
Apple Removes New York Times Apps from iTunes Store in China - gist
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/business/media/new-york-times-apps-apple-china.html
======
schoen
Something that might be comparably shocking is the extent to which Chinese
investors and government representatives influence the content of Hollywood
movies that depict or refer to China. There were some news reports about this
in the last couple of years; I sat next to a Hollywood studio executive on a
flight last month and (rather than arguing about copyright policy)
commiserated about this issue. He confirmed that there are organized systems
in place with representatives sent to monitor film content to ensure Chinese
market access and avoid upsetting investors.

This has been reported quite a bit for several years; see, e.g.,

[http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/05/18/407619652/h...](http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/05/18/407619652/how-
chinas-censors-influence-hollywood)
[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/business/media/in-
hollywoo...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/business/media/in-hollywood-
movies-for-china-bureaucrats-want-a-say.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)
[http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/Dire...](http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/Directed%20by%20Hollywood%20Edited%20by%20China.pdf)

~~~
anigbrowl
That third link is fascinating - not just for he insights into how Chinese
censors indirectly guide producers, but also for the lack of ironic detachment
and self-awareness shown by the American analysts, eg

 _Red Dawn, a remake of a 1980s action movie about a Soviet invasion of the
United States, was originally shot featuring China as the antagonist invading
the United States. According to Mr. Shiao, however, the Chinese are “not
interested in their country being perceived as a violent military threat to
the lives of average Americans.”_

and

 _A 'Captain Phillips' executive identified the tone of the film as a source
of discomfort for censors, particularly “the big Military machine of the U.S.
saving one U.S. citizen. China would never do the same and in no way would
want to promote this idea.”_

While I think censorship an unwise and ultimately self-defeating policy, and
also agree with the basic premise that a good many of the rules are just
dressed up protectionism, I can't really blame China for declining to import
overt propaganda. China makes lots of propagandistic films, but the propaganda
is mainly about what China should be like. It'll be some time before they
produce an overtly anti-American film like _Brother 2_ or _Valley of the
Wolves_ (as opposed to striaght-up propaganda:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_8lSjcoSW8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_8lSjcoSW8))
and I doubt whether it would be well-received here if they did.

~~~
PakG1
_A 'Captain Phillips' executive identified the tone of the film as a source of
discomfort for censors, particularly “the big Military machine of the U.S.
saving one U.S. citizen. China would never do the same and in no way would
want to promote this idea.”_

I was watching Argo on my Chinese IPTV streaming service in Shenzhen with my
Chinese roommate and my roommate was blown away by the idea that the movie was
based on a true story. He said that the Chinese government would never take
such extreme steps to rescue its citizens from any such situation. I never
really thought about his comment and his shock (it was a lot of shock) until
reading this just now. Wow, interesting.

~~~
igravious
Those six were no ordinary citizens, they were diplomats.

Argo is a deeply troubling film. From the one-dimensionality of the Iranians
to the complete lack of historical context ignoring prior US meddling and
interfering in internal Iranian affairs[1]. The involvement of the CIA in the
production[2]. The historical inaccuracies of the film[3]. The timing of the
release of the film given Iranian-Western relations over its nuclear program.

For me Argo is basically unwatchable US patriotic screen-fodder bordering on
propaganda.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état#Unite...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état#United_States_role)

[2] [https://www.amazon.de/CIA-Hollywood-Agency-Shapes-
Television...](https://www.amazon.de/CIA-Hollywood-Agency-Shapes-
Television/dp/0292754361)

“Argo and Zero Dark Thirty are only the latest film productions the CIA has
influenced in the 15 years since the Agency opened its official liaison office
to Hollywood […]”

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_(2012_film)#Historical_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_\(2012_film\)#Historical_inaccuracies)

~~~
verylittlemeat
Thanks for this comment it perfectly describes the way I felt when I watched
Argo.

------
mbgaxyz
Looks like the Chinese government would like to ensure that its citizens do
not fall victim to 'fake news' and has thus taken on the responsibility of
'fact checking'.

~~~
argonaut
If you're trying to make fun of fact checking fake news, that is a totally
facetious comparison. The whole point of fact checking is that the fact check
/ rebuttal is put side by side or preceding the original claim, with evidence
and its own citations. You're not prevented from seeing the original claim,
even if statistically fewer people see the original claim.

If the Communist party decided to replace all online censorship with modals
saying how wrong the website was, and you could just click through the modal,
I would consider that progress in China.

~~~
mordocai
> The whole point of fact checking is that the fact check / rebuttal is put
> side by side or preceding the original claim, with evidence and its own
> citations.

I'm not well read on this topic but I would like to be. I've never heard this
solution presented, likely due to my lack of research. Can you provide
citations of this solution being suggested and/or implemented?

Besides that, while I agree it is better than pure blocking I still feel it
would be a government over-reach. I wouldn't like a company doing it either.

~~~
NoodleIncident
[http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/news-feed-fyi-
addressing...](http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2016/12/news-feed-fyi-addressing-
hoaxes-and-fake-news/)

------
hackuser
Why are other publications (the Wall Street Journal and Financial Times are
mentioned) doing to keep Chinese authorities happy?

This should be a badge of honor for any news source.

The NY Times doesn't publish anything about China that they don't publish
about many other countries. Certainly coverage of the U.S. and U.K. is much
more challenging to those authorities.

~~~
olalonde
If I recall correctly, the NYT website was blocked a few months ago when it
published an unflattering (e.g. allegations of cronyism) article on Xi
Jinping. The NYT is also pretty heavy on "China-bashing" though that's not
really unique to them[0].

[0] [http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/china-
bashing.html](http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/01/china-bashing.html)

~~~
hackuser
> The NYT is also pretty heavy on "China-bashing" though that's not really
> unique to them

I don't see it at all. The Times' reporting is equally critical, and in much
greater volume, of the U.S., U.K., and probably others. The job of
journalists, to a great extent, is to inform the public about problems;
_afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted_. It's not bias against
China, it's the same journalism practiced everywhere about everyone.

The link doesn't really back up its claims. These are the NYT headlines it
cites as "bashing":

    
    
        *   Hong Kong Protesters Seek Democracy.
        *   Discovery of Melamine-Tainted Milk Shuts Shanghai Dairy.
        *   Index of China’s Manufacturing Rose Sharply in December.
        *   Telecom Company to Pay $3 Million in China Bribe Case.
        *   China: Xinjiang Enacts a Curb on Dissent.
        *   A pioneering editor who resigned amid [government
            censor] controversy last fall … named editor in chief of
            a new publication.
        *   China and 10 Southeast Asian nations ushered in the
            world’s third-largest free-trade area.
        *   Chinese Businesses Resist Eviction by Developers.
        *   U.S. Duties on Pipes From China Approved.
        *   China Executes Briton Despite Appeals.
    

It's not even all negative, and does not differ from reporting about
everywhere else. One reason I like the NYT is that everyone thinks the Times
is biased against them: The Clintons, Trump, progressives, liberals,
conservatives, etc.

~~~
analog31
Ironically, these are among the "working class" issues that the liberal
establishment press is accused of ignoring. And the Chinese government are not
the only people threatening the New York Times.

------
jwtadvice
I remember when Apple removed the App that reported on US drone strikes and
civilian casualties.

I remember that Reddit bans foreign news outlets from its news subreddits.

I remember that Facebook censored people trying to post Snowden Documents in
the US.

This is a global phenomenon. We should do everything in our power to reverse
this trend in the United States so that we have the credibility to criticize
China for doing the same.

------
wyager
I wonder what is the largest legal entity a company like Apple or Google would
be willing to flip the middle finger to and say "No, you are ridiculous, feel
free to ban us." At some point the demands just become so onerous that you
either have to have separate SKUs for that legal region (extra expensive) or
you have to put the same backdoors or restrictions in all your products (which
makes the product inferior for customers outside of the legal region as well
as within).

~~~
MBCook
Apple clearly isn't going to, although at least they have a very pro-
encryption stance that we already know China isn't keen on.

Google already bowed years ago. They tried to stay out of China on principle
with search didn't they? But in the end the market was just too big and they
entered it.

It's easy to take a principled stance against North Korea (where users don't
get a choice) or a smaller country that's pretty big like even Iran if they
wanted to.

China is _just too big_ for people to resist. At a certain point you're not
going to grow much unless you go to China.

~~~
wyager
Let's take the UK as an example. It's a medium-sized country, and no one has
significant production there. Let's say the UK keeps passing insane backwards
anti-privacy laws and at some point told Apple to drop the encryption from the
iPhone.

If Apple told them to pound sand and got banned from the UK, how much sales
could they recoup if they kept Irish Apple stores extra well-stocked? If the
response to Brazil's VAT is any example, thrifty entrepreneurs will do all the
hard work of getting iPhones into the UK for a modest but very profitable
overhead. A couple iPhones sold at 25% markup is more than enough to pay for a
RyanAir round-trip and a week living in a cheap flat.

~~~
MBCook
Right. Either a county is so small it doesn't matter to sales, the grey market
will fill it, or it's too big to ignore.

------
ChuckMcM
At what point do you have two products, one is a subscription to a magazine of
fiction and the other a key to tell you how to map the fiction into real
events.

~~~
unchocked
I think that's already the case in China, only the map is informal. Were the
map formalized, I doubt the CPC would tolerate it.

------
Zak
This is one of the more compelling arguments I've seen for allowing
sideloading apart from the obvious philosophical point about users having
ultimate control over devices they own.

~~~
radicaldreamer
Apple has de-facto allowed sideloading via enterprise accounts since
Crashlytics Beta launched (never heard of a company being capped for having
too many users downloading their beta app)

~~~
gilgoomesh
You don't even need an enterprise account for open source apps.

Assuming you build it yourself, sideloading of open source apps is free (no
developer account required) for anyone running iOS 9 and Xcode 7 or later.

~~~
gergles
As long as you don't mind reloading the app every week...

~~~
ascagnel_
Apps you compile, sign, and install yourself don't expire.

~~~
gergles
As far as I know this is only with a paid developer certificate; if you are
using the free one with Xcode, they require you to reinstall them every 7
days.

------
IanDrake
>China’s main internet regulator, the Cyberspace Administration of China, did
not respond to _faxed_ questions.

You have to fax questions to the Chinese Internet regulator?

------
Hondor
In older news - entire Google Play store removed from Android phones in China.
Google cooperates by preventing its play store app being sideloaded and
disallowing app downloads from its website to a computer or phone without the
play store app.

~~~
frik
Google Playstore is blocked, as well as all other Google domains. Your Android
phone feels like a useless brick - you cannot even connect to a WiFi, as it
tries to connect to a Google domain to check if it should show up a input WiFi
password page served from 1.1.1.1 (iOS does the sae, but Apple.com works
fine). Anyway, iOS works fine, as do Android without Google services
preloaded. Bing.com is available, but Baidu is way better.

------
elcapitan
There was an interesting talk on the economics of internet censorship at 33c3,
you can watch it here:
[https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8170-the_economic_consequences_o...](https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8170-the_economic_consequences_of_internet_censorship)

One aspect I found interesting was the hypothesis that states like China use
censorship also as a strategic tool to strengthen their own business (Baidu vs
Google for example).

~~~
rdlecler1
China is a manufacturing economy, while the US is an information economy. This
makes two way trade difficult because China wants control of information. It's
hard to put up a tariff on Chinese products but it's easy to introduce
information controls that cripple American business models.

------
bluetwo
Can anyone from China list what U.S. news apps _are_ available? I would love
to know who sold out.

~~~
hawkice
Honestly, English language material isn't a huge priority for censors in China
most of the time. You'd have to be _extremely_ prominent and cover issues
relevant to the CCP's interest before I'd assume "sold out" is more likely
than "ignored by the censors".

[It seems reasonable to note, here, that the same logic applies to coverage of
the American government -- despite the lack of censors. Perhaps they leverage
access to privileged information -- why leak something important to someone
who dredges up garbage about you the other six days a week.]

------
WhitneyLand
I don't understand why the big hotels in China have so much wider access than
normal. It seems like they make exceptions for some places mostly visited by
international travelers.

~~~
Gustomaximus
They have 'free trade zones' I suspect half for being useful for international
business guests and half to look more open then they are to the global
community. Either way everyone knows how to tunnel out if they want to.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Free-
Trade_Zone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Free-Trade_Zone)

------
jwtadvice
It's similar to how RT is fined and banned in the UK.

There's a ton of US propaganda in the New York Times. China doesn't appreciate
that much.

------
eternalban
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive
and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of
frontiers"

source:
[https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/commu...](https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/communism-
computing-china/censorship.html)

"Blocking misinformation will help protect the [Facebook's] brand and
credibility."

source: [http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/facebook-
an...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/facebook-and-the-
digital-virus-called-fake-news.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)

------
hota_mazi
> Mr. Sainz declined to comment on what local regulations the Times apps were
> said to have violated

I'll take "What's the punishment for criticizing Chinese political figures in
China?" for $100, Alex.

------
gamesurgeon
"...Later that day, a separate team from Apple informed The Times that the
apps would be removed".

Am I reading that right? Seems like the Times is not-so-subtly implying that
Apple tipped off the Chinese authorities. Maybe they mentioned the scathing
nature of the article that could potentially paint China in bad light.

For those that didn't read that article, it unveils billions of dollars in
perks given to Foxconn/Apple:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/technology/apple-iphone-
ch...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/technology/apple-iphone-china-
foxconn.html)

------
sfoon
bowing to Chinese dictatorship, so sad. then again, Facebook/Snapchat also has
no shame bowing as well.

good thing Google has a backbone

~~~
nkristoffersen
What has Google done that shows a "backbone" in China?

~~~
DINKDINK
Gmail warns if they believe “Your Account May Have Been Targeted by State-
Sponsored Actors”[1] in a prompt[2]. I saw this first hand on a friend's
machine in Hong Kong.

[1]
[http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023036659045774495...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303665904577449562114786378)
[2] [https://sophosnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/google-
warnin...](https://sophosnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/google-warning.jpg)

------
loevborg
Apple has always put dollars first and foremost. Its always been odd to me
that the Apple fanboys and girls care so little about that.

------
droithomme
It's reasonable to remove apps for "fake news" sites.

------
WildUtah
Remember all the people that made fun of "don't be evil" as a motto? This is
what happens when you're motto is just, "how much is evil and its cheap evil
sweatshop labor contributing to the bottom line today?"

(Also, touchbar = Darth Vader. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NCm_-GZ-
Dc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NCm_-GZ-Dc) )

