You'll have to read most of this post, I'm afraid, before you get to the "sheep" part. Just a warning.
For those who are either very interested in the issue of Internet censorship or, alternatively, just want to catch up on the world of Kaiser Kuo, his latest blog post is highly recommended. A teaser:
The b.TWEEN Conference: I got back this weekend from Manchester, where I gave a keynote at the b.TWEEN cross media conference. I’d mentioned in a previous post that I would be taking on a tough task: trying to coax an audience steeped (as I, too, am) in western liberal values to step into Chinese shoes and try to understand Internet censorship. To me, after all, the disparity in viewpoints on this issue is an already gaping and rapidly widening chasm, but it’s one that a bit of empathy from both sides can go far to bridge.
I haven't written about this topic much in the past and usually focus my Internet posts on things like IP infringement issues. However, this dichotomy between people steeped in "Western liberal values" and folks in China raises an interesting point. Certainly the attendees Kaiser was speaking to fall into the former category, and I would agree that there is a wide gap between their thinking on the subject and your average person over here.
However, taking a step back and looking at views in China and the West (I'll focus in on the U.S. from here on), it seems to me that we are not so far apart. Your average citizen in each country supports government having the ability to control Net content for the sake of "security" and "public morals."
On the China side, there is a wealth of information on the GFW and controls, and some data on public opinion. On the U.S. side, well, I do not see any outcry by the public when it comes to the Patriot Act, telecom immunity, or any number of issues that pit "security" against established American constitutional rights. All I can make of this is that Americans are OK with sacrificing those rights in the name of security, and public morals has been an excuse used to justify content control for a long time.
So what's a little Net control in the face of the Global War on Terror? Not a big deal, says Joe Sixpack.
But this seems quite strange if one monitors the Internets on a regular basis. A high percentage of journalists, bloggers, Twitterers, etc., many of which are American, seem to regularly rail against Net controls, and are highly critical of the policies of both Washington and Beijing in this area.
If Joe Sixpack is OK with some Net control, how is it that we have such furor? Well, the obvious answer is that the Netterati (probably including the folks Kaiser was talking to) are not reflective of Joe Sixpack's opinions. It should not come as a shock that your average American is not as passionate about these issues as is someone like Cory Doctorow. And there are certainly lots of Net activists in China who are the local counterparts to folks like Doctorow, but they don't necessarily speak for the masses either.
Here's my suggestion: the characterization in some circles of a China populated by a bunch of sheep who willingly accept Net micromanagement, compared to stalwart Westerners who are fighting for Net freedoms — well, I think this is ridiculous. (pardon the bad parallel construction)
Rather, the average person in each nation has demonstrated a willingness to cede control to the government. Maybe it's a human thing, I don't know. But just because the people we converse with on a daily basis (let's call 'em 'liberal elites' as a sop to the U.S. political Right) abhor Net controls does not mean that such passion is shared by a majority of the populace in either country.
We can bemoan this and try to change public opinion of course, but I do find it interesting that a lot of the views maintained by Joe Sixpack translate quite well around the world.