7th Jul 2022


China's cat-and mouse game blocking web content no model for EU

  • Of course, if you ask a Brussels policymaker to name a role model for internet regulation, China won't be on their list. (Photo: Howard Lake)

China's content clampdowns have driven internet users to underground digital spaces that are much harder to keep tabs on.

The EU rightly wants to stop online hate speech and disinformation and knows that any regulation should be a balancing act between security and freedom of speech.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • Germany's synagogue shooter used the lesser-known social media streaming platform Twitch, frequented by gamers (Photo: Wikimedia)

Sadly, the EU is currently leaning toward prioritising safety over liberty, a fraught approach akin to one Beijing has been pursuing for two decades. China proves that sacrificing freedom for security is no solution.

Governments have tried to strengthen content moderation through rules that hold platforms liable.

In doing so, they mask the symptoms but do not cure the underlying causes of pernicious and misleading content. In China, citizens have over the years found loopholes to circumvent measures for blocking content.

Mainstream platform users who disagree with norms enforced by content moderators turn to less mainstream spaces to communicate and organse. Things may seem safer on the surface, but in reality, threats become harder to assess – and even amplified.

Of course, if you ask a Brussels policymaker to name a role model for internet regulation, China won't be on their list.

China's highly sophisticated tools for policing content, blocking websites and tracking user behaviour have earned its policies notoriety as The Great Firewall of China.

China has built an extensive institutional and technological infrastructure to monitor, surveil, delete and block content by users. This is no blueprint for democracies grappling with disinformation, hate speech and election meddling.

Yet current dynamics between policymakers, companies, and users in the EU and elsewhere in fact bear resemblance to China's over the last two decades.

Policymakers want to increase control over online public opinion when it threatens political stability; companies implement content moderation, but want regulators to offer guidance on what to remove; and some discontented users seek alternative spaces to openly express opinions and organise.

The angriest of these may turn to disruptive protests or violence, leading governments to increase control and monitoring over platforms, reinforcing the problem. This painful point has to be made to stop the EU repeating China's mistake of top-down regulation of free speech.

The EU Commission under president Ursula von der Leyen recently presented its goals for a new digital strategy, and is now expecting feedback about ideas like reinforcing content oversight.

Social media companies like Facebook and Twitter long resisted government intervention, but they now see its upsides.

Facebook has presented its ideas in a White Paper and CEO Mark Zuckerberg took his case to Brussels policymakers in February.

Companies see that it's easier to blame regulators for user-unfriendly interventions than face popular criticism for self-regulation, seen by some as too lax and others as too strict.

Facebook and the other social media giants. have learned that policing themselves will never be good PR.

Paper tiger

Their attempts at self-regulation through user reporting and user education have proven a paper tiger in the face of Russian election meddling and fake news.

The companies have discovered self-regulation forces them to define the limits of free speech themselves – not a popular idea among citizens of liberal democracies, their customers.

To clean up cyberspace over time, governments will find they need to build up capacity to monitor and get companies to delete and block content in the name of security.

The result will be a cat-and-mouse game similar to that playing out in China.

Despite building the world's most extensive institutional surveillance apparatus, the Chinese government is nowhere near winning this game. Its fear of challenges to public security has driven it further and further down this hole.

Time and again, users in China have dodged government oversight - moving their conversations to game chat rooms or even jumping the firewall with VPNs to circumvent monitoring.

The livestreaming platform Bilibili, removed in 2019 from some smartphone apps, officially focuses on entertainment.

Users can interact live with streamers, commenting on video content, but conversations are sometimes quite political. It is just one of many such sites the Chinese government has clamped down on since the country started using the internet in the mid-1990s.

'Twitch' killing spree

In Germany, it was no coincidence that the killer responsible for the 2019 synagogue shooting in Halle chose to livestream over the platform Twitch.

Mainly used as a gaming platform, the site is not known as a place for sharing right-wing radical views.

But it was easier for the attacker to operate under the radar in this non-mainstream space.

Since then, German policymakers have drafted a revision to a 2018 law on content monitoring that would give law enforcement even greater powers over platform content and likely push some users to fringe sites.

EU, please note: content-blocking only increases the difficulty and cost of policing egregious content and could lead to much taxpayer money spent on building institutions worthy of a surveillance state.

The EU needs to think hard about where it's heading and consider potential consequences – for freedom of speech and civil liberties more generally.

What if Europeans end up with echo chambers of hate speech outside of mainstream platforms and are more closely watched by their governments than ever before?

It is time to consider alternative approaches to content moderation for a European model that tackles the problem rather than its symptoms.

Author bio

Daniela Stockmann is the author of Media Commercialization and Authoritarian Rule in China, (Cambridge University Press, 2013), received the 2015 Goldsmith Book Prize awarded by the Harvard Kennedy School Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy.


The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

The future of 'Made in China' after coronavirus?

In repointing Europe's approach to industrial policy, some policymakers have prized China as an example to follow. Luckily, the European Commission is moving towards a European approach.


China suspected of bio-espionage in 'heart of EU'

Chinese spies have targeted Belgian biological warfare experts, vaccine-maker GSK, and other high-tech firms in the country, Belgium's intelligence service suspects.


Right-of-reply from Chinese embassy to Belgium

Such claims, based on internal reports four years ago, fall far from the truth, and are mainly based on conjectures and presumptions. The so-called 'Chinese espionage menace' is nothing new and has time and again been proven fictitious.

And now some questions for China's TikTok

At the height of the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests last fall, for example, hashtags relating to the protests appeared abundantly on platforms like Twitter. On TikTok, however, the same hashtags yielded scant results and almost no signs of unrest.


India is waging the wrong war and that's bad for Europe

As long as European companies continue to choose the certainty of the Chinese dictatorship over the volatility of India's fragile democracy, the threat from China is not going to change soon.

The Digital Services Act — a case-study in keeping public in dark

Companies and lobby groups like Spotify, Google and International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) were able to lobby member states using live knowledge of the trilogue discussions on content-ranking systems, advertising and liability for search engines.

Council must act on core of EU migration package

By only screening, fingerprinting or relocating (some) refugees, or by outsourcing our border control to Turkey and giving Erdogan our keys, we will not solve the current problems.

News in Brief

  1. Russia claims untouchable status due to nuclear arsenal
  2. Catalan MEPs lose EU court case over recognition
  3. 39 arrested in migrant-smuggling dragnet
  4. France to nationalise nuclear operator amid energy crisis
  5. Instant legal challenge after ok for 'green' gas and nuclear
  6. Alleged Copenhagen shooter tried calling helpline
  7. Socialist leader urges Czech PM to ratify Istanbul convention
  8. Scottish law chief casts doubt on referendum

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Canadian ministers join forces to combat harmful content online
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers write to EU about new food labelling
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersEmerging journalists from the Nordics and Canada report the facts of the climate crisis
  4. Council of the EUEU: new rules on corporate sustainability reporting
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers for culture: Protect Ukraine’s cultural heritage!
  6. Reuters InstituteDigital News Report 2022

Latest News

  1. Is Orban holding out an olive branch to EPP?
  2. EU should freeze all EU funds to Hungary, says study
  3. Legal action looms after MEPs back 'green' nuclear and gas
  4. EU readies for 'complete Russian gas cut-off', von der Leyen says
  5. Rising prices expose lack of coherent EU response
  6. Keeping gas as 'green' in taxonomy vote only helps Russia
  7. 'War on Women' needs forceful response, not glib statements
  8. Greece defends disputed media and migration track record

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us