Authoritarian Censorship

Authoritarian regimes censor collective action

A set of studies analyzed government censorship in China. The researchers (1) downloaded social media posts before they could be censored, (2) made posts with different attributes and observed which were censored, and (3) set up their own social media site in China, complete with the same censorship software used by existing social media sites. They find that criticisms of the state, its leaders, and their policies are routinely published, whereas posts with collective action potential are much more likely to be censored – regardless of whether they are for or against the state. Criticism on the web, rather than being censored, is used by CCP leaders to determine which officials are not mollifying the people and need to be replaced. This research shows how an authoritarian regime has used social media to crowdsource government performance information while still stifling action that could threaten the regime.

Private sector firms censor themselves in authoritarian regimes

A recent study analyzed media censorship in Russia.  Rather than focus on government censorship efforts, it tested whether private media firms censor ad content.  The researchers posed as a fictitious Russian NGO requesting to place an online advertisement on about 1,000 Russian private media firms’ websites. Advertisements containing either calls for political collective action or anti-regime messages were heavily censored by Russian private media firms; and even advertisements containing non-political calls for collective action were censored. This research shows how authoritarian regimes avoid the costs of state censorship by using the threat of repression to encourage citizens to censor themselves and others.

Do you have a study we should share for a future Facty Friday? Send an email to drg.el@usaid.gov!