From Index on Censorship <[email protected]>
Subject Tariffs and tight control
Date April 11, 2025 11:34 AM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Friday, 11 April 2025
[link removed]


** Tariffs and tight control
------------------------------------------------------------

This week, the global conversation was dominated by one word: tariffs. China was no exception, but not all conversations were allowed to unfold freely. On major Chinese social media platforms, searches for “tariff” and “104” (a numeric stand-in) led to dead ends ([link removed]) , error messages or vanishing posts. It wasn’t silence across the board, though. Some conversations weren’t just permitted, they were actively promoted. State broadcaster CCTV pushed a hashtag that quickly went viral: #UShastradewarandaneggshortage. Meanwhile, posts encouraging Chinese alternatives to US goods saw a notable boost from the platform algorithms.

To outsiders, this patchwork of censorship versus amplification might seem chaotic or contradictory. In reality, it follows a clear, strategic logic. China’s censorship system is built on a few core principles: block anything that goes viral and paints the government in a bad light, suppress content that risks sparking public anger or social unrest, and amplify posts that reflect well on the nation or state. At its heart, it’s about control – of the message, the momentum and the mood. “Saving face” isn’t just cultural etiquette in China, it’s political strategy.

Curiously, this is not only a top-down game. A significant driver of online sentiment today is cyber nationalism, a fast-growing trend where patriotic fervour, often fuelled by influencers, bloggers and grassroots communities, aligns with state objectives. Cyber nationalism is both tolerated and profitable. Pro-nationalist influencers can rake in millions in ad revenue and merchandise sales. The state, in turn, benefits from a wave of popular support that looks organic, and is, to a degree. But there are limits. These nationalist fires are only allowed to burn within a safe perimeter.

When it comes to the trade war, China’s censors are turning ‘crisis’ into ‘opportunity’, wrote ([link removed]) Manya Koetse on What’s On Weibo. Unless there’s a u-turn, the outlook for many Chinese people could darken – except if you're employed as part of the booming censorship industry ([link removed]) . That said, even there job security isn’t guaranteed: in another example of politics aligning with profit, online censorship is increasingly automated through AI ([link removed]) . So while Washington and Beijing trade blows, China’s digital censors are aiding the government line – and scaling it too.

PS. if you want more on the inner workings of Chinese censors, read this excellent article ([link removed]) from two years ago about how local TV stations air stories on government corruption in a way that ultimately benefits the government.

Jemimah Steinfeld

CEO, Index on Censorship


** More from Index
------------------------------------------------------------

Index stands in solidarity with Badiucao ([link removed])

The Chinese-Australian artist faces legal harassment in relation to his protest art ([link removed])

From Pakistan to Hong Kong: The week in free expression ([link removed])

Index rounds up some of the week’s biggest stories in the global free speech landscape ([link removed])

Announcing Index on Censorship’s latest magazine: The forgotten patients ([link removed])

Lost voices in the global healthcare system ([link removed])

The Roma women abused under Czechoslovakia’s haunting legacy ([link removed])

Women are still facing discrimination in their reproductive care ([link removed])

The TV station the Taliban would love to ban ([link removed])

A satellite channel in Paris is broadcasting to women and girls in Afghanistan ([link removed])

UK cosmetic surgery clinic wins big at the 2025 European SLAPP Contest ([link removed])

Signature Clinics took legal action against former patients to try to silence them ([link removed])

Court rejects UK Home Office bid over Apple encryption case ([link removed])

Government bid to have case on backdoor access held in secret thrown out ([link removed]) ([link removed])

Autocrats above the law ([link removed])

In today’s geopolitical climate, even lawyers need lawyers ([link removed])

[link removed]


** Event: Left Speechless panel and magazine launch
------------------------------------------------------------

Join Index on Censorship at The Frontline Club in London on Monday 28 April for a panel discussion on the psychological toll of living in a warzone that affects one’s ability to speak.

The event will launch our latest magazine issue, The forgotten patients.
REGISTER ([link removed])


** From elsewhere
------------------------------------------------------------


**
------------------------------------------------------------


** >> UK: ([link removed]) Afghan human rights defender denied asylum ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


** >> PAKISTAN: ([link removed]) Baloch human rights activist Dr Sabiha Baloch faces arrest ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


** >> TECH: ([link removed]) Apple settles unfair labour charges brought by whistleblower ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


** >> GAZA: ([link removed]) Israeli strike on media tent kills journalists ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


** >> ISRAEL: ([link removed]) Two UK MPs denied entry at border ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------


** Flashback
------------------------------------------------------------
[link removed]

“Apple poisoned me: physically, mentally, spiritually” ([link removed])

by Martin Bright ([link removed])

Index on Censorship, volume 50, issue 4 ([link removed])

This week, former Apple employee and whistleblower Ashley Gjøvik reached a settlement with the tech company over unfair labour charges. Gjøvik faced retaliation after raising concerns about toxic chemical leaks in the workplace.

In light of the settlement, we look back to an interview Index conducted with her in 2022. Read more here. ([link removed])



** Support our work
------------------------------------------------------------

The world is becoming more authoritarian and our work calling for the protection of artists and promoting freedom of expression in countries such as Pakistan, Israel and the USA has never been more important.

By supporting Index on Censorship today, you can help us in our work with censored artists, jailed musicians, journalists under threat and dissidents facing torture or worse.

Please donate today ([link removed])

Photos by: (Weibo) NurPhoto SRL / Alamy Stock Photo; (Ashley Gjøvik) Handout

[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]

View in browser ([link removed])

Copyright (C) 2025 Index on Censorship. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up for Index on Censorship's weekly newsletter.

Our mailing address is:
Index on Censorship
3rd Floor
86-90 Paul Street
London, EC2A 4NE
United Kingdom
Want to change how you receive these emails?

You can update your preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe ([link removed])
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: n/a
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: n/a
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a
  • Email Providers:
    • MailChimp