December 29, 2015
SYDNEY â€" I donâ€™t know how many worthy endeavors have been quashed by Chinese censorship. What I do know, what I do feel, is that this system is destroying the imagination and creativity of the Chinese people.
In China, censorship is not regulated by law, yet that doesnâ€™t stop it from being more powerful than the law itself. Although the relevant rules arenâ€™t very clear, we all instinctively know what to expect and we are cautious about not venturing into sensitive or taboo topics.
In 2013, a good friend of mine recommended a book to a Chinese publishing company about a woman who murdered her husband. Initially, the publishing house showed interest in the project. But when they realized the characters were Muslims, they backed out. â€œWe canâ€™t publish it,â€ they said. â€œItâ€™s too risky. Muslims are taboo.â€ I search far and wide, but found no law that banned speaking or writing about Muslims.
In fact, resistance to censorship has never ceased. This system is now struggling with dissent that didnâ€™t exist before the emergence of the Internet. The new means of communication multiply contacts between China and the rest of the world so that a large number of Chinese have become acquainted with English, inventing new â€œChinglishâ€ words, including some colorful ones like â€œshitizensâ€ meaning Chinese citizens; â€œdemocracyâ€ becomes â€œdemocrazy;â€ and â€œsecretariesâ€ are referred to as â€œsexcretaries.â€
Under the influence of the system
Political jokes, once never to be uttered out loud, proliferate online. I heard this one recently: â€œPresident Xi Jinping went to a good restaurant in Beijing. He asked what the dumplings were stuffed with. The waitress replied that they were filled with cabbage and pork: these with pork and cabbage and those with pork and cabbage. Looking upset, Xi Jinping exclaimed: â€œThey are all stuffed with the same thing, do I have any other choice?â€ The waitress laughed and said: â€œPresident Xi, have you forgotten? When it was time to choose you, it was exactly the same!â€
If the Internet has imposed itself as the place of freedom where resistance to censorship in China is expressed, it is also spreading the battle beyond our borders at a time when Chinese state-owned companies are networking around the world and when Confucius Institutes for the promotion of Chinese culture and language are being established in many different countries. Soon, the shadows of censorship will not only hang over we Chinese citizens, but will also catch up to you who are living far away, always believing you are safe from its reach.
About two years ago, a London magazine asked me to write an article. On its website, I saw all kinds of articles praising the Chinese Communist Party. It was not really my thing. I asked them why they published all this propaganda. The editor explained: â€œWe have no choice. Some of our major clients are Chinese companies. If we publish too many articles that criticize the Communist Party and the Chinese government, they will just stop placing advertisements for us.â€
I know that phenomenon also exists among other European countries as well as Hong Kong, the United States, Australia and even in Africa. Sydney has already more than six newspapers in Chinese language. Most of them are close to the Chinese government, even if it doesnâ€™t control them directly. Articles and comments that are published and directly inspired by its propaganda openly praise the powers that be in Beijing. Hence, Communist party and Chinese government officials are already speaking out on Australian soil. Most might not even notice it.
Last May, PEN America Center showed that the publishing industry and some American writers were already under the influence of Chinese censorship in a report entitled "Censorship and Conscience: Foreign Authors and the Challenge of Chinese Censorship."
Among you already
In Australia, the newspaper The Australian published in 2004 an article showing that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation signed a partnership agreement with the Chinese broadcasting group, Shanghai Media Group. That means that the Australian television broadcasts will go through Chinaâ€™s censorship. Those who have a good memory will remember that during the Melbourne International Film Festival in 2009, the Chinese Consulate tried to cancel the screening of a documentary about the Uighur activist, Rebiya Kadeer.
This goes far beyond the fate of a simple movie. You need to understand that Chinese censors are already among you and that they have started to make choices for you. There will be more cases like these. As experienced in China, you will find out that skilled censorship officials are increasingly acting with discretion and subtlety.
Itâ€™s tempting to say that censorship does not yet exist in the United States, the United Kingdom or in Australia. But if itâ€™s true that censorship also exists in these countries, I would say that it doesnâ€™t at all justify censorship in China. Indeed, any censorship in Western countries is not nearly as harsh as what we are experiencing in China.
Others may feel that freedom of speech is a very important thing but what matters most is doing business with China. Actually, all the foreign companies that have trading relationships with China are likely to be affected by Chinese censorship. In 2014, the â€œGreat Firewall of Chinaâ€ became more airtight. Now, it not only blocks Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube but also Gmail and foreign email services on the Internet.
Every day, virtual private networks that avoid the Great Firewall by connecting directly to computers are blocked. Let me ask you a question: Donâ€™t these restrictions on disclosure imposed by the Chinese government affect your business in the long-term?
There are those who donâ€™t live in China who may think that despite the Chinese government's shortcomings, it could be much worse; and others who say that the digital revolution is stronger than the Communist party.
After the handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, many people on the island thought the same thing. Eighteen years later, this city of more than 7 million inhabitants no longer has independent television channels or newspapers. Its politicians increasingly resemble the Communist Party branch secretaries. People who protest against Chinaâ€™s policy are being increasingly harassed by local mob syndicates. Regarding the journalists and artists who dare to openly criticize Beijing, they are at risk of assassination â€¦
We simply cannot trust the good intentions of the Chinese government. The Chinese economic power enables it to have an impact on all our lives. In the West, Chinaâ€™s censorship seems like a distant phenomenon that won't ever wade into our lives. But if you realize one day that your newspapers are publishing fewer critical articles about China, that intellectuals and the media begin to praise the Chinese system, I hope you will remember what I have just told you.
Civilization is an indivisible whole. When the government of a country begins to attack it, to gag it, to destroy it knowingly, it doesnâ€™t only affect its people but humanity as a whole. In these times of globalization, freedom of speech goes beyond any one countryâ€™s domestic policy. If you watch silently as a foreign government destroys books and arrests people within its country, and if you then get even closer, turning into a trade partner or political ally, without every expressing qualms, then that same government, sooner or later, will attack your own freedom of speech too.
*The following is an excerpt from a speech delivered in Mandarin, on Sept. 6, as part of Sydney's Festival of Dangerous Ideas.
This leading French daily newspaper Le Monde ("The World") was founded in December 1944 in the aftermath of World War II. Today, it is distributed in 120 countries. In late 2010, a trio formed by Pierre Berge, Xavier Niel and Matthieu Pigasse took a controlling 64.5% stake in the newspaper.
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
It is today a proven fraud, nailed by the French stock market watchdog: Air Next resorted to a full range of dubious practices to raise money for a blockchain-powered e-commerce app. But the simplest of errors exposed the scam and limited the damage to investors. A cautionary tale for the crypto economy.
October 27, 2021
PARIS — Air Next promised to use blockchain technology to revolutionize passenger transport. Should we have read something into its name? In fact, the company was talking a lot of hot air from the start. Air Next turned out to be a scam, with a fake website, false identities, fake criminal records, counterfeited bank certificates, aggressive marketing … real crooks. Thirty-five employees recruited over the summer ranked among its victims, not to mention the few investors who put money in the business.
Maud (not her real name) had always dreamed of working in a start-up. In July, she spotted an ad on Linkedin and was interviewed by videoconference — hardly unusual in the era of COVID and teleworking. She was hired very quickly and signed a permanent work contract. She resigned from her old job, happy to get started on a new adventure.
Others like Maud fell for the bait. At least ten senior managers, coming from major airlines, airports, large French and American corporations, a former police officer … all firmly believed in this project. Some quit their jobs to join; some French expats even made their way back to France.
Share capital of one billion
The story began last February, when Air Next registered with the Paris Commercial Court. The new company stated it was developing an application that would allow the purchase of airline tickets by using cryptocurrency, at unbeatable prices and with an automatic guarantee in case of cancellation or delay, via a "smart contract" system (a computer protocol that facilitates, verifies and oversees the handling of a contract).
The firm declared a share capital of one billion euros, with offices under construction at 50, Avenue des Champs Elysées, and a president, Philippe Vincent ... which was probably a usurped identity.
Last summer, Air Next started recruiting. The company also wanted to raise money to have the assets on hand to allow passenger compensation. It organized a fundraiser using an ICO, or "Initial Coin Offering", via the issuance of digital tokens, transacted in cryptocurrencies through the blockchain.
While nothing obliged him to do so, the company owner went as far as setting up a file with the AMF, France's stock market regulator which oversees this type of transaction. Seeking the market regulator stamp is optional, but when issued, it gives guarantees to those buying tokens.
The infamous typo that brought the Air Next scam down
Raising Initial Coin Offering
Then, on Sept. 30, the AMF issued an alert, by way of a press release, on the risks of fraud associated with the ICO, as it suspected some documents to be forgeries. A few hours before that, Air Next had just brought forward by several days the date of its tokens pre-sale.
For employees of the new company, it was a brutal wake-up call. They quickly understood that they had been duped, that they'd bet on the proverbial house of cards. On the investor side, the CEO didn't get beyond an initial fundraising of 150,000 euros. He was hoping to raise millions, but despite his failure, he didn't lose confidence. Challenged by one of his employees on Telegram, he admitted that "many documents provided were false", that "an error cost the life of this project."
What was the "error" he was referring to? A typo in the name of the would-be bank backing the startup. A very small one, at the bottom of the page of the false bank certificate, where the name "Edmond de Rothschild" is misspelled "Edemond".
Before the AMF's public alert, websites specializing in crypto-assets had already noted certain inconsistencies. The company had declared a share capital of 1 billion euros, which is an enormous amount. Air Next's CEO also boasted about having discovered bitcoin at a time when only a few geeks knew about cryptocurrency.
Employees and investors filed a complaint. Failing to find the general manager, Julien Leclerc — which might also be a fake name — they started looking for other culprits. They believe that if the Paris Commercial Court hadn't registered the company, no one would have been defrauded.
Beyond the handful of victims, this case is a plea for the implementation of more secure procedures, in an increasingly digital world, particularly following the pandemic. The much touted ICO market is itself a victim, and may find it hard to recover.
From Your Site Articles
- Crypto Tipping Point: Is Digital Currency Too Big To Fail ... ›
- Bitcoin, Petro, Libra ... Why Cryptocurrency Isn't Really Currency ... ›
- Inside The Himalayan Hideaway Of Chinese Bitcoin Mines ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!