Chinese citizens feel their government is doing a fine job with surveillance
- Reference: 1697176931
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/10/13/chinese_citizens_feel_their_government/
- Source link:
The project mainly investigated how state surveillance is conducted by Beijing and how the population of the People's Republic of China (PRC) perceives it. For the investigation, the researchers conducted media analysis, and an online survey of over 4,000 Chinese citizens.
Most respondents ranked their trust in central government positively – at an average of 7.3 on a scale out of 10. Businesses received a 6.7 rating. When it came to surveillance – by video, audio or internet activity – roughly half said they were comfortable.
[1]
As part of the project, ASPI provided a tool that could be considered quite subversive in China: an interactive website that provided access to uncensored non-Beijing information about deployed surveillance technologies and the agencies that run them. It consisted of five educational modules with quizzes at the end.
[2]
[3]
The website content was shaped by the survey results and reached over 55,000 users over the course of four months. It covered facial recognition, Wi-Fi probes, DNA surveillance, database management and surveillance cameras.
ASPI declined to describe how the platform was distributed "to ensure both the security of participants and ongoing research opportunities."
[4]China – which surveils everyone everywhere – floats facial recognition rules
[5]Yes, Singapore immigration plans to scan your face instead of your passport
[6]NYC rights groups say no to grocery store spycams and snooping landlords
[7]Hikvision, Nvidia named in contract for 'Uyghur detection'
Respondents provided information on the number of surveillance cameras in China – using a figure estimated after analysing over 1700 procurement notices – 39 percent said the government had the right number of cams, while 38.4 percent thought there should be more. Only 22.6 percent said there should be fewer.
ASPI found that although camera surveillance was generally accepted, other types of surveillance – like DNA collection and facial recognition technology – created more friction.
[8]
When it comes to automatic recording of age, gender or ethnicity using facial recognition software, 61.3 percent said it shouldn't be allowed – meaning fundamentally they disagree with the [9]alleged government tracking and monitoring of the nation's Uyghur people. Even at their own places of residence as security measures, over half wanted facial recognition to be opt-in.
The data exposed some contradictions. According to ASPI, some of those with the highest level of trust in Beijing and comfort with surveillance hold values that contradict its narratives. For example, they may express a strong preference for personal privacy over public order. Furthermore, those who distrust government, may value public order over personal privacy.
But largely, the respondents agreed with China's policies.
[10]
"Public opinion often aligns with state messaging that ties surveillance technologies to personal safety and security," [11]explained ASPI.
The think tank summarized Beijing's messaging into four main narratives: that surveillance fights crime, it's a commonplace activity among countries, China's surveillance systems outrank other nations' equipment, and there is a distinction between surveillance from the government and from private companies. And citizens should be wary of the latter.
ASPI explained that the Chinese domestic information space is dominated by state media and government messaging, making it difficult to encounter alternative narratives. The researchers also noted that a glorification of China's surveillance capabilities allows it to promote self-censorship among its population – which doubtless serves to control their actions and speech.
Even though the project participants were allowed to operate anonymously, the outcomes could quite well be tainted by surveillance itself. The researchers conceded that participants might not respond completely truthfully out of fear or habit – and those with dissenting opinions from Beijing had particular incentive to keep thoughts to themselves.
China is known for being densely monitored by closed-circuit television cameras. A 2019 Comparitech analysis [12]calculated that Chinese cities have around 439 cameras per 1000 people.
A 96-country [13]study by Comparitech in 2021 revealed that China is also the most invasive user of biometric data in the world. ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_specialfeatures/cybersecuritymonth&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZSkVQbsWhAocv@fWJFLmXQAAAAE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_specialfeatures/cybersecuritymonth&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZSkVQbsWhAocv@fWJFLmXQAAAAE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_specialfeatures/cybersecuritymonth&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZSkVQbsWhAocv@fWJFLmXQAAAAE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/08/china_facial_recognition_rules/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2023/10/02/singapore_face_scan_passports/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/27/nyc_biometrics_ban/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/31/beijing_hikvision_nvidia_uyghur/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_specialfeatures/cybersecuritymonth&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZSkVQbsWhAocv@fWJFLmXQAAAAE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2020/12/12/in_brief_ai/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_specialfeatures/cybersecuritymonth&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZSkVQbsWhAocv@fWJFLmXQAAAAE&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://www.aspi.org.au/report/surveillance-privacy-and-agency-0
[12] https://www.comparitech.com/vpn-privacy/the-worlds-most-surveilled-cities/
[13] https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/biometric-data-study/
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Foreigners asking Chinese citizens these questions?
I'm not sure such a survey would reflect their true viewpoint.
and the research is probably going to be used to back up surveillance in other countries.
"Don't worry about it, you'll be happy (or else)"
Re: Foreigners asking Chinese citizens these questions?
What they should have done, is at the end of the survey, ask whether the person draws their curtains in the evening, or has net curtains up etc.
If they answer "yes", then you can probably discount the "we are ok with being monitored 24/7" response.
Re: Foreigners asking Chinese citizens these questions?
exactly this. This survey is worse than useless.
Re: Foreigners asking Chinese citizens these questions?
Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend.
How nice to see that the Stockholm syndrom is alive and kicking...
Complaint
I asked my Chinese friend what it's like to live in China.
He says he can't complain.
Re: Complaint
"Oh, you know, mustn't grumble."
Re: Complaint
Is that because he’ll be sent for re-education if he does??
Re: Complaint
thats_the_joke.jpg
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
two and a half customers per camera? How many are actually watched? I suppose the theory is that one doesn't do something because one *might* be watching...
Re: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
The two of you take turns watching the other one.
A remarkably uncritical article
I don't see how any of the reported opinions here could be trusted. When you live in a country where expressing any kind of opinion which is critical of the government on the Internet can end up with you being sent to a work camp for 20 years, the results of any survey have to be regarded with extreme suspicion.
The fact that this report was created by a five-eyes participant who would love to be able to implement such far ranging surveillance on it's own population should immediately raise a huge red flag regarding the impartiality and possible propaganda aspects of the report.
ASPI
From the Wikipedia article:
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) is a defence and strategic policy think tank based in Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, founded by the Australian government, and funded by the Australian Department of Defence along with overseas governments, and defence and technology companies.
Now why would a government funded think tank with ties to the defence industry and most of the players who stand to make lots of money from implementing Chinese style surveillance on the Australian population be regarded as impartial in any way?
This article is a surveillance propaganda exercise.
Re: ASPI
The survey was a surveillance propaganda exercise, the article was just a [1]useful idiot in the wider privacy debate.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
Re: ASPI
Don't call it propaganda. In the free world and Australia we call it Marketing.
There are a lot of cameras in the West too
The only difference is that we *know* the Governments here don’t have any money to pay to have someone watching them…
"I'm a nice guy, ain't I" - asks the person with a gun to your head
There could be three possible reasons for this.
1) They are genuinely happy.
2) They answered they are happy because they were worried about potential reprisals if they didn't.
3) They have been observed so closely for so long that they accept this kind of close monitoring as part of every day life, and even like it.
Foreigners asking Chinese citizens these questions?
How do they know it was really a foreign survey and not their own government looking for rabble rousers? Or that their own government's surveillance would report how they answered? I'm not sure such a survey would reflect their true viewpoint.