"Most people in China are in favour of censorship"

There is obviously a struggle. Some academics talk about an atmosphere of confrontation when it comes to seeking new discourses and ways of saying things in the media. The same is true at the legislative level. Some journalists and media outlets have sought support within the wing of the party that shares their views. They look for a friend, a benefactor that is amenable to a more open approach to journalism. There is also a lot of frustration. A lot of people get frustrated with their jobs and end up leaving in search of alternatives. You can live a pretty good life within the system, so to speak, because a lot of journalists and people in China agree with the need to control information. That is, most people in China believe that without censorship the country would splinter into a million pieces, which would lead to considerable instability, so they think censorship is necessary. Yes, generally speaking, they do. That has to be understood within the context of the current moment of economic development and improving living conditions for the population at large. According to a recent America survey, 82% of people in China think that their country is on the right track. Above all, that's because there aren't any alternatives. The struggle is more over trade issues, to improve things within the existing forums for exchanging opinions rather than by means of direct confrontation. People always try to work within the system. And many people, including many journalists, believe that censorship is essential. The Chinese constitution specifically includes the right to freedom of expression. However, one thing is what is said on paper, and another quite entirely what happens in practice. The declaration of human rights is part of the Chinese discourse, but that is largely just lip service and, in this case, the right clearly does not exist. However, many journalists think that censorship is necessary to stave off chaos. Many people in China accept this theory, including a lot of people who work in the media. I think that's a minor issue for the Chinese, but yes, I would say that it does. They take a paternalistic view of the state and believe that the Party knows what is best for them. They trust it and believe that this control of information is in the country's long-term interest. We have to remember that, while we may find the issue of access to foreign information interesting, the Chinese themselves are primarily interested in what is being blocked in their own language. That said, the fact that, for example, the New York Times or websites like Reporters Without Borders, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are blocked obviously affects a lot of people. However, several things must be borne in mind. First, there is almost always a Chinese alternative. In other words, just because there is no Twitter or Facebook, that does not mean there is a dearth of social networks. There are national alternatives. Consequently, users don't notice the absence, because all their friends are also on the alternative Chinese social network. As a result, what matters most to them is what is going on in their own country. The Chinese are more concerned about what websites are blocked and what information is censored in China than about what is blocked from abroad. Yes, of course. In fact, a lot of local politicians have openly declared that things were easier before the Internet and that these days everything is more complicated. The government exerts its control and tries to channel things in certain directions. Indeed, it's currently trying to turn the Internet into another means for disseminating its view of reality and vision of China. In other words, the Internet is an important tool for modernizing the country. The government is openly promoting it by creating the necessary infrastructure. However, at the same time, it wants the Internet to be used for the good of the Party-State. Right now, this leads to a dual dynamic: on the one hand, it grants greater power to users in general; on the other, it enables greater control and censorship, which is carried out by private companies that have networks and blogs and are responsible for monitoring the information on them. Things are blocked in all sorts of ways: by individual word, by post, by account. So again, there is this dual dynamic. People are increasingly able to voice their opinions and influence public opinion, but the government is hoping to take advantage of that fact to tighten its own control. They were a bit slow in coming, but they've quickly brought themselves up to speed. That's probably the Party's greatest concern. In fact, several studies have been published analysing which posts are blocked on social networks and which are allowed through. It turns out that criticism is allowed, but the minute the criticism involves any sort of demonstration, the minute there is any hint of transference from the virtual world to the physical one, that's when the posts are most radically and obviously blocked. One term that is always systematically blocked on the social networking site Weibo is the word for strike. The terms related to street protests are the most stringently controlled. Obviously, there is fear, and that is why they take the measures they do in this regard. I don't know if you can really talk about opposition and dissidents in China in the context of these channels. Any direct opposition to the government is immediately blocked and censored. There is some wiggle room. For instance, there are plenty of openly declared dissidents that find a venue for their opinions on social networks, but efforts are made to marginalize these people and even to edge them out of the alternative discourse on the social networks. What nearly always happens is that these people, people like Ai Wei Wei, end up using systems and programmes to access Twitter. This effectively severs their contact with the Chinese reality, because your average Chinese user doesn't use Twitter. It's a sort of technological exile for people who directly oppose the system. What China does have is a loyal, faithful opposition that operates within certain limits recognized by the Communist Party, which is the governing party, a fact that brooks no argument. There is a certain permissiveness for support or negotiations on specific aspects, such as advocating for an end to the one-child policy, advocating for an end to the record system, seeking greater measures against corruption, calling for better control of public spending or calling for Chinese politicians to make their salaries public; however, not in the form of direct opposition. That kind of opposition is immediately squelched. But there is a certain pragmatic vein that seeks to encourage other approaches. I think that control is exercised more intelligently in China than we think. For one thing, the level of control varies depending on the user. We always think of the Chinese as being very tightly controlled, but the Chinese themselves don't generally share that view. They don't feel repressed or controlled the way we imagine they do. This is most obviously apparent in this new margin of freedom that has come about with the proliferation of commercial media, of economic weeklies or the Weibo network. Many people disposed to be critical channel their opinions through Weibo. By allowing these new freer forums, but at the same time controlling the main lines of information shared in them, the authorities are establishing a multi-layered system that combines the most sophisticated monitoring and propaganda systems in the country with the most brutal ones in a way that might actually be sustainable in the long term. People have been predicting the end of the Communist Party for years, and it still hasn't happened. The Party's flexibility when it comes to adapting to the times has been key to its survival, even though, from here, it's not always so easy to see. Phenomena like the Weibo network are proving quite capable of adapting to this reality.