吴淦参与的所有事件，“其目的都是为了钱”。

同在凯迪社区，从2009年5月起至当年11月，一网民发表了十余篇质疑“屠夫”的帖子，指出“屠夫”侮辱媒体记者等，已经涉嫌刑事犯罪，并指称“屠夫”的一系列行为就是为了募集捐款。

The following day the Beijing Daily also published an article in its print edition similarly outlining Wu Gan's various business failings, firings, relationship problems, and family difficulties. Below is the graphic that accompanied the article.

China's Real Name Internet Part 4: State Media's Version of Global Internet Governance

One common theme in the People's Daily editorials was that, when it comes to Internet regulation, "everyone does it" - at least three front page editorials explicitly discussed Internet regulation in other countries. In addition, during this period, the People's Daily published a series of reports entitled "Every Country Oversees and Manages the Internet in Accordance with Law - A Comprehensive Analysis" (各国依法监管互联网面面观). Countries covered included:

• December 20: United States http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/20/nw.D110000renmrb_20121220_6-03.htm
• December 22: England http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/22/nw.D110000renmrb_20121222_6-03.htm
• December 23: Canada http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/23/nw.D110000renmrb_20121223_10-03.htm
• December 24: Australia http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/24/nw.D110000renmrb_20121224_6-03.htm
• December 25: United States http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/25/nw.D110000renmrb_20121225_7-03.htm
• December 26: Singapore http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/27/nw.D110000renmrb_20121227_7-03.htm
• December 28: Indonesia http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/28/nw.D110000renmrb_20121228_8-03.htm
• December 29: Argentina http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/29/nw.D110000renmrb_20121229_6-03.htm
• December 30: Mexico http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2012-12/30/nw.D110000renmrb_20121230_7-03.htm

Other than an obscure reference to an "indirect real name system" in Japan, however, the People's Daily's discussion of how other countries have addressed the concept of a real name Internet consisted solely of the following:

Canada

The fundamental value of the practice of "self-discipline" rests in promoting free expression and free flow of information on the Internet, and encouraging forms of dispute resolution with respect to controversial and assaulting online information. The idea of Canada implementing laws for online real name systems is to require the Internet industry to implement strict self-discipline.
“自我规制”实践的根本价值取向就在于保持和促进网络表达自由和信息的自由流动，推进对有争议和攻击性网络信息的纠纷解决机制的形成。加拿大实施网络实名制法律意在要求互联网行业实行严格自律。

Mexico

Besides this, many government officials, including Mexican President Nieto, have already initiated discussions with ordinary Internet users about real name accounts for social web sites, guiding the public to set up a civilized online atmosphere. Currently some Mexican Senators and academics are strongly suggesting that the government should start moving social web sites to a real name system.
此外，包括墨西哥总统涅托在内的许多政府高官已开始带头在社交网站开设实名账户，直接同普通网民进行沟通和交流，引导民众树立文明上网之风。眼下，墨西哥一些国会议员和学者还强烈建议政府应适时启动社交网络实名制。

United States

In fact, in the United States, widely known for "freedom of speech," there exists calls from the public to implement a real name Internet system. Nowadays more and more mainstream media web sites are requiring Internet users to register before they can leave comments. In 2010, the gaming web site "Blizzard" began requiring users to use their real names to post on their forum.
. . . .
In addition to pleas by the public, the American government is also considering a plan for "online ID." In early 2011, the Obama administration proposed establishing a digital identification verification system, enabling American Internet users to send emails, register on social web sites, and conduct online purchases without having to input their user names and passwords, reducing the incidence of online crime, and increasing people's security while online.
实际上，在以“言论自由”著称的美国，社会上同样存在着实行网络实名制的呼吁。如今，越来越多的主流媒体网站要求网友先注册，然后才能留言。2010年，游戏网站“暴雪”还要求用户使用真实姓名在论坛上发言。
. . . .
除了社会上的呼声，美国政府也在考虑推动“网络身份证”计划。2011年初，奥巴马政府提出了建立数码身份认证系统的设想，使今后美国网民收发电子邮件、登录社交网站和进行网络购物等活动时，可以不必输入用户名和密码，减少网络犯罪的发生，提高人们上网的安全性。

South Korea

In the past China's state-run media had turned to South Korea to build its argument that that China's Internet users should accept a real name Internet. For example, on August 13, 2009, the Guangming Daily published an editorial entitled "The Time is Ripe to Implement an Internet Real Name System" (实行网络实名制时机已经成熟). An excerpt:

Fang Binxing offered an example saying, in 2002 South Korea launched an Internet real name system in order to protect citizens' rights, reputations, and economic interests, and this allowed South Korea to become both one of the world's countries with the most thorough real name systems as well as one of the world's countries with the highest level of Internet security. More than that, the Internet real name system promoted the rapid development of South Korea's online banking and online commerce, and attracted a large amount of investment in online enterprises, further driving constant improvements in South Korea's online enterprises. Fang Binxing believes that this gives China excellent experience and an effective example of how to implement its own Internet real name system.
方滨兴举例说,韩国从2002年起推动实施网络实名制,以保护公民的隐私权、名誉权和经济权益,这使得韩国成为全球贯彻实名制最彻底的国家之一,也是网络安全程度最高的国家之一。不仅如此,网络实名制还促进了韩国网上银行、网络消费等的快速发展,吸引了大批资金进入网络产业,带动了韩国网络产业不断升级。方滨兴认为,这给中国实施网络实名制提供了很好的借鉴和有效的示范。

More recently, in December 2011, the Global Times published an editorial entitled "Weibo Regulations a Step on the Right Path." An excerpt:

The new regulations, in theory, are pertinent to solving weibo's urgent problems without harming its good effects. South Korea has already ordered real-name registration for the Internet.

 That same month, Xinhua also sought to reassure readers that this was "Common Practice":

China is not the only country to resort to real-name registration to monitor the Internet. The government of the Republic of Korea started to implement a real-name authentication system on its major websites in 2007 to prevent Internet violence, fraud or malicious information spreading.

In 2009, the system was expanded to cover all websites with daily visits of over 100,000.

But in the year after those editorials were written, the Constitutional Court of South Korea issued its decision in the application of Sohn et. al. unanimously holding that Korea's Internet real name systems were unconstitutional because "they infringe upon freedom of expression and autonomous control of personal data."

On August 24, 2012, the day after the South Korean court issued its decision, Xinhua and the China Daily published an editorial entitled "No Need to Be Overly Concerned About Korea Abolishing Its Real Name System" (不必对韩国取消实名制过分惊诧) by Wu Dingping (吴定平). That editorial stated that South Korea's system had been China's "reference model." It went on to say:

Why did Korea's love affair with its real name system come to an end? Fundamentally, there were no actual problems with the real name system, rather the main issue was that Korea had insufficient protections for personal privacy, and this led to significant pressure on, and resistance to, the real name system, and led ultimately to a fatal attack on it. Comparatively speaking, China has done a better job in this area.
韩国实名制为何“始乱终弃”、半途而废？本质而言不是实名制本身存在问题，而主要是缘于韩国在个人隐私保护方面做得不够到位，给实名制带来巨大的压力和阻力，最终产生致命性的打击。相比较而言，我国在这方面做得相对较好。

See: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2012/10/when-it-comes-to-real-name-registration.html

On January 2, 2013, Xinhua published an editorial under the name "Shi Yi" (石一). Baidu's Baike has an entry for someone with that name - the CEO of Avazu Inc. - but its not clear whether thas person was in fact the editorial's author. The editorial was entitled "Users Registering With True Identification Information is Not the Same as South Korea's Real Name System" (用户真实身份信息注册与韩国实名制并非一回事). Some excerpts:

In order to safeguard the security of personal information, the Decision requires: "When entering into agreements or confirming the provision of services with users, network service providers who provide users network connection services, conduct network access procedures for fixed and mobile telephones, or who provide users with information issuing services shall require users to provide truthful identity information." The purpose of this legislative provision is to safeguard users' online information from being disclosed, falsified, or misused. However, some Internet users have compared it with South Korea's "online real name system," and believe that China should take as a warning the fact that "South Korea's online real name system has already failed." This author believes that this mischaracterizes and misunderstands the Decision, and that China's user real ID information registration information system has some fundamental differences with South Korea's "online real name system."
为保护个人信息安全，《决定》要求“网络服务提供者为用户办理网站接入服务，办理固定电话、移动电话等入网手续，或者为用户提供信息发布服务，应当在与用户签订协议或者确认提供服务时，要求用户提供真实身份信息”。这一规定的立法目的是保护用户网络信息不被泄露、篡改和滥用。但是，也有一些网民将此与韩国“网络实名制”相联系，认为“韩国网络实名制已经失败”，中国应以此为鉴。笔者认为，这是对《决定》的误读和臆测，我国用户真实身份信息注册制度与韩国“网络实名制”有着本质区别。

The editorial went on to discuss three problems experienced by South Korea's systems, and how China will avoid them:

• In South Korea web sites were allowed to retain user's information, but in China "When a user is asked by a web site to carry out identification verification, the web site will redirect to a page on the verification agency's web site. The personal information that the user submits will be verified on the Internet ID verification platform, and not through the registering web site."
• In South Korea the verification agency was a commercial organization, and laws and policies were perfunctorily enforced. In China, "the Internet Society of China will establish a unified Internet real ID information verification platform . . . . the Internet Society of China is non-profit industry organization, and is under the responsibility of the MIIT, and is subject to more oversight and management."
• In South Korea the verification agency charged fees, and this influenced web sites' "enthusiasm." In China, web sites will not be charged fees.

The editorial went on to say: "It was precisely because of these systemic design inadequacies that Internet users' private information security could not be effectively guaranteed, and this was the basic reason why South Korea's 'online real name system' failed."

The editorial made no mention of the South Korean Constitutional Court August decision regarding South Korea's real name system, or that the explicitly said it was NOT going to rule on the privacy issue. The Court's decision stated:

Applicant Sohn et al. further assert that the mandatory verification of user identity restricts bulletin board user’s right to privacy as it obliges the user to disclose the personal data such as name,resident’s registration number, etc. However, we have already explained that the mandatory verification of user identity restricts user’s right to autonomous control of personal data, which is a concrete manifestation of the right to privacy. As we shall decide whether the restriction of user’s right to autonomous control of personal data amounts to infringement, there is no need for us to rule upon the alleged infringement of the right to privacy.

Instead, the Court said that "the focal issues of this case are whether the restrictions imposed by the mandatory verification of user identity are disproportionate and excessive."

Ultimately, the South Korean Constitutional Court found as follows:

We find that the mandatory verification of user identity stipulated in the provisions under review operates as prior restriction of freedom of expression. It discourages expression in general and thus restrains constitutionally protected speech and it hampers free formation of public opinion which is at the heart of democracy. The provisions under review impose excessive restrictions and infringe upon freedom of expression and autonomous control of personal data of Applicant Sohn et al. and upon freedom of press, etc. of Applicant Company.

An English translation of the Korean Court's decision by Professor Keechang Kim, Korea University Law School is available here: http://openweb.or.kr/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Korean-Constitutional-Court-declares-real-name-verification-unconstitutional.pdf

China's Real Name Internet Part 3: The People's Daily's 10 Days of Front Page Editorials

By far the most prolific publisher of pro-real name regulation propaganda was the People's Daily. In the last two weeks of December that paper published at least ten editorials on its front page espousing the need for new Internet regulations:

• December 18: "The Internet Is Not Beyond the Law" (网络不是法外之地)
• December 20: "The Internet Needs to Operate in Accordance with the Law" (网络需要依法运行)
• December 22: "Internet Development Needs to be 'Grabbed with Two Hands'" (网络发展需要"两手抓")
• December 23: "There Can Be Health Only Where There is a Bottom Line." (有底线,才健康)
• December 24: "Words and Deeds on the Internet Should Comply with the Law's Bottom Line" (网络言行应遵循法律底线)
• December 25: "Further the Internet's 'Positive Forces' Through Rule by Law" (以法治涵养网络"正能量")
• December 26: "Virtual Spaces Can't Get Away From 'Real World Rules'" (虚拟空间离不开"现实规则")
• December 28: "Open Platforms Cannot Exist Without 'Legal Boundaries'" (开放平台不能没有"合法边界")
• December 29: "Safeguard the Healthy and Orderly Operation of the Internet in Accordance with the Law" (依法保障网络健康有序运行)
• December 30: "Only by Moving Safely Can We Move Freely" (安全流动,才能自由流动)

 

Similar Wording

The editorials were short (around 400 characters) and used similar, and in some cases identical, language. For example, four of these editorials used the term "border":

• December 20
• "Delineate the borders of behavior" (厘定行为边界)
• December 24
• "Words and actions have borders" (言行是有边界的)
• "Rational borders of freedom" (自由的合理边界)
• "Establish the borders of responsibility" (确立责任边界)
• December 28
• "Borders of legality" (合法边界 - used three times)
• "Demarcate the borders of online words and actions" (划定网络言行的边界)
• "Establish the borders" (确立边界)
• January 10

• "Social life has borders, and the Internet world has a bottom line" (社会生活有边界，网络世界有底线)

Other state-sponsored media outlets employed the "border" metaphor as well. A Global Times' January 9 editorial told readers that "every country's news reports have their own borders and forbidden zones (各国的新闻报道都有各自的边界和禁区), while a Guangming Daily's December 19 editorial used a phrase that would become the title of the People's Daily January 10 editorial: "Social life has borders, and the Internet world has a bottom line." (社会生活有边界，网络世界有底线)

In another example of employing the exact same phrasing, three of the People's Daily editorials (December 18, 20, and 30) and one Guangming Daily editorial (December 19) used the Chinese idiom for "public security and good morals." (公序良俗)

 

Real Name Editorials?

 

Each of the editorials had a different author, but because the People's Daily did not provide any description of the authors' affiliations or qualifications, it was difficult, if not impossible, to determine the author's actual identity. For example, the December 18 editorial was authored by someone named Mo Lvlv (莫津津). The People's Daily has been publishing editorials on a variety of topics with that byline since at least 2005, when it published an editorial on page 10  of the June 7 edition entitled "Hangzhou: Objections Arise to Social Security, to Be Settled in a Hearing" (杭州：低保有异议　听证来定夺). In that editorial the People's Daily referred to Mo as "Yunnan, Kunming, Mo Lvlv" (云南昆明市　莫津津).

On August 30 (服刑先学《弟子规》) and November 9, 2007 (浙江绍兴县　跑车巡警，半月叫停), the People's Daily web site included articles with quotes from a "Yunnan, Kunming, Mo Lvlv" (云南昆明市　莫津津) as well as a "Hunan, Huaihua, Mo Lvlv" (湖南怀化市 莫津津).

In 2010 and 2011, the People's Daily was referring to Mo simply as "Internet user Mo Lvlv" (网友莫津津) in the editorials in which they quoted him (or her):

• 重庆忠县书记县长电视剧里演自己引网友质疑 
• 江苏宿迁：劝解邻里纠纷奖10元 
• 山东梁山县借“水浒”搞反腐教育引争议 
• 议言广场：当结婚遭遇“爱情和面包”的难题 

The People's Daily's December 20 editorial was entitled: "The Internet Needs to Operate in Accordance with the Law" (网络需要依法运行). This was the first in the series to raise privacy issues. The author was Kong Fangbin (孔方斌), and there is no indication that anyone with this name had ever published anything else, anywhere else. Some excerpts:

This is the state of the Internet. Even as there is positive, active, and healthy information flows, there is also rumor mongering, fraud, and defamation mixed in. If we take a laissez-faire attitude it will threaten public security, harm the interests of the average citizen, and bring with it severe social harm.
. . . .
The Internet needs not only "self-cleansing," but also a system for third-party discipline, demarkation of the borders of behavior, and increased oversight in accordance with the law. It is necessary to keep irresponsible rumor mongering in check, keep personal information from being disclosed, and prevent and attack digital crimes from pornography to fraud.
In 1977, America enacted legislation on computer systems, Japan has implemented an indirect real name system, and Germany blocks illegal web page content . . . for the Internet to progress, the law must move forward as well. 

这就是互联网的常态。在正面、积极、健康的信息洪流中，也有谣言、欺诈、诽谤等等混杂其间,对其听之任之，势必威胁公众安全,损害老百姓利益,带来严重的社会危害。
. . . .
网络不仅需要“自我净化”，也需要他律机制，厘定行为边界,依法加以监管。管住不负责任的谣言，管住个人信息的泄露，防止和打击从色情到诈骗的数字化犯罪，是很有必要的。
美国1977年就为计算机系统立法，日本实行网络间接实名制，德国屏蔽不合法网页内容……互联网要向前发展，法律必须如影随形地跟进。

On December 22, the People's Daily front page editorial was entitled "Internet Development Needs to be 'Grabbed with Two Hands'" (网络发展需要'两手抓'). The author was Yu Yang (于洋). Baidu's Baike has an entry for a woman by that name who is an Olympic badminton gold medalist.  Some excerpts from the editorial:

Over the last 20 years China's Internet has gone from weak to flourishing, and much of this is owing to the passion, creativity, and participation of Internet users. However, as something that grew spontaneously, the spread of the Internet has some peculiarities that are not easy to ignore, such as the fact that many Internet users only browse information that they themselves need, only pay attention to views that they agree with, and information screening can easily produce extreme public reaction, as well as irrational discussion and uncivilized behavior.
20多年来，中国互联网从弱小到兴盛，网民们的热情、创意和参与功不可没。但是，在自发状态下，网络传播呈现出的一些特点也不容忽视，比如很多网民只浏览自己需要的信息，只关注自己认同的观点，信息的过滤很容易产生群体观点的极端化，也容易产生不理性的讨论和不文明的行为。

The next editorial was published on December 23 and entitled "There Can Be Health Only Where There is a Bottom Line." (有底线,才健康) Some excerpts:

Being open does not mean people can behave unscrupulously. Being free is not the same thing as running around cursing people, and sharing information does not mean arbitrarily disclosing other people's private affairs and spreading rumors everywhere. Unless there is basic rational judgment, social order, and legal restraints, this kind of of Internet will only sink into chaos and will find itself at a fork in the road, where it cannot develop in a healthy manner, much less become the vital new frontier that Internet users hope for.
Long ago foreign countries made the Internet into an "information superhighway." When driving on a highway legal restrictions and driver's ethical instincts are both required. For the Internet superhighway to be orderly and safe, it similarly needs both ethical self-discipline and legal regulation.  

开放性并不意味着可以恣意妄为，自由表达并不等于四处骂街，信息共享更不是随意泄露别人隐私、到处散播谣言。没有基本的理性判断、社会秩序和法治约束，这样的网络只会陷入混乱、走上歧途，不可能健康发展，更不是网民心中那片充满生机活力的新天地。
很早以前，国外就把互联网比作“信息高速公路”。在高速公路上驱车，法律约束和驾驶员的道德自觉缺一不可，网络信息高速公路的有序安全，同样需要道德自律和法律规范。

The author of this piece, Jian Mandu (简满屯), had previously authored or been quoted in at least four other People's Daily editorials, and was only identified as "a reader":

• September 10, 2004: 净化未成年人成长环境 
• May 28, 2010: 干部讲话应有“百姓思维” 
• July 9, 2010: 人才工作怎样“点石成金” 
• May 23, 2011: 社会管理当求“上工治未病” 

The next day, December 24, the People's Daily front page once again included a similarly-titled editorial: "Words and Deeds on the Internet Should Comply with the Law's Bottom Line" (网络言行应遵循法律底线). The name of the author of that piece, Guo Sheng (郭胜), is somewhat common (including a police officer in Chongqing and a historical figure from the Han Dynasty), so its impossible to determine who the author really is. Some excerpts:

If someone defames and insults others in the name of "freedom," and harm others commercial credibility or their product's reputation, then this is in fact illegal, even criminal. If someone clings to "justice" as an excuse to claim the ends justifies the means, even to the point of "lying to obscure the truth," this is similarly irresponsible.
During last year's riots in England, Premier Cameron once exclaimed: "Free flow of information can be used for good, but it can also be used for bad." The Internet has given us greater freedom, and has also given us greater responsibility. Only by establishing the boundaries of responsibility, stipulating the standards of what is "lawful" and was is "unlawful," will we be able to better enjoy freedom and protect rights, only then will we better promote progress for the nation and society. 

如果以“自由”之名诽谤、侮辱他人，损害别人的商业信誉、商品声誉，这实质上是违法甚至犯罪；如果持着“正义”的理由，只问目的不择手段，甚至搞所谓“谎言倒逼真相”，这同样是不负责任。
去年英国骚乱后，首相卡梅伦曾感慨：“信息自由流通可以用来做好事，但同样可以用来干坏事。” 网络给予了我们更多自由，也给予了我们更大责任。确立责任边界，厘定“法”与“非法”的标准，我们才能更好地享受自由、保护权利，才能更好地推动国家与社会的进步。

The December 25 front page editorial was entitled "Further the Internet's 'Positive Forces' Through Rule by Law" (以法治涵养网络"正能量"). The author, Wang Zhaolei (王兆雷), appears to be a reporter with the People's Daily. Some excerpts:

In modern society, the ultimate purpose of any law is to safeguard citizens' rights, freedoms, and dignity. In this sense, legislation should not be viewed narrowly as "controlling," nor should Internet legislation be viewed as being in opposition to Internet development.
. . . .
Strengthening Internet legislation will not only put fear into the hearts of online criminals, it will also provide a legal basis for safeguarding the rights and intersts of Internet users, and channel Internet administration onto the path of the legal system. 

在现代社会，任何法律的最终目的，都是为了保护公民的权利、自由与尊严。在这个意义上，不应将立法狭隘地理解为某种“管控”，更不应将网络立法与网络发展对立起来。
. . . .
加强网络立法，不仅是对网络违法犯罪的震慑，更为网民维护自身权益提供了法律基础，将网络管理纳入了法制轨道。

The December 27 front page editorial was entitled: "Virtual Spaces Can't Get Away From 'Real World Rules'" (虚拟空间离不开"现实规则"). Some excerpts:

In recent years, the pornographic, fraudulent, rumor mongering, defamatory, and paid commentary content that has frequently appeared on the Internet has not only disturbed online order, it has also interfered with people's offline lives. Establishing and perfecting "real world rules" for the virtual spaces that will promote online civility, heath, and development has become a consensus and an aspiration.
As early as 1996, America clearly determined that the Internet world was "in need of oversight to the same degree as the real world." In Germany, it is impossible to open content promoting Nazi ideology online. In England, the police require Internet cafes to retain knowledge of online activities. The experience of these countries that have a developed Internet should give us inspiration. When it comes to public realms like the Internet, the earlier rules are set up the more mature the development. The sooner we are able to promote the good and abolish the bad, the more we can keep "negative effects" in check, the more we can set free "proper energies." 

这些年，网络平台上不时出现的淫秽色情、网络诈骗、造谣诽谤、网络水军，不仅扰乱了网络秩序，也对人们的现实生活形成了干扰。建立和完善虚拟空间的“现实规则”，推动网络文明健康发展成为共识和心声。
早在1996年，美国就明确将互联网世界定性为“与真实世界一样需要进行监控”的领域。在德国，宣扬纳粹思想的内容在互联网上无法打开。英国警察要求网吧保留对上网者行为的知情权。这些互联网发达国家的经验给我们以启示。在网络这一公共领域中，规则建立越早、发展越成熟，我们就越能兴利除弊、越能抑制“负效应”，释放“正能量”。

The author, Jiang Liuyi (江柳依), had also published at least four other editorials in the People's Daily in 2012:

• May 15, 2012 食品安全问题要“零容忍” 
• May 28, 2012 不能把腐败扩大化 
• November 9, 2012 党心民意同频共振 
• June 14, 2012 摈弃“狭隘的极端主义” 

The following day, December 28, the People's Daily front page editorial entitled "Open Platforms Cannot Exist Without 'Legal Boundaries'" (开放平台不能没有"合法边界"),was authored by Ren Fang (任芳), which is also the name of a People's Daily reporter. Some excerpts:

The good is often buried beneath the bad, with private information being disclosed, rumor mongering and defamation, and infringing and fraudulent actions taking place all the time. In the first half of this year alone China has dealt with 13,900 phishing web sites.
The more open something is, the more it needs to have clearly delineated rules that are commonly obeyed, and borders for Internet speech and action that clearly demarcated. In fact, the history of Internet development is one of constant "border drawing."
这其中往往泥沙俱下，隐私泄露，谣言诽谤，侵权和诈骗活动时有发生。仅今年上半年，我国就处理钓鱼网站1.39万个。 

越是开放，就越需要确立共同遵守的规则、划定网络言行的边界。实际上，互联网发展的历史，就是不断“确立边界”的历史。

The next day, December 29, the People's Daily published a much longer editorial on its front page entitled "Safeguard the Healthy and Orderly Operation of the Internet in Accordance with the Law" (依法保障网络健康有序运行), and this time the editorial was attributed to  "a columnist." Some excerpts:

On December 28, the 30th Meeting of the 11th Plenum of the National People's Congress Standing Committee enacted the Decision Regarding Strengthening Network Information Protection, conforming to the trends of Internet development, the popular will, and the wishes of the people.
. . . .
All circles of society have been vociferous in their call to formulate relevant laws to regulate the collection and utilization of citizen's personal information, stringently punish illegal criminal online activities, safeguard the legal rights and interests of Internet users, and ensure the normal, healthy, and orderly operation of the Internet. The decision of the National People's Congress Standing Committee to strengthen protection of online information comports with the hopes and wishes of people, is an important measure for adapting to the circumstances, and is a concrete manifestation of safeguarding human rights in accordance with the law. It is both very necessary and very timely. 

12月28日，十一届全国人大常委会第三十次会议表决通过了关于加强网络信息保护的决定，顺应了互联网的发展趋势，合乎民意，顺乎民心。
. . . .
社会各界强烈呼吁尽快制定相关法律，规范收集、使用公民个人信息的活动，严厉惩处网络违法犯罪行为，维护网络用户的合法权益，保障网络规范、健康、有序运行。这次全国人大常委会通过关于加强网络信息保护的决定，符合广大人民群众的期盼和愿望，是适应形势发展需要的重要举措，是依法保障人权的具体体现,非常必要和及时。

On December 30, the People's Daily front page editorial was entitled "Only by Moving Safely Can We Move Freely" (安全流动,才能自由流动). The author's name was given as De Sheng (德胜) - the Chinese characters for "morality" and "victory." Some excerpts:

It can be seen that there can be no discussion of "freedom" without security. The flood of illegal harmful information will certainly harm citizens' legal rights and interests, jeopardize online public order and morality, and harm the public interest. In order to fully release the bounty of information flows, it is necessary to eliminate the hidden dangers to information security, and this has already become the common consensus of all circles of society, and the appeals for legislation on information security are growing louder day by day. 

可见，没有安全，“自由”也就无从谈起。非法有害信息的泛滥，势必伤害公民的合法权益、破坏网络的公序良俗、损害社会的公共利益。为了充分释放信息流动的红利，就必须消除信息安全的隐患，这已成为社会各界的基本共识，信息安全立法的呼吁之声也日益强烈。

On January 10, 2013, the People's Daily published an editorial entitled "Internet Expression Also Needs to be Lawful" (网络表达同样应正当合法) by Mao Lei (毛磊 - which is also the name of a People's Daily reporter). This was the first People's Daily editorial in the cycle to mention the Decision's "real name registration" requirement. Some excerpts:

Expression on Internet platforms can produce two-sided results, besides legal expression, there are also people who may use the Internet to undertake insults, defamation, fraud, pornography, and other illegal activities.
Strengthening Internet management will realize the "unification of rights and duties." On the one hand it will safeguard citizens' freedom of speech and right to expression. On the other hand it will require citizens to take responsibility for the content of their expression. The fundamental utility of Internet back-end real name registration lies in increasing the costs associated with spreading rumors by putting a sense of fear into those who would spread rumors. If rumors are allowed to spread, then in fact it is freedom of speech that is the ultimate victim.
Social life has boundaries, and the Internet has a bottom line. Everyone knows that "freedom" is relative, and in the online world as in the real world, there is not absolute freedom. 

在网络平台上的表达，可能产生两面性，即除了合法表达外，还有人可能利用网络进行侮辱、诽谤、诈骗、色情等非法活动。
加强网络管理，体现了“权利义务相统一”。一方面要保护公民的言论自由表达权利，另一方面要求公民对自己表达的内容负责。网络后台实名的根本作用在于，让造谣传谣的成本变得高昂，震慑企图造谣传谣的人。如果任谣言传播，恰恰最后受伤害的就是言论自由。
社会生活有边界，网络世界有底线。众所周知，“自由”是相对的，网络世界与现实社会一样，并不存在绝对自由。

2013 Year in Review: A Chronicle of China's Social Media Crackdown

In August 2013, President Xi Jinping issued a call for for less negative speech online. By October, after a propaganda campaign against popular online personalities, a new law, and dozens of detentions, the People's Daily reported that their surveys showed that there was less negative speech online.

Below is a chronology of the events that lead the People's Daily to declare the "end of era" for public participation in online discourse in China.

April 10: Future SCIO Deputy Director Calls on Government to “Silence Those Who Need Silencing”

Red Flag Journal, a magazine published by the Communist Party's flagship magazine Seeking Truth, publishes an article entitled "Target the Two Venues of Public Discourse, Solidify the Positive Energy of Society." The article was authored by Ren Xianliang who, at the time of publication was acting vice-minister of Shaanxi province’s propaganda department. Several months following the publication he would be appointed deputy director of the State Council Information Office. Some excerpts:

The abrupt rise of the Internet and other new media, especially the appearance of blogs and weibos and other forms of personal media, has in fact undermined policies that banned private media and prohibited cross-border oversight. Certain VIP weibo users frequently have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands, even millions, of followers, and go so far as to launch micro-magazines and micro-television channels.
. . . .
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. As soon as there is any violation of law, rules, or discipline, resolutely handle it in accordance with the law, and show no mercy. It is only by using the law to manage new media formats, including the Internet, in the same manner as is done with real-world society, that we can turn it to our own ends and not be subject to external threats.
. . . .
Online "opinion leaders" represent the aspirations of a sizable portion of the crowd. They are the focus of much public attention, and hold great sway over users' moods and online opinion. Administrative agencies must adopt many different methods to transform, foster, and cultivate "opinion leaders" who understand, approve of, and praise the general and specific policies of the Party and the government, and use them to influence Internet users and guide public opinion.

The following day, the state-sponsored Southern Metropolitan Daily drew attention to Ren's piece by publishing an article entitled "Shaanxi Official: Some Online Discourse is Being Manipulated, When It Comes to the Big V's On Weibo, Silence Those Who Need Silencing" (陕西官员：一些网络舆论被操纵 微博大V该关就关). These screenshots show that the article, originally available here - http://ndnews.oeeee.com/html/201304/11/46487.html - was quickly deleted.

These screenshots were taken on April 12, and show that Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo were censoring searches for "Ren Xianliang."

These screenshots were taken on April 13, and show that Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo were censoring searches for "Silence Those Who Need Silencing."

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/04/chinas-weibos-censor-discussion-about.html

August 10: Online Opinion Leaders Agree on “Seven Bottom Lines”

Well-known online personalities gather at CCTV's headquarters in Beijing and reach an agreement that are seven bottom lines that they would observe when posting on social media:

1. Legal
2. Socialist System
3. National Interest
4. Citizens' Legal Rights and Interests
5. Social Order
6. Moral
7. Factual

Although "National Interest" was listed third, China's state run media reported:

The national interest is to be placed above all others, because without the nation we have nothing. That is the way of the physical world, and so it is even more so in the online world. We must forge an online patriotic culture, with the soul of online culture resting on the national interest.”

August 16: Flagship Party Magazine Says China Cannot Survive Losing Control Over Public Opinion

On August 16, 2013, the Chinese Communist Party's flagship magazine, Seeking Truth, publishes an editorial entitled "Take Up the Cause of Insisting on a Marxist Approach to News." Some excerpts:

At its current stage, China could not endure the consequences of losing control over public opinion. . . . 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 posted by excessively open public opinion. Excessively critical public opinion will damage popular trust in government and jeopardize government administration.

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/08/communist-party-magazine-china-could.html

August 19: Xi Jinping Says Bad Online Opinion Leaders Must Be Restrained

Xi Jinping gives a speech to the National Propaganda and Ideology Work Conference. Some excerpts:

No newspaper, no magazine, no public forum, no meeting room, no television, no movie, no stage shall provide space for any malicious speech that would attack the Party's leaders, attack the socialist system, distort Party or national history, or spread rumors to create trouble. No newspaper, no magazine, no mobile video, no cell phone media, no SMS, no WeChat, no blog, no podcast, no microblog, no online forum, no new media of any sort shall provide such speech with any convenience. . . . Those who would spread rumors to cause trouble must be punished in accordance with the law . . . .

A little less negative speech on the Internet can only help, and not hurt, China's social development and social stability, and the peace and contentment of its people. . . .

With respect to those online opinion leaders, we must strengthen our education and guidance. The good ones should be encouraged. The bad ones should be restrained.

These screenshots were taken on November 7, and shows that Sina Weibo was censoring searches for "Xi Jinping August 19 Speech," but not for "Xi Jinping August 19."

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/12/sina-weibo-censors-searches-for-xi.html

August 19: The Detentions Begin

Beijing police detain Qin Zhihui (known online as Qin Huohuo) and Yang Xiuyu (known online as Lier Chaisi) on suspicion of provoking quarrels and running an illegal business.

August 20: A Strike Hard Campaign is Launched

According to China's state run media, law enforcement agencies around the country "pull back the curtain" on a nationwide campaign to attack organized online rumor mongering.

August 21: A Propaganda Campaign is Launched

Two of Beijing's major local newspapers, the Beijing News and the Beijing Times, carry front page headlines and multi-page articles outlining the allegations against Qin Huohuo and Yang Xiuyu. Allegations against Qin published in China's state run media included:

• In July 2011, Qin posted on Sina Weibo that the Chinese government had paid 200 million yuan (US$32.7 million) in compensation to a foreign passenger after two trains collided in Wenzhou, Zhejiang. The police claimed “The micro blog was forwarded about 12,000 times within two hours, creating public anger at the government.”
• In April 2013, Qin posted on Sina Weibo that the Communist Party's poster-boy Lei Feng, “bought himself an entirely new top-grade wardrobe, including an extra jacket, wollen pants, and black leather shoes. The total price of the jacket, wollen pants, and black leather shoes was about 90 yuan. But at that time Lei Feng's monthly salary was only 6 yuan."

The company operated by Qin and Yang, Erma Interactive Sales Strategies Limited, is accused of astroturfing and spreading thousands of rumors. The three "illustrative cases" provided in China's state run media to illustrate the duo's guilt dated from 2011 and 2012.

The Beijing Times and Beijing News on Qin Huohuo's Detention

August 23: Detentions in Beijing, Chongqing, Zhejiang, and Anhui

Beijing police travel to Chongqing and detain journalist Liu Hu a week after he reposted a a post blowing the whistle on a government official. The detention notice said he was suspected of having committed the offense of “provoking quarrels.”

Police detain a Mr. Ma after a traffic accident occurred in Shangyu, Zhejiang because he posted posted on a local forum that "nine people died.” According to official figures there were only seven fatalities. The police said that "within 20 minutes 454 people viewed it and it was reposted 15 times,” and on that basis subjected him to five days of administrative detention for "fabricating facts and disrupting public order.”

Police detain a 17 year old Anhui student surnamed Wu three days after he posted on Baidu’s PostBar (Tieba 贴吧) forum that a farmer caught three children stealing watermelon. He tied them to a tree and went off to play majiang. Upon returning he discovered the children were all dead, after which the farmer committed suicide. The post was commented on hundreds of times and “created something of a stir.” The police therefore “criticized and educated” Wu, who subsequently made another post on the forum to clear up the matter.

According to an August 29 Xinhua report:

Police in Beijing have captured 27 people after they were found to have been involved in prostitution, including Chinese-American Xue Charles Bi-Chuen, according to the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau.

Xue, 60, an investor and prolific microblogger with more than 12 million followers, was arrested in the Chaoyang District of Beijing last Friday, police said.

Xue was accused of group licentiousness for participating in group sex parties, according to police, adding that among the detainees nine were male and 18 were female, who were captured in late August.

Investigation found Xue, whose Chinese name was "Xue Biqun" and was verified as "Xue Manzi" in Sina Weibo, China's most popular Twitter-like service, came to China in 2007 and had engaged in licentious activities with more than ten female sex workers since May this year.

A Global Times editorial framed the issues relating to Xue this way:

On Weibo, [Xue Manzi] is eager to show an image of righteousness by calling for the Western political system to be promoted in China and voicing support for many mass incidents. But his involvement in soliciting prostitutes, to the surprise of many, exposes his personal virtue.
. . . .
Some celebrity microbloggers wonder why it is so "troublesome" for them to have "freedom of speech." We hope this is just naivety that will ultimately fade away as they learn to deal with their discourse power in a more responsible and sincere way.

August 25: A Detention in Shanghai

Police in Shanghai detain Fu Xuesheng, president of Shanghai LabInfo Technologies Ltd, on allegations that he spread false rumors that:

• a female executive at State-owned oil giant Sinopec accepted sexual favors as a bribe from a US supplier, and that the supplier subsequently blackmailed her;
• a police chief accepted more than 2 billion yuan ($327 million) in bribes and murdered an entrepreneur.

Police claimed that Fu “rented an office in the Lujiazui area in Shanghai and surfed foreign websites there. He initially released the false information on overseas forums and then forwarded it to domestic ones.”

August 26: Detentions and Fines in Henan, Hebei, and Zhejiang

Police in Jili, Henan fine a Mr. Zhang 500 yuan for posting on Baidu's PostBar (Tieba) that "It is said that a few days ago in Beichen a woman was dissected and her organs were taken away." According to the police, this post caused a "mass panic."

Police in Qinghe, Hebei, detain a Mr. Zhao for posting on Baidu’s PostBar (Tieba) that "I heard that a murder took place in Louzhuang, does anyone know what actually happened?" According to the police, this post caused a “mass panic.”

An unnamed Internet user posts on Sina Weibo that 16 people died in a car accident in Dangshan, Zhejiang. Police subsequently announce on their Weibo that they had arrested him and sentenced him to 5 days administrative detention on the grounds that the actual figure was 10 dead and 5 wounded.

August 27: A Detention in Liaoning

Police in Liaoning arrested a Mr. Zhang and subjected him to administrative detention for posting on Sina Weibo that “I’m going to blow up the Pingdu police station.” According to the police, this post caused a “mass panic.”

August 29: Detentions in Guangzhou and Liaoning

Police in Yuexiu, Guangzhou subject an Internet user to seven days of administrative detention for posting the following:

The five heroes of Langya Mountain were in fact some 8th Army irregulars, and after fleeing to Langya Mountain they used their guns to suppress local villagers, with the result that the local villagers resented them. Afterwards the villagers told the Japanese army of the five's whereabouts, which led the five to flee down a blind alley.

Police in Liaoning detain an Internet user posting under the name “Geilixiaowei” for posting that 1,000 had died and an unknown number were missing following floods. The police said this caused a “malicious social influence.”

Liaoning police also claim that, over the preceding three days, they had investigated 25 cases of Internet rumors, leading to 4 arrests and 20 fines.

August 30: A Detention in Hebei

Police in Shidu, Hebei detain a Mr. Li for posting “Two people have died from the heat in Yun county.” They fine him 200 yuan.

September 2: State Media Cautions Against Abusive Implementation of the Anti-Rumor Campaign

Xinhua publishes an editorial entitled "We Must Guard Against the Crackdown on 'Online Rumor's Going Off the Rails.'" Some excerpts:

It is true that it is somewhat inappropriate for Internet users failing to undertake verification and publish inaccurate casualty figures for a traffic accident. Nevertheless, if there is no evidence indicating that there was malicious intent, then it may not rise to the level of "intentionally fabricating and spreading rumors."
. . . .
The original intent of attacking online rumors is good, but we cannot label as rumor every voice we hear that we don't like. We must find a balance between attacking online rumors and protecting the public's rights to know, participate, express, and oversee. We must rely strictly on facts, take the law as our standard, and avoid acting arbitrarily.

Everyone applauds how attacking Internet rumors is conducive to cleansing online spaces and channeling positive energy. But at the same time, we must guard against abusive and deviant implementation in a few places. The path to resolution must first and foremost be built on comprehensive laws and regulations in the relevant areas. And law enforcement in particular must take the lead in abiding by the law. Only then can we build a healthy online environment.

September 5: Newspaper Questions Anti-Rumor Campaign, Gets Censored

The state sponsored Southern Weekend publishes an article entitled "Will Attacking Rumors With the Long Arm of the Law Lead to a World Without Rumors?" An excerpt:

Legal scholars are concerned that, by extending the crime of provoking and quarreling to online spaces we run the risk of making it a "catchall crime," which will create new problems, in particular how to prevent certain leading cadres from utilizing this to exact revenge on whistleblowers where their speech relates to government officials.

As these screenshots show, it was deleted on September 6.

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/09/southern-weekend-article-questions.htm

September 6: State Media Defends the Anti-Rumor Campaign

Global Times publishes an op-ed entitled "Is Chinese Public Opinion Really Constricting?" Some excerpts:

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.
. . . .
First, there is a lack of control over online rumors and malicious behavior which has allowed evildoers to take over, and they are increasingly running rampant. Second, many rumor mongers are using the virtual influence of astroturfers to seize prestige and power, and are employing Big V's reposts to exert influence, building their rants and ulterior motives on a foundation of certain irrational emotional currents in our society, and go on to wantonly attack those with whom they disagree, using rumors and lies to attack others and society. Rumor mongers are generally anonymous, and do not bear any responsibility. Those who repost what they say also avoid responsibility.

September 9: Government Specifies Criminal Penalties for Defamatory Posts Viewed More Than 5,000 Times

The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate publish their “Explanations Regarding Certain Issues Relating to the Application of Laws When Handling Defamation and Other Criminal Cases Involving Information Networks.” The Explanations, which had been passed on September 2 and which would go into effect on September 10, include a provision stating that any online post containing defamatory information would be considered a “serious offense” under the Criminal Law if it received more than 5,000 views or was reposted more than 500 times.

September 13: Wang Gongquan Detained

Police in Beijing detain venture capitalist Wang Gongquan.

These screenshots show that Baidu's "Dinghui Investments Wang Gongquan" PostBar (Tieba) forum was operating at least as recently as May, 2013, but that users searching for that forum on September 14 are told: "Apologies, in accordance with relevant laws, rules, and regulations, this Bar cannot be opened."

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/09/baidu-sina-and-tencent-censor-searches.html

September 15: Xue Manzi Apologizes on National Television For His Online Behavior

CCTV airs a jailhouse interview with Xue Manzi. During the interview Xue says “My irresponsibility in spreading information online was a vent of negative mood, and was a neglect of the social mainstream,” and "freedom of speech cannot override the law.” The China Daily noted: “His sober demeanor was different from the arrogance of two weeks ago when he was taken into detention.”

September 17: Middle School Student is Detained

Police in Gansu detain a 16 year-old surnamed Zhang at his middle school for "provoking trouble" after suggesting on Sina Weibo that an investigation by local police into a man's death was problematic, and claiming that man had been murdered when police had ruled his death a suicide. Authorities subsequently subjected him to seven days of administrative detention.

September 18: Anti-Corruption Crusader is Detained

Police order well-known Weibo personality "Boss Hua Lost the Monkey King's Golden Cudgel” to appear for questioning. Boss Hua gained notoriety for exposing local officials wearing luxury wristwatches.

These screenshots were taken on September 19, 2013, and show that both Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo were censoring searches for "Boss Hua" (花总 Hua Zong).

Context: http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/09/weibo-user-boss-hua-questioned-by.html

September 29: China’s Web Sites Sign a Pledge

China's major web sites, including Baidu, Tencent, Sina, Qihoo, Phoenix, People's Daily, Xinhua, and the China Daily, sign a pledge entitled "Established a Green Internet and Carry Forward the Positive Energy of the Youth." In the Pledge the committed to "propagandize the strength and prosperity of the nation and promote the glorious China dream of its people," and hold the "Seven Bottom Lines."

October 11: People’s Daily Official Declares the Era of Big V’s is Over

The People’s Daily web site publishes an op-ed by Zhu Huaxin, director of the People’s Daily Public Opinion Monitoring Unit. Some excepts:

On the morning of September 10, the well-known Yunnan Internet user "Frontier Man" was arrested by police on suspicion of filing a false registered capital report. "Frontier Man" played an active role in the Elude the Cat and the Elementary School Sex-for-Sale Online Scandals. After the "Elude the Cat" incident in early 2009, the Yunnan Propaganda Department organized Internet users to investigate, and the curtain was raised on an era of "Online Questioning of the Government." Unlike those big city Big V's, "Frontier Man" did not engage in ideological pontification, and sought to find the truth underlying those scandals.

The detention of "Frontier Man" symbolizes the end of an era.

For the past several years, the watchwords of the online world were "online questioning of the government" and salvaging "lost voices." In order to change how government worked the standard operating procedure online was one of "surround" and criticize. Then "Government Affairs Weibos" emerged on the scene, and strove to respond to the "concerns of Internet users."

Beginning at the end of August, the online world has been written over with these keywords: rumor mongering, picking quarrels, exposing Big V's, imposing administrative punishments, crminally detaining. Government has moved from reactive to proactive, calling for the launch of an online" struggle for public opinion," daring to "unsheath swords," and firmly grasping the rights to "lead, manage, and speak out."
. . . .
Public power has begun exert its force, exerting itself with ferocity, allowing many leading cadres to recapture the excite of regaining "lost ground," while simultaneously catching unawares those Internet users who had grown accustomed to the "vomitorium," especially those  "opinion leaders" who had for several years held themselves in such high regard, posting on Weibo as if they were "reciting memorials to the Emperor on his throne."
. . . .
The force of Online Questioning of the Government must fit within the broader context of the state and social management system. Even if it has given rise to new broadcasting technologies, the Internet cannot become some kind of "island" divorced from from the continent of the State's society, culture, and politics. China's 591 million Internet users, in particular those Internet users who are intellectuals who often voice their views on public affairs, have had fortune smile on them in the form of the nation's informatization strategy. But the Chinese who first rose on the crest of this "wave" shouldn't develop any illusions about the state of nation and its administrative system, and mistakenly believe that China's weibos are England's Hyde Park.

The changes to the Internet since August have ruthlessly wrestled back to earth those Internet users who for many years were held aloft by the storm that was public discourse. Those who once believed they had built a Tower of Babylon have suddenly come to discover that we are still scaling the difficult slopes of modernization.
. . . .
While the methods have been somewhat crude, from a certain perspective, the mass exodus undertaken by the current affairs Big V's is not necessarily a forced compression of the "public discourse bubble.” A small number of Internet users are intellectuals who are prone to wallowing in romanticism, restlessness, and extremism. They need to consider how to push society towards a smooth transformation. Otherwise, it is very dangerous to attempt to force online opinion and government policies.

October 16: Political Cartoonist is Interrogated

Police summon political cartoonist Wang Limin (who publishes under the pen name “Perverse Pepper”) and interrogate him for 24 hours about a post he made on Sina Weibo. The post in question related to claims that an infant had died of starvation in Yuyao after a typhoon struck the city.

Context:

• http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/10/cartoonist-wang-liming-detained-for.html
• http://blog.feichangdao.com/2013/10/demonstrations-reported-in-yu-yao-baidu.html

October 21: Five Arrests in Hunan

Police in Hunan arrest five men on charges of fabricating online rumors, blackmailing others, and provoking quarrels. Their victims included Communist Party cadres.

October 30: The Party Declares Victory

A report released by the Public Opinion Monitoring Center under the People's Daily and China.com states that following the campaign launched in August, "the government and Party have suddenly come to dominate online spaces” and “the amount of critical posts and emotional language has dropped precipitously.” Specifically:

• the number of microblogs posted by mainstream media and government agencies has surpassed those of "opinion leaders.”
• the number of posts on Sina Weibo declined over 10 percent compared with the previous two months.
• there has been a clear drop in the number of corruptions cases being reported through non-government operated web sites.

Zhu Huaxin, secretary-general of the People's Daily Online public opinion monitoring center stated:

The public opinion data shows that the Internet, the main battlefield of propaganda, is not lost. The Internet is manageable and controllable, and the Party and the government have taken the first step to take the initiative on this battlefield of public opinion.

November 13: Sina Reports It Has Shut Down Over 1,000 Weibo Accounts During the Anti-Rumor Campaign

Sina reports that, as part of its campaign to enforce the “Seven Bottom Lines,” it had shut down 1,030 Weibo accounts for publishing false information.