Mediaboss Marketing

Rob Fahey

Contributing Editor

Friday 9th October 2020

Share this article

On the scale of grand industry scandals, a few short phrases being censored in the in-game chat client of a free-to-play RPG seems like it ought to be in real "storm in a teacup" territory.

Indeed, it's deeply unlikely that very many of the millions of players of Genshin Impact -- a Breath of the Wild inspired RPG for PC, PS4 and mobile, which is quickly shaping up to be one of the most internationally successful titles to have been developed in mainland China thus far -- will ever really notice that the game does the text equivalent of bleeping them out should they choose to mention places like Taiwan or Hong Kong, or a number of other phrases, some of them surprisingly innocuous. Even among those who do notice, the vast majority will shrug it off; it's not a major imposition for most, and it's not like developer miHoYo seemingly had a choice in the matter given China's censorship rules.

For the specifics of those rules and why this has happened at all, Niko Partners' Daniel Ahmad wrote a succinct thread on Twitter (cited in this previous GamesIndustry.biz story) that's worth reading. Taken in isolation, this is explanation enough -- and will certainly be more than enough to sate the curiosity of almost any gamer who wonders enough about the censored terms to try googling about the whole affair.

What we're seeing here is the thin end of a wedge that's going to become a very serious headache for a lot of games companies in the coming years

However, it's worth stepping back from this single instance of China's censorship creeping into the media and communications of people beyond its borders, and considering the broader context -- because this isn't the first time this kind of issue has popped up, and there's a strong possibility that what we're seeing here is the thin end of a wedge that's going to become a very serious headache for a lot of games companies in the coming years.

Unless you follow developments in Chinese politics and geopolitics relatively closely, the first time something like this appeared on your radar was probably last October -- when Blizzard banned a pro Hearthstone player, Hong Kong resident Ng Wai "blitzchung" Chung, and fired two presenters who had interviewed him on a post-game livestream during which he made remarks supporting democracy in Hong Kong. Blizzard's knee-jerk kowtow to China's censors (jerking your knees and kowtowing at the same time being the gutless executive's version of the childhood challenge of rubbing your belly and patting your head at the same time) earned it an unusually bipartisan rap on the knuckles from the US Senate and House of Representatives, not to mention some noisy protests from the company's own consumers. Tellingly, however, Blizzard only walked back its decision a few steps at best, almost visibly scrambling to find some convoluted form of words that would appease critics outside China without actually annoying China's authorities.

China's authorities seem to have decided that censorship pools once restricted to its own population can be applied internationally

The lesson anyone in authority in China would have taken away from that affair -- and several other individually minor run-ins with western media and gaming companies over various kinds of content or censorship -- is that the size of the Chinese market and the extent of the nation's stakeholdings in overseas firms means that it's now open season on discussions or statements it doesn't like, even outside its borders. Within China, of course, censorship of users' discussions on digital platforms has been standard for years; the government's control, however, mostly stopped at its borders.

As the country's economic and geopolitical conflict with the United States has expanded, however, so too has its desire to control or suppress narratives and discussions overseas. This has resulted in the removal or hiding of statements or symbols with which China's authorities take issue, often from platforms owned or controlled within China (such as WeChat and TikTok, and games like Genshin Impact) but also on platforms which aren't China-based but rely on keeping the authorities there happy for a major part of their revenue and potential growth -- from Activision Blizzard's games through YouTube and Microsoft Bing, all the way up to major international organisations like the WHO.

Genshin Impact is a relatively minor case of Chinese censorship, but the number of examples is steadily growing

A good example of this kind of censorship creeping out beyond China's borders can be found in games, in fact. As Daniel Ahmad noted in his thread on this topic, many Chinese game operators used to run two versions of their games, disabling censorship filters in the one aimed at overseas players. This practice appears to be in decline, with Genshin Impact being just one high-profile example; generally speaking, China's authorities seem to have decided that censorship pools once restricted to its own population are quite handy to apply internationally as well, especially now that some of its major tech companies are doing so well overseas.

As the strain between China and the US increases -- something that's likely to happen regardless of who wins next month's US Presidential election, although a change at the top may at least make the process more predictable -- companies which operate tech or media platforms, like games, in both China and abroad, or which have welcomed large investments from Chinese firms, are going to increasingly find themselves dragged into this fight. Asked to police the speech of their users (and employees) in ways that are going to play increasingly poorly to consumers and governments elsewhere, the value of China's market and investment is going to have to be constantly balanced against the power of the backlash elsewhere.

There's a very real degree of commercial and political pressure being brought slowly to bear on game companies

Absent a pretty major shift in approach from consumers or governments, that's a balance that's not often going to favour anything other than capitulation to China's demands most of the time. The country's authorities have plenty of leverage left in the tank and haven't experienced any real pushback to these moves thus far. Protests against companies complying with censorious demands have been small-scale and relatively muted, and overseas governments certainly haven't shown any stomach for waving around big sticks on this kind of issue.

There has even been a small but vocal counter-backlash movement in some instances, largely based on taking Blizzard's conspicuously awful "we just want people to stop talking about politics and focus on the games" excuse and turning it up to 11. In these people's reality, Chinese censorship is actually good, you see, because it stops terrible people from ruining games by mentioning political things -- when as any fool knows, "games" and "politics" are the opposite of one another and should never be put together.

Of course, games have never existed in a vacuum away from geopolitics and some forms of censorship have been a reality all along. It would be pretty intellectually dishonest to condemn China's growing pernicious influence on in-game content and communications without acknowledging that the whole world has spent decades with its games being quietly tuned and, yes, censored in such a way as to minimise the pearl-clutching of middle America. There's a reason games continue to be vastly more comfortable with an exploding skull than with an exposed nipple, or that anything that lies along America's cultural faultlines -- like the existence of LGBT people, or any kind of nuanced discussion of racism -- is generally avoided or pushed to the fringes of the medium.

But holding up this kind of commercially-driven self-censorship to match the whims of the US market alongside government-ordered filtering of media and communications is a false equivalence. We cannot and should not pretend that "if we don't make this regressive creative decision, we'll risk selling poorly in America" is remotely the same thing, morally, as "if we don't follow this censorship order, we'll probably have our Chinese joint venture shut down".

So yes, the Genshin Impact scandal really is a storm in a teacup. Something as (arguably) minor and (certainly) dumb as Taiwan and Hong Kong being added to a game's naughty word filter isn't really anything game consumers are going to worry about in the long term, given that it doesn't impact the game, is easily circumvented, and well, why are you discussing politics in a game chat channel anyway -- or so the logic will go. Put enough stormy tea-cups together, though, and a pattern starts to swirl out of them.

This wedge is still thin, but it's been sliding in for a long time, and far away from the ground reality of a censored game chat channel there's a very real degree of commercial and political pressure being brought slowly to bear on game companies and other firms with influence over culture and media around the world. I'm not sure we'll ever see Genshin Impact's chat censorship as a watershed, but be certain that it's a little taste of a sour flavour we're all going to get very used to in the coming years.

Here is the original post:
Gaming will be a frontline in China's censorship drive | Opinion - GamesIndustry.biz

Facebook and Twitter on Tuesday censored posts by President Donald Trump that the social media platforms said violated their rules against misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic. In his posts, Trump compared COVID-19 to the seasonal flu, downplayed the deadly nature of the pandemic and said, we are learning to live with COVID.

The morning after he returned to the White House from Walter Reed Hospitalstill infectious and heavily medicatedand posed in Hitlerian fashion for a photo op on the Truman Balcony, Trump took to social media to bolster his homicidal herd immunity policy and dangerously demonstrate by example how the great leader is facing down the virus.

Facebook removed his post entirely but not before it was shared approximately 26,000 times, according to data published by the social media metrics company CrowdTangle. A Facebook spokesperson told CNBC, We remove incorrect information about the severity of Covid-19, and have now removed this post.

The action by Facebook is unusual in that the worlds largest social media platform has been reluctant to remove posts by the president in the past. In August, Facebook deleted a video of Donald Trump falsely asserting that children were almost immune from COVID-19 during an interview with Fox News, the first time the platform ever removed one of his social media posts.

In the case of Twitter, the tweet remains up but is covered by a warning that says, This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the publics interest for the Tweet to remain accessible, along with a link to learn more about the companys coronavirus information policy. Trumps post cannot be retweeted or shared.

The full Tweet reads, Flu season is coming up! Many people every year, sometimes over 100,000, and despite the Vaccine, die from the Flu. Are we going to close down our Country? No, we have learned to live with it, just like we are learning to live with Covid, in most populations far less lethal!!!

That Trumps comparison of the seasonal flu to the coronavirus is completely false is easily confirmed by information readily accessible on the website of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The site contains data for every year of the seasonal flu going back to 2010-2011 and shows that the death rate among those who get sick from the flu ranges between 0.1 percent and 0.3 percent. The death rate, through July, of those who have contracted COVID-19 is 2 percent, showing that coronavirus is between 6.7 and 20 times more deadly than the flu.

Additionally, as pointed out by the Washington Post, many people who have been infected with the virus have lingering symptoms for months, including difficulty breathing, inability to exert themselves physically, recurring pain. The virus can cause long-term damage to organs other than the lungs, damage that is not common to the seasonal flu.

In response to the censorship measures by Facebook and Twitter, the President tweeted REPEAL SECTION 230!!! Section 230 contains the provisions within the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that shield online services such as social media platforms from being legally responsible for the content posted by users of their systems.

When Twitter began labeling the presidents tweets in late May, he issued an executive order making the US government the arbiter of political speech online. The order called upon the Federal Communications Commission to revise the scope of Section 230 and also empowered the Federal Trade Commission to evaluate the content moderation polices of the tech giants and determine whether or not their actions violate free speech rights.

With Attorney General William Barr standing next to him, President Trump said on that day, Were here today to defend free speech from one of the greatest dangers, before he signed the order. By empowering the federal regulatory agencies in his executive order, Trump was sending a message to big tech that attempts to censor his social media postsalong with those of his far-right and fascist allies and supporterswould result in the removal of Section 230 protections and open up the online service providers to fines and lawsuits.

Since then, the Department of Justice (DoJ) and AG Barr late last month drafted proposed legislation modifying the language of Section 230 to address concerns about online censorship by requiring greater transparency and accountability when platforms remove lawful speech. In a letter dated September 23, Barr jumbled together claims that big tech is hiding behind the shield of Section 230 to censor lawful speech with the allegation that online service providers are invoking the laws protections to escape liability even when they knew their services were being used for criminal activity.

Simultaneous with the DoJ-drafted legislation, Republican Senators Roger Wicker of Mississippi, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee introduced a bill in the Senate that calls for nearly identical modifications to Section 230 rules for online services. At the top of their list is the unsubstantiated charge that right-wing political views are being singled out by the tech monopolies for persistent online censorship.

In moving the bill, Senator Wicker said, For too long, social media platforms have hidden behind Section 230 protections to censor content that deviates from their beliefs. These practices should not receive special protections in our society where freedom of speech is at the core of our nations values. Our legislation would restore power to consumers by promoting full and fair discourse online.

On October 1, the Senate Commerce Committee, which includes 14 Republicans and 12 Democrats, voted unanimously to subpoena the top executives of Facebook, Twitter and Google to appear at a hearing on Section 230 on October 28. After initial opposition to the subpoenas from Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell, the Republicans agreed to add the topics of privacy and misinformation to be discussed along with censorship issues.

Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee released a 449-page report on Tuesday on the results of its antitrust investigation into Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook which condemns big techs monopoly power and calls for the companies to be broken up and restructured.

The coming together of the White House and Democrats and Republicans in Congress over a raft of regulations and attempt to assert government control over the Silicon Valley tech giants raises to a new level contradictions embedded within the capitalist system, not least of which is that these firms are the most valued properties on Wall Street worth trillions of dollars and a primary source of the massive fortunes being made by the financial oligarchy that controls both parties and the entire US political establishment.

Behind the frenzied efforts to rein in the powerful technologies of these firms is a growing awareness that the utilization of these systems by billions of people amid expanding class struggle internationally presents the ruling elite with a problem of revolutionary proportions.

While the ruling establishment is roiled by intense conflicts in the run-up to the November 3 electionswith Trump asserting that he intends to stay in office regardless of the outcomethe Democrats and Republicans are unified in their drive to clamp down on information technologies. Their central aim is to prevent the working class from using these technologies to organize their struggles, including across national boundaries, and above all to stop the program of revolutionary socialism represented by the World Socialist Web Site from reaching the working class and youth.

Go here to see the original:
Trump intensifies conflict with big tech over Section 230 protections following censorship moves by Facebook and Twitter - WSWS

10/09/2020 China (International Christian Concern) The China Christian Council (CCC) and Three-Self Patriotic Movement, commonly known as the lianghui (two organizations) in China, govern all things for state-sanctioned churches. However, some Christians recently discovered that the word Christ has been removed from all of the publications available for sales on its online bookstore.

According to Ying Fuk-tsang, director of the divinity school at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, he was notified by Chinese Christians that the Christian books on sales at Tianfeng Bookstore on WeChat platform, have their covers altered. The word jidu (Christ) on all the books has been covered with stars or replaced with English letters JD (abbreviated from jidu).

While it is possible that the bookstore owned by lianghui did this in order to avoid censorship from WeChat, since anything religious is becoming increasingly sensitive in cyberspace, this shows that both freedom of speech and religious freedom are deteriorating with each passing day under Xis regime.For interviews, please contact Olivia Miller, Communications Coordinator:press@persecution.org.

See the rest here:
TSPM Online Book Store Self-censors and Avoids Using the Word Christ - International Christian Concern

The social media giants Facebook and Twitter on Tuesday censored President Trump's post and tweet, comparing COVID-19 and the flu.

Facebook removed Trump's post in which he claimed COVID-19 is less deadly "in most populations" than the flu.

The President wrote on Twitter: "Flu season is coming up! Many people every year, sometimes over 100,000, and despite the Vaccine, die from the Flu. Are we going to close down our Country? No, we have learned to live with it, just like we are learning to live with Covid, in most populations far less lethal!!!"

Twitter left the President's tweet in place, but added the following disclaimer:

"This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public's interest for the Tweet to remain accessible," the disclaimer read.

Axios reports Facebook has been criticized for not removing posts that violate community guidelines in a timely manner, yet the company took swift action when Trump posted information about the virus that "could contribute to imminent physical harm." Twitter took action about 30 minutes later.

A Facebook spokesperson told Axios, "We remove incorrect information about the severity of COVID-19, and have now removed this post."

A Twitter spokesman also told the website: "We placed a public interest notice on this Tweet for violating our COVID-19 Misleading Information Policy by making misleading health claims about COVID-19. As is standard with this public interest notice, engagements with the Tweet will be significantly limited."

The President's social media posts came after he tested positive for COVID-19 and spent three days at the Walter Reed Medical Center. While reportedly still contagious, he will continue his recovery at the White House, where he will be cared for 24/7 by a team of doctors and nurses.

Out of 7.4 million cases in the US, COVID-19 has killed almost 210,000 Americans this year, according to the CDC. For comparison, the CDC's website estimates 24,000 to 62,000 have died during the most recent flu season, out of 39 million to 56 million people who were sick from it.

STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FREE CBN NEWS APP!Click Here Get the App with Special Alerts on Breaking News and Live Events!

Read more here:
Facebook, Twitter Censor Trump Post Comparing COVID with the Flu - CBN News

How do you solve a problem thats 340 million pages thick?

Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, is currently trying to figure that out. Over the past few years, the Social Security Administration has accumulated an astronomical number of unclaimed tax forms, sent by Americans who pay their Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax under Social Security numbers that dont exist. Even in the wake of the governments extensive efforts to track down the missing taxpayers 171 million tax forms have already been matched to their rightful owners there are still more than enough unclaimed filings for every one of the approximately 140 million tax-paying United States citizen to have filled out their paperwork twice.

This remaining sea of homeless papers, located in what is known as the Earnings Suspense File, is anything but idle. Most of that money has made its way to Social Security trust funds, the sources of the payments that older Americans receive every month. Indeed, for an administration staring down severe sustainability challenges as Americas population ages, these mystery tax payments have kept over a decade of budgets out of the red. Without the extra revenue, Social Security would have been unable to cover payouts starting in 2009.

Who are these mystery donors, responsible for a whopping 10 percent of Social Security funds, but unable to receive a cent in benefits?

Theyre undocumented immigrants.

While many undocumented workers are paid under the table, and consequently do not pay income tax, many others use illegitimate Social Security numbers instead. An estimated 1.8 million undocumented workers did this in 2010. Employers generally dont pay much notice, so phantom forms, and the payments that accompany them, end up with the Social Security Administration.

This reality flies in the face of the anti-immigrant rhetoric that Donald Trump rode to the White House in 2016 and is counting on this November. His claims that undocumented immigrants are a drain on society, that they are stealing American jobs in a zero-sum game for economic viability, simply dont hold up against the facts.

Undocumented immigrants are a net positive for the U.S. economy. They arent just helping Americans to retire comfortably; theyre also making it easier for millions of citizens to meet their basic needs affordably. And even the claim that undocumented immigrants are stealing low-skilled jobs en masse from American workers is muddled at best.

As of 2017, one in 22 American workers was undocumented nationally. This figure, however, belies the true gravity of this demographic; undocumented workers are even more concentrated in economically important states such as California and Texas, where they constituted around 9 percent and 8 percent of the statewide labor forces, respectively, in 2016. In these states and others, they tend to take up generally unpleasant work: farming, construction, cleaning. Services that Americans depend on and take for granted are delivered seamlessly by undocumented immigrants for cheap.

Because undocumented immigrants dont have access to the social, economic and cultural institutions that citizens depend on, they generally lack the bargaining power to demand above average wages. This has produced a situation where entire industries rely on the cheap work that the undocumented provide. The impacts of this awkward symbiosis are particularly pronounced in agriculture. The National Milk Producers Federation, for instance, claimed in 2009 that the price of their namesake good would increase by 61 percent if they could no longer employ immigrant workers, a large proportion of whom are undocumented. In a country where nearly 80 percent of workers live paycheck to paycheck, undocumented immigrants arent just doing our dirty work; they are, quite literally, putting food in our mouths.

The irony is painfully obvious. In Texas, a red state, undocumented immigrants were estimated to have created almost $145 billion of gross product in 2015. In Nebraska, another red state, where an estimated three-fourths of rural residents want tighter borders to prevent illegal immigration, people drink milk, cut apples and peel bananas made affordable by illegal immigrants all while railing against the supposed displacement of American workers.

Incidentally, does that last worry hold up against the data? The answer certainly isnt black and white. Many studies have concluded that illegal immigrants reduced the wages of native workers. However, because illegal immigrants allow employers to reduce costs, economists Andri Chassamboulli and Giovanni Peri have argued that job creation gets a boost, increasing native workers employment opportunities. At the very least, illegal immigrants arent putting American workers on the streets, as President Trump might claim.

To view illegal immigration solely as an assault on American sovereignty is to neglect its real impact. Americans need to put data before pride and consider how their own economic reality changes when illegal immigrants make the extremely difficult decision to come to the United States.

The Social Security Administration isnt going to be able to give many of their nameless tax filings homes anytime soon. But as they continue to pile up, so do the benefits that undocumented immigrants afford our nations economy.

Arjun Shanmugam 23 can be reached at arjun_shanmugam@brown.edu. Please send responses to this opinion to letters@browndailyherald.com and op-eds to opinions@browndailyherald.com.

Read more here:
Shanmugam '23: Why illegal immigration is good for America - The Brown Daily Herald