Connect with us

China Insight

“It’ll Only Get Better” – The Week of Hong Kong National Security Law on Weibo

“Horses will still run, stocks will still sizzle, and dancers will still dance.”

Manya Koetse

Published

on

The implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law has been a hot topic in international media over the past week. On Chinese social media, the law and the global responses to it have also triggered widespread discussions.

The new National Security Law (NSL) that came into effect on June 30 has caused alarm in Hong Kong, where people have protested for greater freedom, democracy, and independence from the political influences of Beijing since March of last year.

Although the law has been described as a “nightmare” by some critics, there are Beijing supporters who claim it is “huge progress.”

Pro-regime author Thomas Hon Wing Polin, for example, called the implementation of the law “the most hopeful day in the life of Hong Kong since its return to China in 1997.”

The law’s full name is the “Safeguarding National Security Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China” (中华人民共和国香港特别行政区维护国家安全法), and it basically stands for everything Hong Kong demonstrators have protested against for so long – less autonomy and more Beijing influence over the city.

On July 8, the national security office was officially opened in Hong Kong.

 

About the National Security Law

 

The NSL provides legal guarantee for police to “safeguard China’s national interest” and apply the law, that imposes criminal penalties for secession, subversion against state power, terrorist activities, and collusion with foreign forces.

The NSL has many vague provisions, and the legislative interpretation is up to Beijing. This makes it easier for Chinese authorities to punish protesters and those who criticize the government. People convicted of national security crimes could face up to life imprisonment.

The law (see full text here) has garnered special attention for its Article 38 and Article 43, the latter of which took effect on July 7.

Article 38 mainly triggered controversy for stating that every provision of the NSL also applies to everyone outside of Hong Kong:

This Law shall apply to offenses under this Law committed against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region from outside the Region by a person who is not a permanent resident of the Region.”

Article 43 includes seven implementation rules, including one that allows Hong Kong authorities to demand tech companies to remove information and to share private user data. Noncompliance could result in fines or even imprisonment for staff members.

China Law Translate‘s Jeremy Daum commented on Twitter: “Regardless of how often such requests are made, even the possibility of such harsh penalties for protecting user data will leave foreign businesses in an incredibly difficult position. They may well be left with no choice but to leave HK, which may be the goal.”

 

International Responses to Beijing’s NSL in Hong Kong

 

Over the past few days, foreign companies and governments have responded to the law’s enactment with their own measures.

Both Canada and Australia have suspended extradition treaties with Hong Kong. New Zealand’s Foreign Minister stated the country is “deeply concerned at the imposition of this legislation” and that it would “review” its relationship with Hong Kong.

UK has offered citizenship options to Hong Kong residents, while France and Germany proposed EU countermeasures.

Major tech companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, Zoom and LinkedIn have indicated they will “pause” requests for data from authorities while they are assessing the situation and their position.

Beijing-headquartered ByteDance told Reuters that it will withdraw its TikTok app out of the region. (Note that there is a difference between the Tiktok app and Douyin app, that is available in mainland China).

During a press conference on July 7, China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian reacted to a question regarding these responses to the National Security Law, reassuring that “horses will still run, stocks will still sizzle, and dancers will still dance” in Hong Kong – referring to the famous words Deng Xiaoping once said about Britain’s handover of Hong Kong to Chinese rule in 1997.

 

Weibo Discussions

 

On Chinese social media platform Weibo, there have been discussions on the National Security Law developments under various hashtags – all hosted by the Weibo accounts of state media outlets such as People’s Daily or CCTV – since June of this year.

Some of the main hashtags:

  • “Hong Kong National Security Law” #港区国安法# (260 million views at the time of writing)
  • “Hong Kong National Security Law Takes Effect” #香港国安法正式生效# (380 million views)
  • “Hong Kong National Security Law Full Text” #香港维护国家安全法全文# (280 million views)
  • “Hong Kong National Security Law’s Implementation Rules Effective as of July” 7 #香港国安法实施细则7月7日生效# (81+ million views at the time of writing)
  • “Hong Kong’s National Security Law Specifies Four Types of Criminal Acts that Endanger National Security” #香港国安法明确4类危害国家安全犯罪行为#
    (13+ million views)
  • “Member of Hong Police Force Says Deterrence of National Security Law Is Already Apparent” #港警一哥说港区国安法的震慑力已显现# (67+ million views)
  • “Hong Kong Will Introduce the National Security Law to Students in Class Curriculum” #香港将在课程中向学生介绍国安法# (210 million views)

Although, as always, most comment threads below news articles on Weibo are heavily censored, there still are thousands of comments on these news developments.

A recurring comment is that the implementation of the law will make Hong Kong “more stable” and therefore “more prosperous.” Also: “Hong Kong is part of China. I hope our country will only get better.”

About Facebook and other tech companies “pausing” data requests from local authorities until further notice, some commenters say that this shows that these platforms are biased or hold a double standard. (Facebook has a page about its requests for user data here.) “They hand over data to other countries, but not to China?”

“If you don’t approve of China, if you don’t like Hong Kong, just get out instead of earning money from Chinese.”

Among all comments, there are also those acknowledging the forms of (silent) protest going on in Hong Kong, with sheets of blank paper becoming the latest protest symbol to avoid using slogans banned under the new national security law.

Others make fun of the subdued protests after the implementation of the NSL, posting photos of “before” and “after” the law took effect (image below).

Post on Weibo: protest in Hong Kong before and after the implementation of the National Security Law.

Last year during the Hong Kong protests, many Chinese social media users praised the Hong Kong police force and condemned the “angry youth.”

As explained in this article, the ideas shaping the discussions on Hong Kong on Chinese social media platforms such as Weibo mainly were that Western media were biased in reporting the demonstrations and that Hong Kong youth were stuck in a ‘colonial mentality’ and lacked patriotic education.

“We support the Hong Kong police force” was one of the slogans going around in 2019.

 

New Law, Same Ideas

 

This time around, the same rhetorical perspectives reappear on Chinese social media as during the start of the Hong Kong protests.

Firstly, there is a clear focus on the Hong Kong police force and the power they (should) have. Weibo users collectively praise the implementation of the NSL because the authorities now have more legal power to punish those who are “disturbing” Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.

The apparent general support for tough laws against anti-Beijing protesters also becomes clear looking at the recent news regarding the “Hong Kong Man Who Trampled and Burned Flag Sentenced to Five-Week Imprisonment” (#香港踩踏焚烧国旗男子改判入狱5周#), which was viewed 190 million times on Weibo on Friday.

A 21-year-old man who burned the national flag during protests in September last year was initially sentenced to 240 hours of community service. After prosecutors, pushing for tougher sentencing, requested a review of the case, the man was resentenced.

On Weibo, thousands of people responded to this news, saying his punishment was “too light” and that it should have been “five years rather than five weeks.”

“Even five years would not be enough for these kinds of cockroaches [蟑螂],” blogger Taogewang (@淘歌王) writes.

Second, there is also, again, a focus on the lack of patriotic education among Hong Kong youth.

On July 11, Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam spoke at a local education forum, where she said that over 3,000 students have been arrested during the Hong Kong protests since June of last year. Lam pointed out that the NSL was an important moment to “let education return to education” and to let “student’s study return to the right track.”

On Weibo, this news item (#3000多名香港学生因修例风波被捕#) was discussed with a seeming general consensus that “patriotism starts with education” and that patriotism should be taught in Hong Kong schools.

Some argued that when teaching Hong Kong students about “One Country, Two Systems,” there should be more focus on the ‘One Country’ aspect rather than on the ‘Two Systems.’

Third, the supposed Western media bias in reporting about the Hong Kong National Security Law is again used in pro-Beijing discussions in Chinese online media, suggesting that Western media are prejudiced and show anti-Chinese sentiments in how they report about the developments in Hong Kong.

On July 11, Chinese media outlet The Observer (观察者) posted a fragment of a BBC Hardtalk interview about the National Security Law from July 7, in which BBC’s Stephen Sackur repeatedly interrupted Hong Kong Senior Counsel and politician Ronny Tong (汤家骅), who defended the implementation of the law (see full interview here).

“They don’t want to hear your opinion at all,” one Weibo commenter said about Western media: “They just want you to make a mistake that suits their narrative.”

“Why do you invite a guest if you want to answer the questions you pose yourself?” others wonder.

For many on Chinese social media, the implementation of the law means that Hong Kong will see more law and order after a year filled with unrest. For others it simply means that the city has “finally” has returned to the motherland.

Many netizens keep repeating the same phrase: “Now that the National Security Law takes effect, Hong Kong will only get better.”

Also read: How the Hong Kong Protests Are Discussed on Chinese Social Media

By Manya Koetse

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.

©2020 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Manya Koetse is the editor-in-chief of www.whatsonweibo.com. She is a writer and consultant (Sinologist, MPhil) on social trends in China, with a focus on social media and digital developments, popular culture, and gender issues. Contact at manya@whatsonweibo.com, or follow on Twitter.

Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Avatar

    Emilio

    July 17, 2020 at 5:07 pm

    The implementation of this law is a clear advance in terms of security for Hong Kong

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

China Insight

“Support Xinjiang MianHua!” – China’s Social Media Storm over Xinjiang Cotton Ban

The hashtag “Wo Zhichi Xinjiang Mianhua” – “I Support Xinjiang Cotton” – received over 6 billion views on Weibo.

Manya Koetse

Published

on

Western brands faced heavy criticism in China this week when a social media storm erupted over the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) and its brand members for no longer sourcing from China’s Xinjiang region. The ‘Xinjiang cotton ban’ led to a major ‘Xinjiang cotton support’ campaign on Weibo, and a boycott for those brands siding with BCI.

In 2019, an extensive brand ‘witch hunt’ took place on Weibo and other Chinese social media networks in light of the protests in Hong Kong, with international fashion and luxury brands, from Versace to Swarovski, getting caught in the crossfire for listing Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan as separate countries or regions – not part of China – on their official websites or brand T-shirts.

Now, another brand ‘witch hunt’ is taking place on Chinese social media. This time, it is not about Hong Kong, but about Xinjiang and its cotton industry.

H&M, Uniqlo, Nike, Adidas and other international brands have caused public outrage for the stand they’ve taken against the alleged use of forced labor involving the Muslim Uyghur minority to produce cotton in China’s western region of Xinjiang.

The social media storm started earlier this week on Wednesday, March 24, and is linked to H&M and the ‘BCI’ (Better Cotton Initiative), a Swiss NGO that aims to promote better standards in cotton farming.

In October 2020, H&M shared a statement on its site in which the Swedish retailer said it was “deeply concerned” over reports of forced labor in the production of cotton in Xinjiang, officially Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (XUAR).

H&M stated that it would no longer source cotton from Xinjiang, following the BCI decision to suspend licensing of BCI cotton in the region.

 

BCI and its Suspension of Activities in Xinjiang

 

The Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) is the largest cotton sustainability program in the world. It practices across 23 countries and accounts for 22% of global cotton production. The governance group was established in 2005 in cooperation with WWF and leading retailers, with the aim of promoting the widespread use of improved farm practices.

While H&M is a ‘top member’ of the Better Cotton Initiative (link), many others brands such as IKEA, Gap, Adidas, Nike, Levi’s, and C&A are also brand members.

January 2020
In January of 2020, the BCI was slammed by Dr Adrian Zenz, a senior fellow with the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation in Washington DC, for its refusal to pull out of the Xinjiang region. At the time, 20 percent of its ‘better cotton’ was sourced from Xinjiang, which is China’s largest cotton growing area.

According to a 2020 report by EcoTextile, the BCI maintained that its implicated council member, the yarn producer Huafu, denied the allegations and that an independent audit of the company’s Aksu facility in Xinjiang had failed to identify any instances of forced labor. An earlier report by Adidas from 2019 also stated that their independent investigations found no evidence of forced labor.

March 2020
In late March of 2020, the BCI reportedly did suspend activities with licensed farmers in the Xinjiang region for the 2020/21 cotton season while also contracting a global expert to conduct an external review of the Xinjiang situation. Chinese state media Global Times later reported that despite suspending its licensing activities, the BCI would remain committed to cotton farming communities in Xinjiang and would continue to engage in activities in the region.

July 2020
The pressure on BCI and other brands to stop sourcing from Xinjiang was heightened when a coalition of civil society groups raised concerns over the treatment of the Uyghur Muslim minority in China and the “grave risk of forced labor.” Reuters reported that more than 180 organizations urged brands from Adidas to Amazon to end sourcing of cotton and clothing from the region and cut ties with any suppliers in China that would benefit from the alleged forced labour of Uyghur other Muslim groups.

October 2020
In October of 2020, the Better Cotton Initiative announced it would cease all field-level activities in Xinjiang with immediate effect because the region had reportedly become “an increasingly untenable operating environment.” The aforementioned statement by H&M came out in the same month.

March 2021
By late March 2021, various Chinese state media reported on the BCI suspension. These reports came days after a coordinated effort by the United States, the European Union, Britain and Canada to impose sanctions on Chinese officials over China’s alleged human rights violations and abuses in Xinjiang, something which was called a “concerted effort to slander China’s policies in its Xinjiang region” by Global Times. The news outlet linked these “anti-China forces’ efforts” to the BCI decision to suspend its Xinjiang activities.

 

A Social Media Storm over Xinjiang Cotton

 

The news developments were followed by a wave of social media boycott movements and Chinese brand ambassadors cutting ties with international brands, with H&M being the main target over its Xinjiang statement.

Chinese e-commerce platforms Taobao, JD.com, Pinduoduo, Suning.com, and Meituan’s Dianping on Thursday all removed H&M from their platforms, with Chinese Android app stores also removing H&M. On Thursday, a search for “H&M” came up with no results on these sites (see images below).

Two of China’s largest online maps also removed H&M from its systems.

No H&M on these maps.

On Thursday, virtually all topics in Weibo’s top trending lists related to the Xinjiang cotton ban (see image below), with Chinese famous influencers and celebrities one by one announcing they would terminate their contracts with international brands related to the Xinjiang cotton ban.

The storm became so big this week that some people on social media even commented that “if you’re a Chinese celebrity and you don’t have any contracts to terminate now, you’re not doing so well.”

After H&M, an entire list of brands was targeted, including Adidas, Nike, Calvin Klein, New Balance, Tommy Hilfiger, Uniqlo, Converse, Puma, Burberry, and Lacoste.

In light of the heated discussions and calls for boycotts, there was also another hashtag that popped up on Weibo, namely that of “don’t make it hard for the workers” (不要为难打工人). The hashtag came up after some Chinese staff members at Nike and Adidas stores were scolded on a live stream, with netizens calling on people to stay rational and not let the boycott turn into personal attacks on people. But another popular video showed a man in Chongqing calling customers out in an H&M store for buying their “trash.”

Another hashtag gaining many views, 520 million in total, was that of two ‘girls from Xinjiang dancing outside H&M’ (#新疆小姐姐在HM门店外跳新疆舞#) – it was linked to a video that showed two women performing outside of a H&M store in Chongqing.

Meanwhile, some brands, including Chinese company Anta Sports and the Japanese Asics, reportedly announced they would leave the Better Cotton Initiative in order to continue sourcing cotton from Xinjiang.

The discussions on Xinjiang as Weibo saw this week are unprecedented, as ‘Xinjiang’ was previously a sensitive topic on Chinese social media and was barely discussed in political contexts. The last time Xinjiang became a big topic of discussion on Chinese social media was in 2018, when CCTV aired a program on the region’s “vocational education programs” in Xinjiang. That media moment triggered mixed reactions on Weibo, with some commenters wondering what the difference between a ‘re-education center’ and a ‘prison’ is.

 

Chinese State Media and the ‘Xinjiang Cotton Ban’

 

While Chinese netizens and celebrities play a major role in the storm that erupted over BCI, H&M, and Xinjiang cotton, the role of Chinese state media is pivotal.

Over the past week, various state media outlets posted strong messages regarding the ban in various ways, the most noteworthy one being People’s Daily‘s “I Support Xinjiang Cotton” (#我支持新疆棉花#) hashtag, which had garnered six billion views by the weekend. “The H&M Group released a statement that sparked outrage among netizens. Let’s pass it on together: Support Xinjiang Cotton,” the tagline of the hashtag page said.

The message came with an image saying “Xinjiang Mianhua” (Xinjiang cotton) in a similar font to the H&M logo, the “H” and “M” within ‘mianhua‘ being identical to the H&M letters.

The image and post by People’s Daily was shared over 36 million times.

A message by People’s Daily: those who slander China are not welcome.

Another image by People’s Daily published on March 25 said that the Chinese market does not welcome those who slander China.

The Communist Youth League also contributed to the online storm by posting about H&M, writing: “On the one hand they are starting rumors and boycotting Xinjiang cotton, on the other hand they want to make money in China. Dream on, H&M!” That post received around 430,000 likes.

Various official media, including Global Times and China Daily, posted about cotton production in Xinjiang. Besides refuting the forced labor accusations and accusing Western players of hypocrisy and ulterior motives, a recurring issue stressed is how 42 percent of Xinjiang’s cotton is harvested by machines. Ministry of Commerce spokesman Gao Feng was quoted as saying that “the so-called forced labor in Xinjiang is nonexistent and entirely imaginary. The spotless white Xinjiang cotton brooks no slander.”

This image was posted by China Daily USA.

On March 27, People’s Daily posted a rap video by ‘Xinjiang Youth’ (新疆青年) on its official Weibo channel (video below) that included some tough lines attacking Western powers, companies, and media.

Also noteworthy in this propaganda campaign is how the Canadian YouTuber Daniel Dumbrill got caught up, as what he said in one of his videos was quoted by Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying (华春莹) on March 27 during a press conference, with his video being screened before the conference.

In this video, that was part of a larger panel on Xinjiang, Dumbrill responded to the decision-making process on how China’s treatment of Uyghurs is called a “genocide.”

Recently, a number of countries and parliaments including the U.S., Canada and the Netherlands have declared that China’s crackdown on the Muslim minorities amounts to “genocide” in violation of the U.N. Genocide Convention. Dumbrill talks about why the Xinjiang narratives matter to both the foreign and domestic politics of the US and other Western countries, with Dumbril claiming it “isn’t really about human rights and a care for overseas Muslims” but about other political goals. Dumbrill’s video was praised by authorities, state media, and by Chinese netizens.

“We have to push for the truth to come out,” some netizens commented. Others wrote: “But we’re only allowed to discuss it from within [the country].”

Meanwhile, while many companies are seeing sales falling, there are also many who are benefiting from the current developments. Some sellers on Taobao have found another way to attract customers, promoting their products as being made with “100% Xinjiang Cotton!”

As this is an ongoing topic, we will report more later. Meanwhile, don’t forget to follow us on Twitter.

By Manya Koetse, with contributions by Miranda Barnes

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.

©2021 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Continue Reading

China Arts & Entertainment

“Love the Motherland” – New Moral Guidelines for Chinese Performers Come Into Force

New “Self-Disciplinary Measures” for performers in China come into force on March 1st.

Manya Koetse

Published

on

On February 5th of 2021, the China Association of Performing Arts (中国演出行业协会), which is run by China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism, officially released new guidelines for Chinese performers in order to promote the idea that Chinese performers should abide by rules of ‘social morality,’ stating they could face a permanent ban from their profession if they fail to comply.

The guidelines, that come into force on a trial basis starting from March 1st, are meant to “promote the healthy development of the performer industry” (“促进演出行业健康发展”). It is the first time for the Association, which was established in 1988, to introduce “clear regulations” in this way.

The regulations are presented as being “self-disciplinary measures” for actors, musicians, dancers, opera performers, acrobats, and any other people engaged in performing within China.

Part of the article presented by the China Association of Performing Arts includes the “practice norms”, which stipulate that performers, among other things, should abide by national laws and regulations, should honor their contracts and comply with copyright laws. The article also lists other things. For example, performers should:

 

  • “..love the motherland, and support the Party’s line and policies” (“热爱祖国,拥护党的路线方针政策”)
  • “..persevere in the orientation that literature and art should serve the people and socialism” (“坚持文艺为人民服务、为社会主义服务的方向”)
  • “..actively uphold a positive image” (“积极树立正面形象”)
  • “..actively participate in social charity events, help the development of public welfare undertakings, consciously put social responsibility into practice” (“积极参与社会公益活动,助力公益事业发展,自觉践行社会责任”)

 

Another part describes what performers are not allowed to do. Among other things – of which some seem obvious, such as ‘do not violate the basic principles of the Constitution’ – they include things like ‘performers may not..’:

 

  • “..jeopardize national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, endanger national security or damage national honor and interests” (“危害国家统一、主权和领土完整,危害国家安全,或者损害国家荣誉和利益”)
  • “..encite hatred against ethnic groups, discriminate against ethnic groups, infringe the customs and habits of ethnic groups, insult ethnic groups or undermine national unity” (“煽动民族仇恨、民族歧视,侵害民族风俗习惯,伤害民族感情,破坏民族团结”)
  • “..organize, participate in, or promote illegal activities regarding obscenities, pornography, gambling, drugs, violence, terrorism, or criminal elements etc” (“组织、参与、宣扬涉及淫秽、色情、赌博、毒品、暴力、恐怖或者黑恶势力等非法活动 “)
  • “..violate national religion policies, promote cults or superstition” (“违反国家宗教政策,宣扬邪教、迷信”)
  • “..do lip-sync in professional performances, deceive the audience by fake playing instruments etc” (“在营业性演出中以假唱、假演奏等手段欺骗观众”)

 

The punishment for going against these regulations is an industry-wide boycott of one year, three years, five years, or even a permanent ban depending on how serious the case is.

By stressing that art should serve the people, the China Association of Performing Arts reiterates President Xi Jinping’s views on the arts, which he previously shared at a symposium of prominent artists and writers in Beijing in 2014, and where he also said that “the arts must serve the people and serve socialism.”

As discussed by Chinese author Murong Xuecun in the New York Times in 2014 (‘The Art of Xi Jinping’ link), President Xi’s comments reminded of the famous Yan’an talks by Mao Zedong in 1942 where he prescribed the new direction for art and literature in China, saying they should serve the ‘people’ – the workers, peasants, and soldiers – and not the petty bourgeoisie or intellectuals.

The Beijing comments by Xi signaled that the Chinese government fixed its sights on literature and the arts, with Murong Xuecun already predicting that it would be the start of new lists of forbidden films, broadcasts, and publications. Those lists may now also include banned performers.

 

“Idols should be a good example for others”

 

The China Association of Performing Arts also has a Weibo account (@中国演出行业协会) where they posted about the new regulations.

“I support this, idols should be a good example for others,” one top commenter reacted to the regulations.

Others suggested that there should be a blacklist of performers engaged in illegal activities in order to “warn the industry.”

But there are also voices, such as some on Q&A site Zhihu, expressing that the current regulations are too vague, as they include stipulations that are already part of the law. Some argue that there should be a clearer description of the consequences artists will face when they violate industry guidelines or when they engage in acts that are illegal.

“Surrogate pregnancies, insulting China, taking drugs, evading taxes, etc etc – this should be banned forever,” another person said.

The ‘surrogate pregnancy’ comment refers to the controversy involving Zheng Shuang (郑爽). It already is the biggest celebrity controversy of the year in China. The 29-year-old famous Chinese actress dominated all trending topics in January of 2021 when news came out that the actress and her husband Zhang Heng (张恒) had separated and that she had left behind two children born out of surrogacy in the United States. Surrogacy is not legal in China.

Since the controversy, Zheng Shuang was dropped by the brands she represented, she was shut down by China’s State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, and her honorary titles were revoked by Huading Awards.

Among all Weibo comments on the new regulations, there also many mocking them – especially the rule that stipulates performers should not lip-sync and deceive their audiences. “What about the Spring Festival Gala?”, multiple commenters say, referring to the biggest live televised state media event, that is often criticized for lip-synced performances.

 

“Can Zheng Shuang still make a comeback?”

 

The recent regulations come at a time when Chinese celebrities have enormous influence in popular culture due to the blossoming of various social media platforms – some of Weibo’s top celebrities have over 120 million fans.

At the same time, the past decades have seen a higher grade of commercialization of Chinese media, with entertainment and celebrities being a major driving force behind the success of hundreds of Chinese television stations. This has only further accelerated the influence of China’s top performers.

Loved by millions of fans, the power of Chinese celebrity artists is often also used by authorities to promote Party ideology and policies. This is done in myriad ways. In 2017, a group of Chinese celebrities praised China’s “New Era” in a song supporting Xi Jinping Thought; in 2019, influential pop stars sang about the importance of social credit.

In this thriving celebrity culture, Chinese authorities are tightening control on the culture & entertainment content that reaches millions of fans within the country. In 2019 there was a crackdown on the rising popularity of Chinese costume dramas. In 2017, China’s State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) issued a notice that Chinese television stations should refrain from broadcasting TV dramas “focused on entertaining” during primetime. These are just minor examples of ways in which authorities are shaping a popular culture environment that is not just about the entertainment alone – it should also serve the Party’s goals.

As the “self-discipline management measures” have now gone into effect, some discussions on social media are focused on whether or not these measures should be applied retroactively, and if Chinese celebrities could still be affected now for past behaviors.

In a previous interview with Xinhua News, The Secretary-General of the China Association of Performing Arts Pan Yan (潘燕) stated that previous actions or situations will not be taken into account when it comes to the current guidelines.

“Does this mean Zheng Shuang can still make a comeback?”, some netizens wondered.

Pan Yan also said that the Association has an ‘ethics committee’ which will be involved in the process of assessing whether or not artists have violated the practice norms.

 
By Manya Koetse

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.

©2021 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Support What’s on Weibo

If you enjoy What’s on Weibo and support the way we report the latest trends in China, you could consider becoming a What's on Weibo patron:
Donate

Facebook

Advertisement

Contribute

Got any tips? Or want to become a contributor or intern at What's on Weibo? Email us as at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Popular Reads