China kills the internet............

[Mega]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...t-control.html
Mike

[makimanos]

Re: China kills the internet............

Arab spring to China? Not so fast.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: China kills the internet............

China has reportedly cut both iNet and mobile phone services to some of it's larger interior cities at times possibly coinciding with limited civil disturbances.

On a related note, Iran is reportedly in the middle of a 2 step process to be completed during 2012 to cut global iNet and shift to a domestic/national iNet.

I suspect this is being done to defend against or mitigate efforts to use the internet as a tool by western intelligence services to foment regime change.

If you recall efforts under the Reagan Administration to shatter the Warsaw Pact it included funding to bring telecommunications and media distribution tools(with the help of the Vatican in Poland I believe) like portable printing presses, recording and duplication equipment, etc to protestors and those pushing for regime change.

There was an article about 1-2 years ago in the NYTimes I believe on efforts to build discrete/covert/distributed wireless local area network enabling devices, I think built on sat net links, which could only really be of practical use in denied and non-permissive areas like Iran and China.

[GRG55]

Re: China kills the internet............

This is a throwback, still held in the minds of the old guard in so many countries, that find it necessary to attempt to strictly control the information that people can access in order to maintain their hold on political and economic power. Used to be "the government" owned the radio and television stations and, often, the main newspapers. If there were any non-government alternates they were strictly censored, under threat of being shut down. Investigative journalists were jailed or shot. Shutting down the internet and mobile systems, and jailing bloggers is the modern equivalent.

Old political habits die hard. But the idea that the nation with the so called "second largest economy in the world", one that is so dependent on globalization and integration, can somehow successfully isolate itself and its citizens from that world is laughable. China's efforts to avoid the inevitable political and social consequences of its economic policies is reminiscent of Saudi Arabia's failed efforts to achieve "progress without change".

[lakedaemonian]

Re: China kills the internet............

This is a throwback, still held in the minds of the old guard in so many countries, that find it necessary to attempt to strictly control the information that people can access in order to maintain their hold on political and economic power. Used to be "the government" owned the radio and television stations and, often, the main newspapers. If there were any non-government alternates they were strictly censored, under threat of being shut down. Investigative journalists were jailed or shot. Shutting down the internet and mobile systems, and jailing bloggers is the modern equivalent.

Old political habits die hard. But the idea that the nation with the so called "second largest economy in the world", one that is so dependent on globalization and integration, can somehow successfully isolate itself and its citizens from that world is laughable. China's efforts to avoid the inevitable political and social consequences of its economic policies is reminiscent of Saudi Arabia's failed efforts to achieve "progress without change".

On a somewhat related note, I'm starting to seriously wonder about the other end of the spectrum with the near complete deregulation of media in the US.

I recall as a kid in the US I think there were limits along the lines of a maximum of 1 TV station, 1 radio station and 1 newspaper per market, or something along those lines that could be owned by any entity. It seemed kind of stupid to put limits on media ownership at the time.

It now seems to have gone the other way with quite considerable media distribution power held in the hands of quite a small group of fairly entrenched interests with the exception being the internet. Conventional print/radio/tv seems to provide too few massively and nationally integrated options even though variety may be exploding, the numbers of influential media distribution channel owners have shrunk too much maybe?

I wonder if we've gone too far the other way and need to come back a little bit.

[GRG55]

Re: China kills the internet............

On a somewhat related note, I'm starting to seriously wonder about the other end of the spectrum with the near complete deregulation of media in the US.

I recall as a kid in the US I think there were limits along the lines of a maximum of 1 TV station, 1 radio station and 1 newspaper per market, or something along those lines that could be owned by any entity. It seemed kind of stupid to put limits on media ownership at the time.

It now seems to have gone the other way with quite considerable media distribution power held in the hands of quite a small group of fairly entrenched interests with the exception being the internet. Conventional print/radio/tv seems to provide too few massively and nationally integrated options even though variety may be exploding, the numbers of influential media distribution channel owners have shrunk too much maybe?

I wonder if we've gone too far the other way and need to come back a little bit.

Huh? The number of "influential media distribution channel owners have shrunk..."? Really? Maybe in New Zealand. Certainly not in North America, where it seems impossible to escape the "100-channel" universe in all its varied manifestations. The volume of newspapers and magazines on offer at the local vendor and in the airport shop has multiplied manyfold over the decades.

There might be an argument that in the "good ol' days" of only one print/radio/tv source perhaps the media was a source of information, whereas today it seems always and everywhere purely a form of entertainment.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: China kills the internet............

Huh? The number of "influential media distribution channel owners have shrunk..."? Really? Maybe in New Zealand. Certainly not in North America, where it seems impossible to escape the "100-channel" universe in all its varied manifestations. The volume of newspapers and magazines on offer at the local vendor and in the airport shop has multiplied manyfold over the decades.

There might be an argument that in the "good ol' days" of only one print/radio/tv source perhaps the media was a source of information, whereas today it seems always and everywhere purely a form of entertainment.

I agree the number of TV and print channels have increased significantly, but what about ownership of the channels?

Isn't it true, particularly in the US and a few other western countries, that media ownership has had significant consolidation in the hands of fewer total owners at the same time the number of channels has significantly increased?

Comcast, Disney, Viacom, News Corp, Clear Channel, and a few others would own the majority of major media distribution channels in the US wouldn't they?

If so, that's only a few owners influencing a lot of eyeballs.

I think I recall something along the lines of diversity in ownership to better ensure diverse viewpoints regarding the old regulation......there's a lot of media channel diversity today but what about diversity in ownership/opinion/news?

Wasn't a big part of the reason for older regulation, now defunct, to prevent too much media concentration in too few hands?

[lektrode]

Re: China kills the internet............

I agree the number of TV and print channels have increased significantly, but what about ownership of the channels?

Isn't it true, particularly in the US and a few other western countries, that media ownership has had significant consolidation in the hands of fewer total owners at the same time the number of channels has significantly

even tho the '100channel universe' is now more like the 500channel universe there are fewer and fewer conduits for said channels - timewarner and comcast cable systems own most(?) of the pipeline, so therefore control the feed (of TV anyway.. thank the IP gods for streaming media...) (oh and yeah, thank EJ et al, for the 'tulip)

i can only offer anecdotal evidence of the negative aspects of this consolidation: when listening to the car radio it seems like all the stations go to adverts at the same time - just like happens on TV

and finally, after i simply couldnt deal with another GD night of 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts, 10mins of show, followed by 5mins of adverts - with the same adverts repeating every other batch....

i bought a streaming media/dvd/cd player and dumped the 500channel universe
netflix and hulu, plus slacker 'radio' covers things nicely

and if i could get even 2 of the big4 networks, plus PBS via an aerial antenna?
i'd dump the minimum/stripped-cable package (about a dozen channels) too!

ironically, 2or3 decades after we were told that cable TV was going to do all sorts of wonderful things (like limit commercial interruption) ITS THE GD CABLE STATIONS THAT ARE THE WORST!

they charge upwards of a 75bux/mo for the 500channels and then stuff em with so many ads that its simply become unwatchable.

the other thing is that there seems to be only ONE SOURCE of 'news' these daze and they all copy/paste/print/web the same stories, from one end of the country to the other (US anyway, dunno what its like outside, cept for what eye see here) - it gets _really_ noticeable when one follows the news in several regions (esp when what appears in say the wsj on monday shows up in the local big city paper on tues or wed and the exurban fishwrapper on thu or friday)

but sorry for getting off the topic - LD hit one of me noives....

[Adeptus]

Re: China kills the internet............

These may help... (re: media consolidation). I like the title of the second infographic: "The Illusion of choice". These days, I find myself watching more BBC & RT (Russian Television) news channels to get a better (more accurate?) version of what may really be going on in North America. Of course, I would never watch those channels to learn of what's really going on in the UK or Russia.

[mesyn191]

Re: China kills the internet............

If you want a good alternative to US media and already watch BBC or other Euro-Russian shows then I'd recommend Al-Jazeera too. They're right up there with PBS and the BBC in the quality of their reporting IMO.

[c1ue]

Re: China kills the internet............

I'd recommend Al-Jazeera too. They're right up there with PBS and the BBC in the quality of their reporting IMO.

I agree with this statement, but not in the way you imply.

The al-Jazeera coverage of Libya and Syria showed just how objective the sheikh of Qatar is.