Category Archives: Censorship

In 2017, the television series Rap of China debuted to 100 million views in the first four hours of its release. Prior to the show, rap had existed in China only in underground circles; it had become mainstream overnight. But its ascendance to the realm of pop culture would have dire consequences for freedom of speech in the country.

A year later, as Rap of China headed into its second season, the Chinese government imposed widespread restrictions on the countrys nascent rap scene. It blacklisted 150 rappers. References to hip-hop culture were banned from appearing in all media sources, including television and movies. Although the laws governing the censorship were left deliberately vague, they were strictly enforced. Artists whose heart and morality are not aligned with the party and whose morality is not noble, the Communist Party said, were no longer able to perform in public.

"In China, you never know exactly what is forbidden, says a Chinese rapper in David Verbeeks short documentary Trapped in the City of a Thousand Mountains. Thats actually a very clever tactic. It makes everyone more careful. Without a clear boundary, people will be more prone to self-censor."

The atmospheric film follows a group of Chinese rappers through the streets of Chongqing, one of Chinas largest cities, as they discuss life in the surveillance state as marginalized musicians. Verbeek, who lived in China for 12 years, tapped his network to find subjects for the film. Some of the musicians who appear in the film, such as Mister Da, have been forced to abandon their music as a result of the new regulations. Others, like Ghostism, continue to use the genre as a platform for fomenting dissent.Wherever there is repression / There will be rebellion, he raps.

The films cinematography is ominousshot mostly in the shadows of the night, flashes of neon lights intermittently puncturing the darkness, as if evoking the role of the artist in the resistance.

The essence of hip-hop is to be a critical voice that empowers communities, Verbeek told me. Now, however, the role hip-hop plays in China is marginal, because it is castrated.

According to Verbeek, censorship, digital espionage, and surveillance have had a widespread impact on Chinese youth. The situation has numbed peoples brains to critical thought, and has, ironically, turned them into the perfect consumers for Western materialism, he said. But despite all the brainwashing, the Chinese remain soulful people, full of character and spirit. Their openness and generosity will always continue to surprise meits in direct contrast to their government.

China doesnt have freedom, says one musician who appears in the film. Thats real talk.

His friend gets the last word: You better stop talking now.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Read the original:
Chinese Rappers Take On the Surveillance State - The Atlantic

Activision Blizzard, one of Americas biggest gaming companies, just bowed to Chinese censorship in a disturbing way: suspending a professional player of Hearthstone, its digital card game, over a statement supporting the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests.

The offending commentary from Chung Ng Wai, a Hong Kong-based player who goes by the name Blitzchung, came during an official interview on Sunday held after he won a match in the Hearthstone Grandmasters tournament, the highest level of competition in the game.

Chung said Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our time a protest slogan in the city while wearing goggles and a face mask, items commonly donned by protestors to conceal their identity. The protests, which began over an extradition law, have morphed into a broad-based demand to protect the semi-autonomous citys democratic political system from mainland Chinas attempts to exert control over it.

On Tuesday, Blizzard came down hard on Chung. In an official statement on Hearthstones blog, the company announced that it would be suspending Chung for a year, forcing him to forfeit thousands of dollars in prize money from 2019 and firing the casters (commentators) who conducted the interview.

This is a big deal.

Blizzard, who created (among other things) World of Warcraft, is a massive company. It brought in about $7.5 billion in revenue in 2018. Like the NBA, which has rebuked the Houston Rockets general manager over a pro-Hong Kong tweet, Blizzard is not merely trying to operate within the confines of Chinese censorship but acting as its agent.

The non-Chinese Hearthstone player base is furious with Blizzard; the games subreddit is full of longtime players vowing to quit the game in protest. Count me as one of them.

Ive been playing Hearthstone daily for about two years, including spending some money on cards and reaching the top tier of the games competitive ladder (the Legend ranks). But now Im done, both with Hearthstone and any other Activision Blizzard product, unless it reinstates Chung and the casters.

Blizzards argument for suspending Chung hinges on an alleged rule violation, specifically Section 6.1 of the official Hearthstone Grandmasters rules. The rule prohibits engaging in any act that, in Blizzards sole discretion, brings you into public disrepute, offends a portion or group of the public, or otherwise damages Blizzard image.

The idea here seems to be that supporting pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong has brought Chung into public disrepute in mainland China, justifying his suspension. The actual motivation is most likely crasser: Blizzards userbase is declining, and it is counting on expansion in the very large Chinese market to reverse the downward momentum.

The gaming giant ... is badly in need of a stimulus after its market value declined by a quarter over the past twelve months, the financial news company AlphaStreet reported in January. Blizzards strategy of taking the China route for regaining the lost strength is currently followed by many American tech companies.

Blizzards userbase remains overwhelmingly non-Chinese. According to the companys most recent financial data, from June 2019, the entire Asia-Pacific region makes up a scant 12 percent of its revenue. Since that region includes large gaming markets in places like Japan and South Korea, mainland Chinas clout is smaller than you think and pales in comparison to the Americas (55 percent) and Europe/the Middle East (33 percent).

So while Blizzard may have a lot of ground to gain in the Chinese market, a significant hit to its revenue in the United States and other liberal democracies would be a massive threat. Blizzards fans in those countries have a lot of leverage over the company.

And, in this case, theyre justified in using it.

Navigating the Chinese market is difficult for major companies and requires some necessary tradeoffs. Blizzard has changed the art in World of Warcraft to comply with Chinese cultural norms and strictures, notably cutting out some goriness and skeletons. Thats maybe not ideal, but at least a defensible choice for a company that has a clear financial stake in the Chinese market.

Censoring a professional player for expressing support for the democracy movement in Hong Kong and seizing his money is way over the line.

It isnt merely adjusting a cosmetic part of the product to fit a particular market; its actively participating in the suppression of political speech on behalf of core liberal values. Blizzard is throwing its lot in with an authoritarian state, acting as an international agent of its repressive apparatus in opposition to fundamental human rights.

An organized boycott targeting Blizzard is also a relatively rare opportunity for ordinary citizens around the world to help out the Hong Kong protestors working to protect their democratic system.

Its hard to do much for the brave people taking to the streets from thousands of miles away, but international consumers do have leverage over international corporations. Punishing Blizzard for its behavior could help send a signal to other companies that acting as agents of the Chinese state carries a cost and that they need to think carefully before throwing Hong Kong under the bus.

Blizzards censorship of Chung is hardly the only case of a US company acting on behalf of China. Just yesterday, the NBA issued a statement distancing itself from Daryl Morey, the general manager of the Houston Rockets, after he tweeted support for the Hong Kong protestors. The team is reportedly considering firing him in order to placate Chinese authorities and protect NBA investments there.

The league is facing a bipartisan political backlash as a result; Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and several Democratic presidential candidates have condemned the leagues actions.

But Blizzard, less well known among the American political class, isnt facing the same amount of high-level political condemnation. For now, it seems its up to Blizzards users to show the company that its actions have consequences.

See the article here:
Blizzard Hong Kong controversy: what happened and why it matters - Vox.com

I'm sure by now you've heard about the massive issues going on in China, which have been going on for a very, very long time now - but we're at a point where it's hard to ignore, even for gamers.

Activision Blizzard is in the crosshairs of Chinese censorship, with the Overwatch, Diablo, and World of Warcraft creator bowing to Chinese pressure. Activision Blizzard recently suspended one of its pro Hearthstone players after the player support pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

But the list is growing, wtih Apple taking a knee to Chinese censorship and even the likes of American Airlines, Gap, Mercedes-Benz, Ray-Ban, Nike, TikTok, and many others pressured by the country and its strict stance on criticism. Mashable has compiled a big list of these companies that include (so far, as I'm sure there are more):

* Prices last scanned on 10/14/2019 at 6:03 am CDT - prices may not be accurate, please click for very latest pricing

Read the original post:
Here's a list of companies taking the knee to Chinese censorship - TweakTown

The third season of The Seven Deadly Sins anime, Wrath of Gods, recently debuted on Japanese television much to the dismay of fans who found that depictions of blood and gore were being heavily censored.

In the first episode of the new season, titled The Light That Drives off Darkness, viewers discovered that depictions of blood, such as Escanor slicing a demon in half or Merlin blowing a hole in a demon with her Purgatory Venom technique, were colored bright white and that depictions of gore, such as Ban using his Snatch ability to take out a monsters heart, were colored black:

Related: Seven Deadly Sins Confirms Season 3 Release Date

Related: Cosplay of the Day: Sarah Addy as Elizabeth from Seven Deadly Sins

As this episode provided a re-cap for viewers of the previous season, this censorship was most notable when recounting Melodias death at the hands of Estarossa, as the scene was depicted with a giant black circle covering up Melodias wounds, which were clearly visible in the original episode:

Left: The original scene as seen in The Seven Deadly Sins: Signs of Holy WarRight: The same scene as seen in the recap featured in The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of Gods premiere

Related: New The Seven Deadly Sins Anime Announced by Studio DEEN

Fans have expressed their displeasure regarding the censorship on social media:

The season premiere marks the debut of Studio Deen as the series primary animator, replacing A-1 Pictures who had worked on the previous two seasons, and of the series on its new broadcast home, TV Tokyo. It is currently unknown what roles, if any, these two companies had on implementing the heavy censorship.

Its unclear if this censorship will carry over to the United States release that will come to Netflix.

(Visited 40,000 times, 926 visits today)

censorshipThe Seven Deadly SinsThe Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of Gods

Follow this link:
The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of Gods Debuts with Heavy Censorship of Blood and Gore - Bounding Into Comics

A pair of House Democrats have accused Education Secretary Betsy DeVos of ignoring allegations of censorship and civil rights violations at Liberty University because of the institutions close relationship with President Donald Trump.

In a letter Monday, Rep. Andy Levin, D-Michigan, and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D- Maryland, argue Libertys honor code violates a recent presidential executive order and federal civil rights laws because it places extreme restrictions on student speech and relationships between LGBTQ students.

Given that Libertys violations are public and longstanding, we are left to conclude that the Departments failure to act is deliberate and that it is only interested in enforcing free speech policies against institutions it deems unfriendly, the congressmen wrote.

Mondays letter, which includes additional allegations unrelated to Liberty, asks DeVos to hand over records involving investigations into free speech violations to the House by Oct. 21. It is unclear if DeVos will comply with the request. A spokesperson for DeVos did not return requests for comment.

In a statement Tuesday, Falwell said the congressmens letter demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the scope and purpose of federal laws governing private universities.

Unlike most of its counterparts in the United States, Liberty University actually promotes free speech and free expression. Using its own resources, Liberty University invites conservatives and liberals, as well as Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and Independents to its regular student Convocation forums and commencement ceremonies, Falwell said.

At the heart of the letter are claims DeVos is improperly giving cover to Liberty, an institution the congressmen describe as politically aligned with the Trump administration.

Falwell is a vocal supporter of the president and has said Trump offered him the job of education secretary shortly after the 2016 presidential election. Both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have spoken at Liberty graduation ceremonies in recent years.

Levin, the vice chair of the House Education Committee, and Raskin, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, wrote that Liberty is in violation of an executive order issued in March directing federal agencies to ensure colleges promote open debate as well as Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination at educational institutions receiving federal money.

The letter takes aim at Libertys honor code, known as The Liberty Way, for banning students from consuming media and entertainment that is offensive to Libertys standards and traditions and prohibiting sexual relations outside of a biblically- ordained marriage between a natural-born man and a natural-born woman.

The congressmen also allege Liberty has suppressed student journalism, referencing a 2016 decision by Falwell to remove a student-authored opinion piece from the university newspaper criticizing then-candidate Trump for boasting of sexual assault. Falwell told The News & Advance at the time the column was redundant because the paper already was printing a letter urging support for Trumps opponent Hillary Clinton.

In their statement, Liberty officials pushed back against allegations of censorship and discrimination, saying the honor code is fully consistent with the proper role of a Christian institution and the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from intervening in speech decisions made by a private institution.

In the statement, Falwell notes the alleged incidents of censorship occurred long before Trumps executive order but also argues the episodes would have not violated the order had it been in effect.

The censorship wrongly claimed by the congressmen was simply Liberty University exercising its editorial control over the Liberty Champion, the newspaper it owns, publishes and pays the staff. Even though most of that staff consists of student employees, it is not and has never been a student newspaper, Falwell said.

It is indeed a shame that two federal legislators can be so out of touch with the basic civics concerning the laws about which they wrote the secretary, Falwell added. Even so, Liberty University will respond to any inquiry of the Department of Education to set the record straight.

Richard Chumney covers breaking news and public safety for The News & Advance. Reach him at (434) 385-5547.

Richard Chumney covers breaking news and public safety for The News & Advance. Reach him at (434) 385-5547.

See original here:
Democrats accuse DeVos of ignoring claims of censorship, civil rights violations at Liberty University - Lynchburg News and Advance

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Last Friday, a now-deleted tweet from Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey sent China and the NBA world into a frenzy. Immediately, the NBAs Chinese partners suspended all ties with the Houston Rockets, and the NBA released a statement claiming that Mr. Morey had deeply offended many of our friends and fans in China.

What was the terrible thing that Mr. Morey posted? Well, he simply publicly supported the pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong by tweeting the slogan Fight for freedom. Stand with Hong Kong.

Right now, Hong Kong citizens are embroiled in the fight of their lives against the growing authoritarianism of the Chinese government. It seems strange, then, that Houston Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta was so quick to tweet that Mr. Morey does NOT speak for the team. Mr. Moreys support for basic freedoms, too, was deemed regrettable by NBA spokesman Mike Bass.

Whose team are these guys on, anyway?

Chinas, so it seems. And their loyalty is enmeshed with a dependency on Chinas money. As one of the most popular NBA teams in China, the Houston Rockets are on track to lose hundreds of millions, if not billions, if the Chinese market continues to punish them for Moreys regrettable proclamation. Of course, that shouldnt matter to them in the face of the regimes continual assault on freedom. However, sadly it does.

American businesses have long tailored their products or services to the demands of the Chinese market and its censors. As Ryan Khurana of the Institute for Advancing Prosperity has noted, this practice can be seen in everything from Hollywoods re-editing its films so they dont violate the Communist Partys definition of public morality to Googles offering to comply with censorship practices that directly oppose its own mission of increasing peoples access to information worldwide.

Until recently, the American public didnt really notice. But now, things are different. Its no longer just a matter of companies changing their product to satisfy the Chinese market. The controversy surrounding the Houston Rockets is evidence that some American businesses are willing to silence their own employees at the behest of the Chinese Communist Party.

Its cowardly, but being brave has become less important to companies as access to Chinas enormous market grows into an ever more irresistible prize to firms around the world. China boasts a mushrooming middle class of more than 400 million people and a massive economy that has, in some ways, already surpassed the United States.

Of course, China is still a ruthless authoritarian state with extreme disregard for human rights. Its using ever more forceful methods to suppress the Hong Kong protestors and, in Xinjiang, more than one million Muslims are currently imprisoned in so-called re-education camps. Any semblance of freedom in their press or speech is seriously absent, too.

As China Daily, a newspaper owned by the Communist Party, proclaimed, China hopes the incident with Morey and the Houston Rockets will teach other companies a lesson: The big Chinese market is open to the world, but those who challenge Chinas core interests and hurt Chinese peoples feelings cannot make any profit from it. In other words, any criticism of China will not bode well for American businesses from now on.

But U.S. businesses shouldnt cave to Chinas will. In fact, firms that stand for freedom of expression ought not worry about scorn from the Chinese, because Americans shouldnt be trying to appease an oppressive regime. Rather, companies that act to censor the free expression of their employees should have their feet held to the fire by a concerned American people.

The U.S. consumer should take a firm stand and potentially boycott those organizations that continue to give in to the draconian whims of the Communist Party. Doing so would create an heavy disincentive to any company thinking of succumbing to the pressures of the Chinese government, and similarly, if the collective pressure of multinational businesses standing up to Chinese censorship builds, the shoe will be on the other foot Beijing will be forced to rethink its current practices out of fear of losing the business of many of Americas billion-dollar companies.

Like Mr. Morey, Americans have a duty to stand boldly against authoritarian abuses abroad, even when money is at stake. After all, China isnt holding all the cards. U.S. consumers have a great deal of power that they can leverage all on their own.

Alexander C. R. Hammond is the policy adviser to the director general at the Institute of Economic Affairs and a Young Voices Foreign Policy fall fellow. You can find him on Twitter at @AlexanderHammo

Go here to see the original:
American businesses shouldn't give in to Chinese censorship - Washington Times

The Athletic didnt publish any articles about Houston Rockets GM Daryl Moreys since-deleted Friday tweet in support of pro-democracy Hong Kong protestors, or about the subsequent manic attempts at damage control by the Rockets owner and the NBA, until a couple days after the controversy began. It was a long enough delay that readers began to take notice. One Athletic NBA writer, when asked about the lack of coverage, said it was because of the publications insistence on quality over quickness.

When the Athletic did get around to covering the fallout from Moreys tweet, though, they fell way short of getting it right. This article by senior NBA writer Joe Vardon is framed as a kind of explainer for the whole affair, but seems to take the Chinese establishments explanation for the outrage at face value. This had the unfortunate effect of presenting an authoritarian governments propaganda uncritically, and under the guise of neutral journalism. Heres a taste:

In America, whats happening in Hong Kong is about an erosion of civil liberties, like free speech. An invasion of privacy. Oppression. These are the kinds of things NBA players and coaches speak out against all the time, when they happen in America.

Boiling down a highly complex issue into a paragraph or two, though, in China, this isnt about civil liberty. According to Tsai, and others interviewed by The Athletic, its about national sovereignty, and about everyone playing by the same rules. Hong Kong is a part of China, and the people there should play by the same rules as the people on the mainland.

Where the article fails is not just in its inability to explain Hong Kongs uniquely autonomous existence within China, which is a complicated topic well beyond any NBA writers usual beat, but also in its over reliance on sources who present only the Chineses governments official point of view. Aside from the public statements of Morey and Adam Silver, only two other people are quoted in the entire 1,500-word article. One is the Facebook open letter of billionaire Nets owner Joe Tsai, who took it upon himself to speak for 1.4 billion Chinese citizens when he said that they stand united when it comes to the territorial integrity of China and the countrys sovereignty over her homeland. This issue is non-negotiable. The other quotes came from a guy named Sourabh Gupta, who is a senior fellow at the Institute for China-America Studies in Washington, D.C. While that institutions name sounds nice and neutral, the organization itself is actually a think tank established to advocate for the Chinese governments claims to the South China Sea.

Typically, one might see these errors in judgement rebutted in the comments below the article. In this case, though, there is no comment section. Nearly 300 predictably opinionated and decently heated comments on the Vardon story appear to be archived herethey make for a loud if not particularly enjoyable read if you have the timebut presently, The Athletic has shut down the discussion on the site. On Vardons article, and two other articles about the NBA in China, The Athletics comment sections are completely disabled. Reached for comment, a spokesperson for The Athletic had this explanation.

After closely monitoring the comments section on this particular story, we decided to disable the feature as we believed much of the content to be in direct violation of our Code of Conduct Policy. As a precautionary measure given the highly sensitive nature of the topic, we preemptively disabled the comments section on the other two stories about the same subject. This is not the first time we have disabled comments on a story and have followed a similar approach in the past under similar circumstances.

The Code of Conduct, which the spokesperson included, can be summarized by its headers: No Assholes. No Hate. No Trolls. No Spam.

The Athletics subscribers arent thrilled about this move, and theyre making themselves heard elsewhere on the site. Though readers have been deprived of this particular outlet for their thoughts, comment sections on other Athletic articlestypically a place where 15 people congratulate the reporter on their storyhave instead been filled with aggrieved subscribers:

Shutting down a heated comment section is The Athletics rightevery publication can (and frankly should) moderate its comments to keep out bigots and trolls, if only as a courtesy to readers. But in this particular case, and in the context of the original article, it feels like an oafish and heavy-handed overreaction. To quietly snuff out any direct pushback against a clear reporting mistakeplus any conversation about the Hong Kong protests more generallyis a cowardly move. For a site that likes to advertise its comments as a sparkling oasis of polite debate, short-circuiting this kind of criticism is especially weak.

The good news, howeverand trust me, Ive learned this from experienceis that sports fans will never, ever shut up when they feel like theyve been denied an opportunity to make their opinions heard. The Athletics subscribers will, one way or another, find a way to get these takes off. When you see a furious debate about the one-child policy raging below a puffy profile of Al-Farouq Aminu, now youll know why.

Continue reading here:
The Athletic Outrages White Men Everywhere By Censoring Their Opinions On China - Deadspin

Microsoft is introducing a number of new automatic message moderation success to automatically censor offensive content.

Announced through a post on Xbox Wire, Microsoft will be introducing a new host of options to help players tweak their gaming experience.

Within your Xboxs settings, players will soon be able to change their message filtration to a number of options. Theres friendly, medium, mature and unfiltered. Different filters ban different words accordingly.

Messages that get caught in the censorship filter will be blocked from view. If a message contains offensive words the message will instead say, Potentially offensive message hidden.

With content filtration, its essential that every player has the ability to choose their own filtration level, and that the settings work for gamers of all ages,Xbox said.

We recognise that while some adults use profanity without any ill intent while gaming, parents with small children likely wont find this same experience acceptable. Similarly, there are differences between the everyday speech youd use with your friends and harmful insults that could negatively impact anyone. With this in mind, weve ensured our safety settings are configurable along a spectrum from most filtered to least filtered so you can choose what is best for you.

The rest is here:
New Xbox message moderation will automatically censor offensive content - MSPoweruser

David Gelernters public renunciation of Darwinism set off shockwaves in the halls of academia and in the public square (see here, here, andhere). Atheist evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne responded to Gelernters defection with an article for Quillette, David Gelernter is Wrong About Ditching Darwin.

For those unfamiliar with Coyne, he earned the title Censor of the Year from Discovery Institute for his bullying tactics against Ball State University physics professor Eric Hedin (pictured above). Coyne, a professor at the University of Chicago, targeted Hedin for teaching a class on the Boundaries of Science that discussed the less controversial evidence for design in nature. With his friends at the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Coyne launched a smear campaign. They successfully pressured the university into canceling Hedins class and censoring any scientific discussions that were not consistent with Coynes atheistic philosophical framework. No faculty would be allowed to mention any evidence for design in nature unless it was interpreted in materialist terms.

In contrast, thanks to the Yale computer scientists academic standing, Coyne was unable simply to coerce Gelernter into silence. Instead, he had to resort to engaging the actual arguments. Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, Coyne misrepresented the science related to the fossil record, protein rarity, and developmental mutations. Critics have regularly mischaracterized design arguments and misinterpreted the related scientific literature, albeit often unintentionally (here, here, here, and here). Yet, most have demonstrated the good sense to publish their critiques in journals or other publications sufficiently biased to not allow any opportunity for responders to correct the errors.

Coyne would have been better advised to follow their example. It would have been much safer to promote his disinformation against Gelernter through an outlet equally committed to defending the Darwinist status quo. Instead, he made the fatal mistake of publishing in Quillette which values open-mindedness and honest inquiry. Reflecting these values, the editors followed up by publishing a detailed response to Coyne by paleontologist Gnter Bechly, mathematician David Berlinski, and myself. This reply exposed Coynes gross misunderstanding of the underlying science.

Quillettes choice to post our response to Coyne undoubtedly came as a shock to him. I am sure he expected complete freedom to smear the reputation of a distinguished scientist and to take his usual liberty with the facts. Instead, his ignorance and bias were put on detailed display.

What might be even more disturbing to him is the possibility that Quillette has set a precedent. Perhaps in the future, design critics will be held accountable for disseminating false and misleading information. As news agencies and the public get a look at journalism that models intellectual honesty and scientific accuracy, returning to the status quo could prove increasingly distasteful. Critics might then feel more obligated to accurately present our arguments and evidence. However, holding themselves to higher intellectual standards poses the challenge that they might in the end not have much left to say.

Photo: Eric Hedin, via Biola University.

Read more:
Censors Silenced Eric Hedin, but They Couldn't Silence David Gelernter: Here's Why It Matters - Discovery Institute

The creators of South Park have offered a mock apology to China following reports thatthe US TV comedyhas been banned by Beijing.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone posted the statement on Twitter after learning that all episodes, clips, reviews and references to their show have been removed from Chinese streaming and social media platforms, saysThe Guardian.

We welcome the Chinese censors into our homes and hearts, they wrote. Long live the Communist Party!

The apparent ban comes after the South Park team poked fun at Chinese censorship in a recent episode titled Band in China. The episode, aired in the US last week, sees cartoon dad Randy Marsharrested, imprisoned and forced into labour and re-education after travelling to the Asian superpower to grow his marijuana business, the BBCreports.

In one scene, he is forced to read aloud a message that says: I am a proud member of the Communist Party. The party is more important than the individual.

He later has a conversation with Winnie the Pooh and Piglet - a reference to the ban on images of Pooh introduced by China in 2017 after the fictional bear was compared with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Some people said Pooh looked like the Chinese president, sowere illegal in China now, says Piglet.

Randy responds: What kind of madhouse is this?

As well as mocking the Chinese authorities, the South Parkcreators so-called apology also refers to theUS National Basketball Association (NBA), which has distanced itself from a pro-Hong Kong protest tweet sent by Daryl Morey, general manager of the Houston Rockets.

Morey later backtracked, saying: I have had a lot of opportunity since that tweet to hear and consider other perspectives. Rockets player James Harden added: We apologise. We love China.

Chinese media and authorities have overseen a near blackout of the Hong Kong protests, with levels of censorship reaching new highs, says the South China Morning Post.

Its a new record, said Dr Fu King-wa, a Hong Kong university scholar examining the extent of censorship. You can see that the keywords [in censored posts] such as police, justice, they are all linked to protest in Hong Kong.For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the weeks news agenda - try The Week magazine. Get your first six issues free

So just how stringent is censorship in China?

China is ranked 177th out of 180 countries for press freedom by Reporters Without Borders(RSF).

Chinas state and privately-owned media are now under the Communist Partys close control, while foreign reporters trying to work in China are encountering more and more obstacles in the field, say the international non-governmental organisation. More than 60 journalists and bloggers are currently detained in conditions that pose a threat to their lives.

Content from Chinese media is vetted by the authorities before it can be published.

Beijing has also detained number of freedom activists and human rights defenders, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo, who died in custody in 2017 after being refused permission to seek treatment overseas for liver cancer.

Thousands of websites are blocked in China, including Google, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.

And a Chinese cybersecurity law passed in 2017 obligates all internet companies operating in the country to monitor and censor users content, saysAmnesty International.

Under tougher internet regulations, members of the public can now be jailed for the comments on a news item that they post on a social network or messaging service, or even just for sharing content, says RSF.

Last year, Chinas main messaging service, WeChat, introduced new terms of service allowing the platform to collect personal information and pass data on its 900 million users to the government by default.

A friend of mine just got his WeChat account blocked for three days after he had a conversation with his friend talking about Chinas legal system, and reform of the legal system, Chinese journalist Karoline Kan told the BBC in September.

Meanwhile, many websites that report on activities that the authorities want censored - for example, pro-democracy protests - have seen their journalists arrested and mistreated in prison.

Some Chinese users get around the censors by using VPNs, virtual connections that encrypt data and disguise what the user is looking at online.

Link:
Chinese censorship: what is banned? - The Week UK