hardboiled

YouTube and Music in the Far East

The wrath of censorship in China today keeping its citizens and Tibet in the dark

Times have changed but it seems the presence of censorship in China has not. Recently, access to YouTube has been blocked and the incoming flow of foreign artists allowed to perform in China has been noticeably diminished. The source of this decreased accessibility to these specific mediums of entertainment stems from a few newly instated regulations; but that’s nothing shocking in a country that openly exercises censorship, even today.

While researching the cause of the regulations imposing this blockade, I expected to find articles citing how fear of too much influence from the Western music and media threatening their own culture motivated the Chinese government to enforce these constrictions on music and internet accessibility.

This assumption spans several years back; I remember reading about many western bands that had their hands tied in compromises they were forced to make in order to be allowed to perform in China. In 2003, The Rolling Stones were forced to omit certain songs because of their sexual explicitness and drug references for a concert in China; the Chinese government not being too fond of the sex or the drugs in rock and roll, and the influence those messages may send to their youth. I assumed that I would find the same motives for the recent restrictions imposed on YouTube and performances from foreign artists.

China’s policies in the past and present have been enforced in large part for the “good” of the youth. China has roughly 200 million of young Chinese accessing the Web everyday. It seems what the Chinese government hope to achieve from this lockdown of information is a pristine environment for their youth to grow up, free from the risk of cultural, mental, and political corruption. China believes that the censoring of certain information is necessary in order to make sure their youth grow up without having to feel conflict that may arise from the clashing of foreign ideals (introduced through foreign media) and the traditional beliefs of their country.

In order to achieve those means, China has been cracking down on websites that have ‘objectionable’ content. Along with a stricter eye on the web, came a tighter policy on foreign musicians allowed to perform within the country’s walls. In the past, it may have been cultural differences – a stern attitude regarding profanity and the modesty of the artists during performances – that caused conflict between artists and the Chinese government’s willingness to host live concerts on their behalf. I was astonished to find there was more to the recent wave of censorship in China than just culture clash.

Censorship reeks of a political agenda in the wake of recent events in China. On Monday, March 23, 2009, internet users in China took notice of popular video streaming website, YouTube’s increasing inaccessibility. Access to YouTube gradually halted within 24 hours of Monday night. Although this is not the first time China has taken YouTube off the map, I was surprised to find Tibet at the heart of YouTube’s lock down.

Many sources claim that the Chinese government, in the previous year during the Tibet riots, had blocked access to YouTube from internet users because it hosted video footage of Chinese policemen inflicting violence upon citizens during the Tibet protests. Conflict between Tibet with China has reached an all time high as Tibet fights to reclaim its independence; China has ruled over “Tibet territory” since 1951. There are claims that YouTube was blocked again this March for the same purpose; to prevent access to a video released by Tibet’s government-in-exile displaying Chinese authorities beating Tibetan citizens participating in the protests during March of last year.

Reasons given for the temporary block on YouTube included China’s Foreign Ministry’s comment: “taking up management of the network according to the laws” and the “need [for the internet] to be regulated by law in order to prevent the spread of harmful information and national security.” These vague justifications skirt around the real reason for the blocking of YouTube: the spread of information that conflicts with the country’s own interests – silencing Tibet, and keeping its citizens complacent throughout their efforts.

Tibet also has grounding in the banning of performances from British band Oasis in the previous month. Ticket stopped selling abruptly despite successful sales after the Chinese government learned that band member Noel Gallagher participated in a “Free Tibet” benefit concert in 1997. It seems that conflict with Tibet has sparked a major crunch on the Chinese citizen's access to music as well as YouTube.

Oasis is not alone in being blacklisted from China; conflicts involving support of Tibet have put red tape on the tours and performances of other foreign artists. Some attribute this limitation to an incident that originated during Icelandic singer Bjork’s performance in Shanghai in March of 2008; she intermittently whispered ‘Tibet’ throughout her song ‘Declare Independence’.

Bjork’s stunt is said to have been the main motivation for the Chinese Ministry of Culture releasing the following statement on July 17, 2008: “any artistic group or individual who has ever engaged in activities that threaten national sovereignty will not be allowed in [China],” a warning to all incoming foreign artists to leave any personal “political agendas” (at least Pro-Tibetan ones) they may be harboring at home. Bjork now faces permanent blacklisting from ever performing in China, as do other of her unnamed Pro-Tibet musician-compatriots.

Live music was not the only variety of music scrutinized for evidence of pro-Tibetan support. Further investigation into the matter led me to discover that around August of 2008, access to Apple’s i-Tunes Store was restricted, if not blocked entirely, for offering a pro-Tibetan album (‘Songs for Tibet’ on which singers and songwriters such as Moby, John Mayer, and Sting appeared) to its users.

While I am a strict opponent of censorship in all forms, I also have to question the role cultural dynamics have in influencing China’s policy to block their citizen’s access to information as crucial as the events surrounding the Tibetan conflict. China is not the only country to have had blocks placed on YouTube; Thailand blocked access to videos on YouTube that may have proven offensive to their king (in their country, an offense to the king is prohibited by law). The vulnerable minds of the youth provide incentive for its maintenance of what has been dubbed “the Great Firewall of China.” That being said, I still cannot accept China’s “good intentions” for their practice of such blatant censorship; especially when we know there are less than honorable ulterior motives behind them.