Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Self-Censoring 'Chinese Wikipedia' Launched 429

Posted by Zonk
from the taking-the-wik-out-of-wiki dept.
Billosaur writes "New Scientist is reporting that Baidu, China's largest search engine, is launching its own version of Wikipedia. The site, Baidupedia, differs from the more well-known Wikipedia in that it is self-censoring." From the article: "Unlike Wikipedia, which allows anyone to create and modify entries, Baidupedia is censored by the company to avoid offending the Chinese government. Entries to the encyclopaedia must first pass a filtering system before being added to the site. Baidupedia bars users from including any 'malicious evaluation of the current national system', any 'attack on government institutions', and prevents the 'promotion of a dispirited or negative view of life'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Self-Censoring 'Chinese Wikipedia' Launched

Comments Filter:
  • evil (Score:2, Insightful)

    by flogic42 (948616)
    This sort of censorship is pure unequivocal evil. The Chinese government has no right to do that under any circumstances.
    • Re:evil (Score:3, Informative)

      by bersl2 (689221)
      The Chinese government has no right to do that under any circumstances.

      It is my impression that one has every right to fork Wikipedia or otherwise imitate it.

      Now, restricting access to one site over the other is a completely different story.
    • Re:evil (Score:2, Insightful)

      by alx5000 (896642)

      Touching a philosophical issue, the question of censorship being evil or not, relies on which side of the line you are on; sure Western civilizations mosly despise its use (let alone its abuse), but being China a country with 1100 million people, I think that if they're political education supports censorship, even with actual opposition, it is not that evil. I'm not sure if I'm making my point clear: even it seems evil to you, and to many others, it's just a point of view, it doesn't matter how logically c

      • Touching a philosophical issue, the question of censorship being evil or not, relies on which side of the line you are on; sure Western civilizations mosly despise its use (let alone its abuse), but being China a country with 1100 million people, I think that if they're political education supports censorship, even with actual opposition, it is not that evil.

        Your argument seems to rest on two implicit premises that are, IMHO, rather questionable. First, that "X is popular" imples "X is not evil", and sec

    • From the article:
      Baidupedia ... prevents the 'promotion of a dispirited or negative view of life'

      "Happy thoughts. Happy thoughts. Boy, I'm getting mighty sick of this"

      *Poof*

      "Happy thoughts. Happy thoughts..."

    • Re:evil (Score:3, Insightful)

      by maxwell demon (590494)
      It's a private company saying what is allowed on their own server. It doesn't affect any other site. It's actually not too different from a company which doesn't allow negative comments about their products on their web site. No, that's not good, but it's surely not unequivocal evil.

      Moreover they explicitly say they are censoring, so you are already warned that the view you get presented there is biased. If you want unbiased information, you know you better go somewhere else. It's not that they would preten
  • But..... (Score:4, Funny)

    by DAldredge (2353) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:29PM (#15312076) Journal
    Unpossible!

    Everyone knows the USA is much worse than china...
    • Sure looks like there's already a lot of questionable content [baidu.com] on there...
    • Re:But..... (Score:3, Funny)

      by biocute (936687)
      Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but everyone knows that you should use "m" if a word starts with "p", like impassable, impotent....

      So it should be umpossible, not unpossible.
    • To the contrary... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Lendrick (314723) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:59PM (#15312464) Homepage Journal
      Everyone knows that the USA is great as long as it's better than China! National wiretapping? That's fine, it's not as bad as China! "Free Speech Zones"? In China, they don't even get free speech, so that's okay too! Imprisoning citizens indefinitely without trial? In China, they do it a lot more!

      Yay, go USA! We're Not As Bad As China (TM)!
      • by Malakusen (961638) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:11PM (#15312606) Journal
        Or Syria, Iran, North Korea, and... hmm... whichever else is a "bad" country.

        Should be:
        Yay, go USA! We're Not Yet As Bad As The Worst Countries In The World (TM)!

        Which has always struck me as being like saying "Yay Lyme Disease! At Least It's Not AIDS!

        America, where's there no point improving if you haven't hit rock bottom yet.
      • Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:27PM (#15312789)
        Fuck this "much worse" shit. It doesn't matter if you're better than a hundred repressive totalitarian regimes.

        What matters is what your ideals are and how closely you live them.

        We supposedly value "justice". But we seem to be living "vigilantism". And there are people who are 100% okay with that.

        The only difference between them and any Chinese executives filtering content is where they were born. If they had been born in China instead of the US, they'd be 100% behind their government's actions to stop the democracy movement.
        • We supposedly value "justice". But we seem to be living "vigilantism". And there are people who are 100% okay with that.

          And we'll string ya up if you disagree!
        • Re:Mod parent up! (Score:3, Insightful)

          by caluml (551744)
          China and the US are going to be indistinguishable in a few years. The only difference will be how they got there.
          China = dictatorship, with increased amounts of capitalism.
          US = capitalistic society, with increased amounts of dictatorship.
  • by danpsmith (922127) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:30PM (#15312080)
    ...the wikipedia edits you!
  • Let me guess.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Homology (639438) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:31PM (#15312098)
    there are plenty of Western companies that will happily develop the technology. For a modest fee, of course. I'm sure that Yahoo have much to contribute on how to stiffle free speech for the sake of profit.
  • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:32PM (#15312107)

    Happy Fun Wiki!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:32PM (#15312112)
    I looked up "abominable snowman" and it told me it was "a large primate-like creature supposedly living in the mountains of censored."
  • Brave New China? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by guitaristx (791223) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:33PM (#15312120) Journal
    prevents the 'promotion of a dispirited or negative view of life'.

    Yeah, they'll give the breakers of this rule a healthy dose of soma [wikipedia.org].
  • by Jerry (6400) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:33PM (#15312126)
    where the Western Wiki presents the Western cultural view of things and events, and the Chinese Wike presents what the Communist Dictators dictate.
    • Except that the "Western Wiki" as you put it was able to be modified by West, East, North, South or even outer space green men that had internet access. So I fail to see how it only presented the western view. Frankly, I'd love to see this Self Censoring wiki smashed repeatedly by whatever hacking forces are within China.
  • by Lead Butthead (321013) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:38PM (#15312195) Journal
    Does it record the origin of the offending articles and report them to the government, or merely deletes othe offending articles?
  • by GungaDan (195739) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:39PM (#15312206) Homepage
    That's a Chinese Fox News.

  • by FhnuZoag (875558) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:40PM (#15312208)
    The irony is that this is fairly close to what many western critics of Wikipedia propose. 'Moral responsibility', stronger 'editorial controls', protection of living people, 'accountability', anyone?

    I guess this post is kinda flamebaity, but well...
    • That's a bit of a strawman argument, because most wikipedia critics aren't really proposing any of those things, except for the accountability.

      Indeed, it's quite the opposite. The critics of Wikipedia are complaining that WP:OFFICE is now being used to protect living people (that Peppers guy), clamp down on stuff that'll get them sued ("moral responsibility"), and so forth. If they had more accountability, they'd actually have to defend their actions.

      -Erwos
  • Censorship rights (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pumpknhd (575415) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:41PM (#15312222)
    Flamebait me if you want, but companies DO have rights to censorship. Heck, Slashdot censors. Otherwise, every article here might be M$ bashing or Linux raves. Or, endless dupes (oh wait, this happens already). Back to my point, companies can censor if they want. Users just don't have to go there. Why go to Baidupedia when you can go to Wikipedia? Yes, there is a Chinese language section of Wikipedia. [wikipedia.org]

    As far as I'm concerned, Chinese companies can censor all they want...so long as the government doesn't force them to use only Baidupedia and block Wikipedia.

    By the way, Google owns 2% of Baidu [ucla.edu]. And as we all know, DO NO EVIL! (yes, full of sarcasm)
  • by reporter (666905) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:45PM (#15312272) Homepage
    News reports (like the recent one [newscientisttech.com]) about censorship in China appear frequently in this forum. The best that we and other Westerners can do is to apply subtle pressure to the Chinese people, not just Beijing, to reform.

    However, we can do little more.

    Freedom in China ultimately depends on the citizenry. Barring external intervention, the future of a people are determined by the people. Period.

    Back in 1989, Czechoslovakia had a population of about 15.6 million [wikipedia.org]. In November of that year, 800,000 citizens assembled in Prague and demanded freedom [wikipedia.org]. 800,000 is about 5% of the nation's population.

    The story repeated itself in all of Eastern Europe. Once it was free from the external intervention of the Soviet Union, the Eastern Europeans collectively decided that they wanted freedom, and they got it. They forced their authoritarian governments out of power.

    The story is quite different in China. No one is imposing authoritarian rule on China. If the Chinese people wanted to enjoy the same democracy and human rights that we have in the West, then the Chinese people could get democracy and human rights tomorrow. The problem is that most Chinese either support authoritarianism or are indifferent to it. President Hu Jintao (the dictator of China), all by himself, cannot impose authoritarian rule on China. Hu has a lot of supporters.

    That is the difference between Eastern Europe and China. I respect the Eastern Europeans.

    • If the Chinese people wanted to enjoy the same democracy and human rights that we have in the West, then the Chinese people could get democracy and human rights tomorrow. The problem is that most Chinese either support authoritarianism or are indifferent to it.

      Alot of people don't want to die or go to prison. In the West where you currently have SOME freedom; killing of protestors wouldn't be tolerated. It would be just another day in China. Tiananmen Square, anyone?

      • >Alot of people don't want to die or go to prison.

        And we can't make the decision for them, but the bottom line is, as long as they are not willing to pay the price of freedom, they will not have it.

        • And we can't make the decision for them, but the bottom line is, as long as they are not willing to pay the price of freedom, they will not have it.

          Easy for you to say because you already have your freedom. If you don't have freedom today, are you willing to die for the hope of others MAY have that freedom in the future? Also, maybe you wanna tell the parents of the thousands of students that mowed down by tanks, that they were 'not willing to pay the price'?

    • by Twanfox (185252) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:59PM (#15312473)
      Freedom in China ultimately depends on the citizenry. Barring external intervention, the future of a people are determined by the people. Period.

      Not that I don't agree with you on this, I find that this statement is being said kind of ironic, given the situation in Iraq. I find the parallels and dichotomy staggering.

      Iraq was a dictator-led state, governed by a brutal oppressor that would do whatever he had to in order to not only stay in power but advanced his own agenda. The US, invading under false pretenses, topples this government and assists in the formation of a representative democracy (or whatever failing system is being used in the US), and we have no quams about having done so, from the point of view of the US government.

      China is a communist state, governed by a brutal government that uses censorship, isolationism, and propaganda (amungst other devices) to force compliance, obedience, and social growth from it's people. The US does NOTHING, dispite countless publicied human rights violations similar to those committed in Iraq. We state as above, if China's fate is to change, then the change must come from the people.

      While I think something good came out of the Iraq invasion (no more Sadam), I think that we should not have invaded as we did. If Iraq was to be free, they were more likely to value that freedom if they took it themselves, just as China should.

      Offtopic, I know, but an amusing parallel just the same.

      • Iraq is a relatively small country with little military power compared to its access to particularly desireable resources.

        China is a 1,300,000,000-strong giant with immense military capability. Now, I would have gladly fought for an actual, worthy ideal, say, liberating China from an oppressive government; however, those that lead my government are not so eager to take on someone their own size, or bigger. Suddenly, logic and reasoning re-enter the equation when confronted with an adversary so behemoth, the
      • The United States isn't "doing nothing" in regards to China at all. The US is in fact propping up the Communist dictatorship with it's trade policies.

        If the United States wanted democracy in China it would be easy. All we would have to do is threaten a trade embargo unless the PRC instituted democratic reforms. We could easily convince (or force) most of our allies to join us, even Russia even we played hardball. Of course, those democratic reforms would probably mean higher wages, which would mean all the
    • Then clearly you haven't read much on China, except perhaps, with regards to current events.

      You see, China has the longest unbroken history of any current civilization. The principles of Confucius, among others, I won't deny the effect of Siddartha or Lao Tzu however their focus was spiritual and Confucius was political (although that in and of itself is a misnomer, because a truly Confucian political system is one in which subtle, yet totalitarian control is exercised from the divine Father, through rites), still linger today.

      I mean, if you think these sort of cultural bonds are easy to free yourself from, then try and figure out why English speakers still refer to the sun as 'rising.' I don't *think* people still believe it's a geocentric universe, but that leftover cultural and historical background is exerting pressure on the citizenry.

      Now, compare China's 3000+ years of unbroken history with the fragmented mess that is Eastern Europe and you're talking about analogizing teflon fibers with yarn. Yes, I'm proud of the Czechs, they did a grand job, and the Chinese could take a page from their book, no doubt. The point is that until you can UNDERSTAND the Chinese perhaps you shouldn't bandy your 'respect' around like it was God's gift to give.

      The Chinese piss me off all the time, but I understand how and why they get there, and trust me, they are deserving of our respect.
    • WHOOOOSH! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PCM2 (4486) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:06PM (#15312559) Homepage
      If the Chinese people wanted to enjoy the same democracy and human rights that we have in the West, then the Chinese people could get democracy and human rights tomorrow.
      Um, actually, they tried that. [google.com]

      This [google.cn] is where it got them.

      Seriously, you need to read up a little more on just how extensive the demonstrations around Tiananmen Square really were. That wasn't one guy and a bunch of tanks. It was thousands and thousands of people, getting shot in the back by troops armed with assault rifles as they fled. I recommend a recent Frontline special, called "The Tank Man," [pbs.org] for more information.

  • ...you do not talk about the Baidupedia.
  • Baidupedia bars users from including any 'malicious evaluation of the current national system'

    Malicious evaluation, seditious reasoning and logic, and evil, evil truth-telling.
  • Loving Wikipedia.. with all it's faults.. like the cute but quirky girl in high school you knew things were going to work out with once you got back from college.

    Then getting back from college and finding out she's living in a trailer.. with a crack habit.. and her pimp...

    Not that I would have had experience in that field... or anything...
  • Ensucklopedia (Score:2, Informative)

    by blindd0t (855876)
    In an unrelated story, sales of the book, "Beavis and Butt-Head Ensucklopedia" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beavis_and_butthead# Books) have recently sky-rocketed.
  • Sample Baidupedia Entries:

    Freedom: A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference as long as these actions do not undermine the authority of the state.

    Democracy: Government of the people by wealthy people.

    Communism: Government of the people by the people where the people collectively own all property and the state takes care of you so everyone is happy.

    Capitalism: An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means
  • by scenestar (828656) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:54PM (#15312382) Homepage Journal
    than congressmen paying people to edit out "negative entries".

    Oh wait, that's just free-market..
  • by bill_kress (99356) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @04:55PM (#15312407)
    Ch1na sux0rs. You can never fi1t3r me, i r 2 l337 4 u!

    Side note: This brings up an interesting discussion a chineese friend and I had the other day.

    There are some things in America that simply won't work in China. One, he claims, is all you can eat restaraunts. People will just move in until you kick them out. When they have a salad bar, people will build 3 foot high salads (Search for it on Flicker--it's a pretty amazing sight to behold).

    This also came up when we were discussing selling a house. He was wondering why we clean the house when we leave. We don't have to clean the carpets or drapes, but you just do--often spending quite a bit of money that we don't have to.

    Apparently there are many other examples, all coming down to, he claims and I paraphrase: Chineese people are much less likely to look out for the "Common Good" unless forced to by law.

    With this concept in mind, I kind of wonder if open source concepts (including the contents of the wikipedia) will work in China, or will it all be like our whitehouse/wallmart where everyone is only adding entries when it helps themselves personally.

    ps: I wouldn't even consider that this might be a racial issue, it's obviously cultural (if it existis at all--if not please correct me!)
    • There are some things in America that simply won't work in China. One, he claims, is all you can eat restaraunts. People will just move in until you kick them out.

      ISTR reading, a long time ago, about a Hong Kong AYCE restaurant that solved this problem by charging for time. Actually, American ones will do this, too, from what I hear, though less formally -- they'll just through you out or exercise the "we reserve the right to refuse service..." clause if you abuse it.

      This also came up when we were disc

    • by eklitzke (873155) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:57PM (#15313059) Homepage
      My girlfriend is Chinese, and it's really fun to talk to her family about the cultural differences between China and America. For example, they were amazed that in American parks there are ducks and geese that can just walk around, and even go up to people for food. Apparently in China there would be a problem with people trying to catch the ducks, so that in the few places where you can see ducks out in public they stay the hell away from people. The same goes for flowers, which apparently aren't normally grown in parks because people would just pick them all!

      This isn't to suggest that in China there isn't a value for the public good. Quite the contrary. Just a few years ago if you went to the Temple of Heaven the big steps that lead into the temple weren't fenced off at all. Specifically, there is a huge relief carving that goes up through the center of the stairs, and people had enough respect and common sense not to abuse that privelege by walking on it, or vandalizing it. All through Beijing there are landmarks that weren't protected at all from the people, because they didn't need to be. Of course, a lot of this has changed recently, and in the past few years some of these things have started to be fenced off.

      On the Linux note, her parents view Linux with a kind of mild amusement. They find it somewhat humorous that people would spend so much time and effort to write free software, and think I'm kind of crazy for choosing a career with Linux.
  • ...and prevents the 'promotion of a dispirited or negative view of life'.
    Well that excludes about all the music from the late 70's (Punk) to the current popular rubbish. And also most of the last 100 years of Blues and others.
  • can't really work on all political forms of protest. What dissidents need to do is not criticise the government but make articles in which the government is not mentioned but people would be invited (without express mentioning) to associate this situation with that which they currently live in. Nazi propaganda did this and was very effective in doing so - they made films which people could easily see one thing and associate it with another (the one which comes to mind is one of a young boy committed to a
  • Imagine if all the energy required to maintain all the censorship in China was directed towards productive goals. Economically, I think the USA wouldn't stand a chance against China. Pray it doesn't happen any time soon.
  • by Winlin (42941) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:02PM (#15312514)
    I notice that articles about China seem to bring a certain number of posts about how we in the west shouldn't be arrogant and assume, that just because we value freedom of speech and such rights, the chinese people want the same freedoms. And of course there ARE cultural differences between East and West. But I also have to wonder...if the chinese people are so content with the pace of change in society, then why does the government need all those citizen censors, and great firewalls, and controlled wikis? It would seem that there would be no need for such stringent methods of control when the people don't want western ideas.
  • oh well... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Lazy Jones (8403) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:03PM (#15312528) Homepage Journal
    at least they don't keep their government employees busy with rewriting Wikipedia entries about politicians, so they might actually get some real work done instead.

    • OTOH, their government employees' real work all too often involves finding people who promote views different from the governments and prosecuting (and sometimes executing) them, so its something of a mixed blessing.
  • I agree on censoring, but go to the main page and you see a lot of question marks. China, you've gone TOO far this time!
  • If only &#%@*^ would let me @*&%# what ever the &#%@ I want to $#% [removed for opinion]
  • Baidupedia is censored by the company...
    Interesting definition of "self-censoring".
  • NPOV (Score:5, Funny)

    by AtariDatacenter (31657) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:31PM (#15312829)
    So in China... NPOV becomes PGPOV? (pro government point of view)?

    LOL. That's funny stuff. In the US, they reject text for not having a neutral point of view. In China, they reject text for not having a "positive" point of view.
  • by RexRhino (769423) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:36PM (#15312880)
    If DARPA hadn't developed the Internet, and CERN hadn't developed the World Wide Web, then China would not be censoring the Internet!!! It is time that we blame those who are REALLY responsible for this: the U.S. and Europe!!! You facist bastards!
  • by Lorenzarius (765215) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @05:42PM (#15312932)

    The Chinese version of Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] has only 67k articles for several years of development, however this Baidu encyclopedia already has more articles than that within several days. Why is that? It is because Baidu doesn't care about copyrights. According to their user agreement/disclaimer [baidu.com] (which is only available in Chinese), the content will be released under GFDL and/or CC-SA 2.5 (which are incompatible) and at the same time all copyrights are reserved by Baidu. In fact there are a bunch of other contradictions within the same document. On the other hand, its users also doesn't care about copyrights too, because many of the articles are just copied from all the sites around the web.

    Therefore we don't have to take this Baidu encyclopedia seriously, because even Baidu doesn't take this encyclopedia seriously. They launch this project just to create cohesion within its users.

    <conspiracy>However there is one more interesting thing about this Baidu encyclopedia: Baidu as a search engine raises to prominence in China after Google is blocked. And if you don't know already, the Chinese Wikipedia (actually all the wikimedia projects) is blocked in China. Coincidence?</conspiracy>

  • Vietnamese Wikipedia (Score:3, Interesting)

    by D H NG (779318) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @06:39PM (#15313366)
    I'm currently a bureaucrat at the Vietnamese Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]. In the first 2 years it had been building up a user base, currently with around 9000 registered users and 7500 articles. It had so far managed to escape government filtering and was even featured in some popular Vietnamese media and endorsed by the official government encyclopedia [bachkhoatoanthu.gov.vn]. But I'm not sure about its future, with a spate of new sensitive articles this week that was generating much more discussion than content. There had been previous attempts at making "made-in-Vietnam" free encyclopedias, but none are as successful as this one.
  • by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @06:50PM (#15313444)
    this thought just ocurred to me.

    mostly, the portscan and connect attempts (break-ins) are from .cn (they surely are the lion's share of the hack attempts at my site).

    I'm perfectly happy to ban all of .cn from my home (dsl based) site. I usually do /16 blocks on their netblocks, as I discover them, anyway.

    but how about this for a pro-active idea? put photos of tienenmen sq. (the REAL photos - you know what I mean) on your home page. that, alone, should get your IP blocked by the chinese gov.

    end result: you've just installed a spamblock closer to the source than you could ever accomplish without their 'help'.

    I think I'm going to try this. (what is there to lose?)

  • by Tandoori Haggis (662404) on Thursday May 11, 2006 @07:39PM (#15313741)
    Back in the 1980's if you built a crystal set (basic diode detector radio receiver) Radio Moscow tended to come in loud and clear. They had a major presence on the Shortwave bands. Nowadays it seems like whatever shortwave broadcast band you tune around, there is an English broadcast from Radio China International. They seem to have invested really heavily in this propaganda tool, as I can't recall anything like it since Radio Moscow of the original cold war. Although it doesn't seem quite as blatant as Radio Moscow or Radio Albania, if the USA or UK are in the media due to some potential controversy, RCI seems to enjoy making the most of it.
    So, China now manufacture pretty much everything we buy or own due to outsourcing.
    Has anybody else noticed what's happening? Where are we heading?

    "The protests of 1989 resulted in the killing of Chinese protestors in the streets to the west of the square and adjacent areas. Some sources (Graham Earnshaw and Columbia Journal Review) claim that none died on the square itself. Opponents of the Chinese democracy movement object to the Western Media's labelling of the Tiananmen Massacre, the event known to the Chinese simply as the June Fourth or June Fourth movement, and June Fourth Incident. However, Chinese expatriates that escaped the tyranny after the killing said that the numbers ended up being in the thousands. This was a combination of the hundreds killed on the spot and the miniature purge that followed. These stories are confirmed by intelligence in the country as well. [edit]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianamen_square [wikipedia.org]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 11, 2006 @07:57PM (#15313900)
    See, censorship alone does not bother me, since what the chinese government does is not only censorship. They deliberately distort historical reports to present the government's view of the facts. Which is much, much worse of censorship alone and is similar to NPOV on steroids.

    This kind of behavior is exposed by Orwell on Animal Farm [online-literature.com] and, guess what? The average citizenry, in total absence of further information will take the government discourse as true.

    The worst scenario is when the "West" starts to take their version as truth as well. See what happened to Tibet! What about the Goguryeo antiques found in China? In the latter case, the Chinese government spent a lot of money paying "scientists" to deliberately rewrite documents and papers about the history of that region to hide the fact that Goguryeo also was part of ancient Korea!

    And screw the scientists as well (academical independence my ass!) Once the Chinese version of stuff hits Britannica, Larousse, the west will also start to believe in them.

The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.

Working...