美联社：希拉里克林顿的互联网讲演谴责了中国和其他屏蔽网络的国家

撰文：ROBERT BURNS
发表时间：01/21/10 10:51 AM分
翻译：小米（xiaomi2020@gmail.com）

图：美国务卿希拉里·克林顿星期四发表关于“自由互联网”的演讲

华盛顿—国务卿希拉里克林顿星期四敦促中国调查让谷歌威胁退出这个国家的网络入侵—并挑战北京，促其公开调查结果。

她说，“那些拒绝自由接入信息世界和有违互联网用户的基本权利的国家，他们的风险是将自己和下个世纪的进步之间筑起高墙，”并补充说，“中国和美国在这一问题上有不同的意见，我们希望能够就这些分歧进行坦诚的持续的沟通。”

当谈到在过去几年里“存在着威胁着信息的自由流动的障碍时”，她举了中国和好几个国家的例子，她还点名批评了突尼斯、乌兹别克斯坦、埃及和越南。

克林顿是在一个题材广泛的关于互联网自由及其在美国的外交政策中的地位的演讲中作了上述评述。

“一些国家建立起了电子屏障，阻止其人民接触到世界性的网络，”她说。

“他们从搜索引擎返回的结果中抹去了字句、名字和短语，他们侵犯了公民的隐私，而这些人无非是说了些非暴力的政治性言论。”

国务院的官员说他们将很快就谷歌事宜对中国官员提交正式的投诉，星期四一位高级的中国政府官员说这不应该影响中美关系。

中国的官方媒体新华社报道，外交部副部长何亚非在北京说，“谷歌的事情不应该和两国的政府联系起来；否则就是过分解读。”

新华社的报道中没有提及内容审核，而是指谷歌“与政府政策不符。”

在她的演讲中明确提及谷歌事宜之前有一段话，克林顿从广义上讲了信息自由和国际化商业之间的联系。

她说，“那些审核新闻和信息的国家应该认识到这一点，从经济的角度上来说，不存在审核政治言论和经济言论的区别。如果你的国家的商业不能得到任何政治或经济信息，这最终肯定会减少增长。”

“做商业决策的时候，美国的公司正逐渐地把信息自由的问题也加以考虑，我希望它们的竞争者和外国政府也能紧密关注这一趋势。”

接着她就提了谷歌的例子。

“我们希望中国当局能够对让谷歌做出这一声明的网络入侵进行一番彻底的调查，”她说，在谷歌最近的这次声明中提到了它会重新考虑在中国的商业运营。“我们还希望这一调查及其结果是公开透明的。”

Internet Freedom

The prepared text of U.S. of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's speech, delivered at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.

JANUARY 21, 2010

Thank you, Alberto for that kind introduction. It's a pleasure to be here at the Newseum. This institution is a monument to some of our most precious freedoms, and I'm grateful for this opportunity to discuss how those freedoms apply to the challenges of the 21st century. I'm also delighted to see so many friends and former colleagues.

This is an important speech on an important subject. But before I begin, I want to speak briefly about Haiti. During the last nine days, the people of Haiti and the people of the world have joined together to deal with a tragedy of staggering proportions. Our hemisphere has seen its share of hardship, but there are few precedents for the situation we're facing in Port-au-Prince.  Communication networks have played a critical role in our response. In the hours after the quake, we worked with partners in the private sector to set up the text "HAITI" campaign so that mobile phone users in the United States could donate to relief efforts via text message.  That initiative has been a showcase for the generosity of the American people and it's raised over $25 million for recovery efforts. 

Information networks have also played a critical role on the ground.

The technology community has set up interactive maps to help identify needs and target resources. And on Monday, a seven-year-old girl and two women were pulled from the rubble of a collapsed supermarket by an American search and rescue team after they sent a text message calling for help. These examples are manifestations of a much broader phenomenon.

The spread of information networks is forming a new nervous system for our planet. When something happens in Haiti or Hunan the rest of us learn about it in real time - from real people. And we can respond in real time as well. Americans eager to help in the aftermath of a disaster and the girl trapped in that supermarket are connected in ways that we weren't a generation ago.  That same principle applies to almost all of humanity. As we sit here today, any of you - or any of our children - can take out tools we carry with us every day and transmit this discussion to billions across the world.

In many respects, information has never been so free. There are more ways to spread more ideas to more people than at any moment in history. Even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.


During his visit to China in November, President Obama held a town hall meeting with an online component to highlight the importance of the internet. In response to a question that was sent in over the internet, he defended the right of people to freely access information, and said that the more freely information flows, the stronger societies become. He spoke about how access to information helps citizens to hold their governments accountable, generates new ideas, and encourages creativity. The United States' belief in that truth is what brings me here today.


But amid this unprecedented surge in connectivity, we must also recognize that these technologies are not an unmitigated blessing. These tools are also being exploited to undermine human progress and political rights. Just as steel can be used to build hospitals or machine guns and nuclear energy can power a city or destroy it, modern information networks and the technologies they support can be harnessed for good or ill. The same networks that help organize movements for freedom also enable al Qaeda to spew hatred and incite violence against the innocent. And technologies with the potential to open up access to government and promote transparency can also be hijacked by governments to crush dissent and deny human rights.
In the last year, we've seen a spike in threats to the free flow of information. China, Tunisia, and Uzbekistan have stepped up their censorship of the internet. In Vietnam, access to popular social networking sites has suddenly disappeared. And last Friday in Egypt, 30 bloggers and activists were detained. One member of this group, Bassem Samir - who is thankfully no longer in prison - is with us today. So while it is clear that the spread of these technologies is transforming our world, it is still unclear how that transformation will affect the human rights and welfare of much of the world's population.

SYNCING PROGRESS WITH PRINCIPLES

On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for freedom and progress. But the United States does. We stand for a single internet where all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the world's information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it.

This challenge may be new, but our responsibility to help ensure the free exchange of ideas goes back to the birth of our republic. The words of the First Amendment to the Constitution are carved in 50 tons of Tennessee marble on the front of this building. And every generation of Americans has worked to protect the values etched in that stone.

Franklin Roosevelt built on these ideas when he delivered his Four Freedoms speech in 1941. At the time, Americans faced a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence. But the vision of a world in which all people enjoyed freedom of expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear transcended the trouble of his day.

Years later, one of my heroes, Eleanor Roosevelt, worked to have these principles adopted as a cornerstone of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They have provided a lodestar to every succeeding generation - guiding us, galvanizing us, and enabling us to move forward in the face of uncertainty.

As technology hurtles forward, we must think back to that legacy. We need to synchronize our technological progress with our principles. In accepting the Nobel Prize, President Obama spoke about the need to build a world in which peace rests on the "inherent rights and dignity of every individual." And in my speech on human rights at Georgetown I talked about how we must find ways to make human rights a reality. Today, we find an urgent need to protect these freedoms on the digital frontiers of the 21st century.

There are many other networks in the world - some aid in the movement of people or resources; and some facilitate exchanges between individuals with the same work or nterests. But the internet is a network that magnifies the power and potential of all others. And that's why we believe it's critical that its users are assured certain basic freedoms.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

First among them is the freedom of expression. This freedom is no longer defined solely by whether citizens can go into the town square and criticize their government without fear of retribution. Blogs, email, social networks, and text messages have opened up new forums for exchanging ideas - and created new targets for censorship.

As I speak to you today, government censors are working furiously to erase my words from the records of history. But history itself has already condemned these tactics. Two months ago, I was in Germany to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The leaders gathered at that ceremony paid tribute to the courageous men and women on the far side of that barrier who made the case against oppression by circulating small pamphlets called samizdat. These leaflets questioned the claims and intentions of dictatorships in the Eastern Bloc, and many people paid dearly for distributing them. But their words helped pierce the concrete and concertina wire of the Iron Curtain.

The Berlin Wall symbolized a world divided, and it defined an entire era. Today, remnants of that wall sit inside this museum - where they belong. And the new iconic infrastructure of our age is the internet.

Instead of division, it stands for connection. But even as networks spread to nations around the globe, virtual walls are cropping up in place of visible walls.

Some countries have erected electronic barriers that prevent their people from accessing portions of the world's networks. They have expunged words, names and phrases from search engine results. They have violated the privacy of citizens who engage in non-violent political speech. These actions contravene the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which tells us that all people have the right "to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." With the spread of these restrictive practices, a new information curtain is descending across much of the world. Beyond this partition, viral videos and blog posts are becoming the samizdat of our day.

As in the dictatorships of the past, governments are targeting independent thinkers who use these tools. In the demonstrations that followed Iran's presidential elections, grainy cell phone footage of a young woman's bloody murder provided a digital indictment of the government's brutality. We've seen reports that when Iranians living overseas posted online criticism of their nation's leaders, their family members in Iran were singled out for retribution. And despite an intense campaign of government intimidation, brave citizen journalists in Iran continue using technology to show the world and their fellow citizens what is happening in their country. In speaking out on behalf of their own human rights the Iranian people have inspired the world.

And their courage is redefining how technology is used to spread truth and expose injustice.

All societies recognize that free expression has its limits. We do not tolerate those who incite others to violence, such as the agents of al Qaeda who are - at this moment - using the internet to promote the mass murder of innocent people. And hate speech that targets individuals on the basis of their ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation is reprehensible. It is an unfortunate fact that these issues are both growing challenges that the international community must confront together. We must also grapple with the issue of anonymous speech. Those who use the internet to recruit terrorists or distribute stolen intellectual property cannot divorce their online actions from their real world identities. But these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes.

FREEDOM OF WORSHIP

The freedom of expression may be the most obvious freedom to face challenges with the spread of new technologies, but it is not alone. The freedom of worship usually involves the rights of individuals to commune - or not commune - with their Creator. And that's one channel of communication that does not rely on technology. But the freedom of worship also speaks to the universal right to come together with those who share your values and vision for humanity. In our history, those gatherings often took place in churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques. Today, they may also take place on line.

The internet can help bridge divides between people of different faiths.

As the president said in Cairo, "freedom of religion is central to the ability of people to live together." And as we look for ways to expand dialogue, the internet holds out tremendous promise. We have already begun connecting students in the United States with young people in Muslim communities around the world to discuss global challenges. And we will continue using this tool to foster discussion between individuals in different religious communities.

Some nations, however, have co-opted the internet as a tool to target and silence people of faith. Last year in Saudi Arabia, a man spent months in prison for blogging about Christianity. And a Harvard study found that the Saudi government blocked many web pages about Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam. Countries including Vietnam and China employed similar tactics to restrict access to religious information.

Just as these technologies must not be used to punish peaceful political speech, they must not be used to persecute or silence religious minorities. Prayers will always travel on higher networks. But connection technologies like the internet and social networking sites should enhance individuals' ability to worship as they see fit, come together with people of their own faith, and learn more about the beliefs of others. We must work to advance the freedom of worship online just as we do in other areas of life.

FREEDOM FROM WANT

There are, of course, hundreds of millions of people living without the benefits of these technologies. In our world, talent is distributed universally, but opportunity is not. And we know from long experience that promoting social and economic development in countries where people lack access to knowledge, markets, capital, and opportunity can be frustrating, and sometimes futile work. In this context, the internet can serve as a great equalizer. By providing people with access to knowledge and potential markets, networks can create opportunity where none exists.

Over the last year, I've seen this first hand. In Kenya, where farmers have seen their income grow by as much as 30% since they started using mobile banking technology. In Bangladesh, where more than 300,000 people have signed up to learn English on their mobile phones. And in sub-Saharan Africa, where women entrepreneurs use the internet to get access to microcredit loans and connect to global markets. These examples of progress can be replicated in the lives of the billion people at the bottom of the world's economic ladder.  In many cases,

the internet, mobile phones, and other connection technologies can do for economic growth what the green revolution did for agriculture. You can now generate significant yields from very modest inputs. One World Bank study found that in a typical developing country, a 10% increase in the penetration rate for mobile phones led to an almost one percent annual increase in per capita GDP. To put that in perspective, for India, that would translate into almost $10 billion a year. 

A connection to global information networks is like an on a ramp to modernity. In the early years of these technologies, many believed they would divide the world between haves and have-nots. That hasn't happened. There are 4 billion cell phones in use today - many are in the hands of market vendors, rickshaw drivers, and others who've historically lacked access to education and opportunity. Information networks have become a great leveler, and we should use them to help lift people out of poverty.

FREEDOM FROM FEAR

We have every reason to be hopeful about what people can accomplish when they leverage communication networks and connection technologies to achieve progress. But some will use global information networks for darker purposes. Violent extremists, criminal cartels, sexual predators, and authoritarian governments all seek to exploit global networks. Just as terrorists have taken advantage of the openness of our society to carry out their plots, violent extremists use the internet to radicalize and intimidate. As we work to advance these freedoms, we must also work against those who use communication networks as tools of disruption and fear.

Governments and citizens must have confidence that the networks at the core of their national security and economic prosperity are safe and resilient. This is about more than petty hackers who deface websites.

Our ability to bank online, use electronic commerce, and safeguard billions of dollars in intellectual property are all at stake if we cannot rely on the security of information networks.

Disruptions in these systems demand a coordinated response by governments, the private sector, and the international community. We need more tools to help law enforcement agencies cooperate across jurisdictions when criminal hackers and organized crime syndicates attack networks for financial gain. The same is true when social ills such as child pornography and the exploitation of trafficked women and girls migrate online. We applaud efforts such as the Council on Europe's Convention on Cybercrime that facilitate international cooperation in prosecuting such offenses.

We have taken steps as a government, and as a Department, to find diplomatic solutions to strengthen global cyber security. Over a half-dozen different Bureaus have joined together to work on this issue, and two years ago we created an office to coordinate foreign policy in cyberspace. We have worked to address this challenge at the UN and other multilateral forums and put cyber-security on the world's agenda. And President Obama has appointed a new national cyberspace policy coordinator who will help us work even more closely to ensure that our networks stay free, secure, and reliable.

States, terrorists, and those who would act as their proxies must know that the United States will protect our networks. Those who disrupt the free flow of information in our society, or any other, pose a threat to our economy, our government and our civil society. Countries or individuals that engage in cyber attacks should face consequences and international condemnation. In an interconnected world, an attack on one nation's networks can be an attack on all. By reinforcing that message, we can create norms of behavior among states and encourage respect for the global networked commons.

THE FREEDOM TO CONNECT

The final freedom I want to address today flows from the four I've already mentioned: the freedom to connect - the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet, to websites, or to each other. The freedom to connect is like the freedom of assembly in cyber space. It allows individuals to get online, come together, and hopefully cooperate in the name of progress. Once you're on the internet, you don't need to be a tycoon or a rock star to have a huge impact on society.

The largest public response to the terrorist attacks in Mumbai was launched by a 13-year-old boy. He used social networks to organize blood drives and a massive interfaith book of condolence. In Colombia, an unemployed engineer brought together more than 12 million people in 190 cities around the world to demonstrate against the FARC terrorist movement. The protests were the largest anti-terrorist demonstrations in history. In the weeks that followed, the FARC saw more demobilizations and desertions than it had during a decade of military action. And in Mexico, a single email from a private citizen who was fed up with drug-related violence snowballed into huge demonstrations in all of the country's 32 states. In Mexico City alone, 150,000 people took to the streets in protest. The internet can help humanity push back against those who promote violence and extremism.

In Iran, Moldova, and many other countries, online organizing has been a critical tool for advancing democracy, and enabling citizens to protest suspicious election results. Even in established democracies like the United States, we've seen the power of these tools to change history. Some of you may still remember the 2008 presidential election...

The freedom to connect to these technologies can help transform societies, but it is also critically important to individuals. I recently heard the story of a doctor who had been trying desperately to diagnose his daughter's rare medical condition. After consulting with two dozen specialists, he still didn't have an answer. He finally identified the condition - and a cure - by using an internet search engine. That's one of the reasons why unfettered access to search engine technology is so important.

APPLYING PRINCIPLES TO POLICY

The principles I've outlined today will guide our approach to the issue of internet freedom and the use of these technologies. And I want to speak about how we apply them in practice. The United States is committed to devoting the diplomatic, economic and technological resources necessary to advance these freedoms. We are a nation made up of immigrants from every country and interests that span the globe. Our foreign policy is premised on the idea that no country stands to benefit more when cooperation among peoples and states increases. And no country shoulders a heavier burden when conflict drives nations apart.

We are well placed to seize the opportunities that come with interconnectivity. And as the birthplace for so many of these technologies, we have a responsibility to see them used for good. To do that, we need to develop our capacity for 21st century statecraft.

Realigning our policies and our priorities won't be easy. But adjusting to new technology rarely is. When the telegraph was introduced, it was a source of great anxiety for many in the diplomatic community, where the prospect of receiving daily instructions from Washington was not entirely welcome. But just as our diplomats eventually mastered the telegraph, I have supreme confidence that the world can harness the potential of these new tools as well.

I'm proud that the State Department is already working in more than 40 countries to help individuals silenced by oppressive governments. We are making this issue a priority in at the United Nations as well, and included internet freedom as a component in the first resolution we introduced after returning to the UN Human Rights Council.

We are also supporting the development of new tools that enable citizens to exercise their right of free expression by circumventing politically motivated censorship. We are working globally to make sure that those tools get to the people who need them, in local languages, and with the training they need to access the internet safely. The United States has been assisting in these efforts for some time. Both the American people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is proud to help promote internet freedom.

We need to put these tools in the hands of people around the world who will use them to advance democracy and human rights, fight climate change and epidemics, build global support for President Obama's goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and encourage sustainable economic development. That's why today I'm announcing that over the next year, we will work with partners in industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations to establish a standing effort that will harness the power of connection technologies and apply them to our diplomatic goals. By relying on mobile phones, mapping applications, and other new tools, we can empower citizens and leverage our traditional diplomacy. We can also address deficiencies in the current market for innovation.

Let me give you one example: let's say I want to create a mobile phone application that would allow people to rate government ministries on their responsiveness, efficiency, and level of corruption. The hardware required to make this idea work is already in the hands of billions of potential users. And the software involved would be relatively inexpensive to develop and deploy. If people took advantage of this tool, it would help us target foreign assistance spending, improve lives, and encourage foreign investment in countries with responsible governments - all good things. However, right now, mobile application developers have no financial incentive to pursue that project on their own and the State Department lacks a mechanism to make it happen. This initiative should help resolve that problem, and provide long-term dividends from modest investments in innovation. We're going to work with experts to find the best structure for this venture, and we'll need the talent and resources of technology companies and non-profit organizations in order to get the best results. So for those of you in this room, consider yourselves invited.

In the meantime, there are companies, individuals, and institutions working on ideas and applications that could advance our diplomatic and development objectives. And the State Department will be launching an innovation competition to give this work an immediate boost. We'll be asking Americans to send us their best ideas for applications and technologies that help to break down language barriers, overcome illiteracy, and connect people to the services and information they need. Microsoft, for example, has already developed a prototype for a digital doctor that could help provide medical care in isolated rural communities. We want to see more ideas like that. And we'll work with the winners of the competition and provide grant to help build their ideas to scale.

PRIVATE SECTOR AND FOREIGN GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY

As we work together with the private sector and foreign governments to deploy the tools of 21st century statecraft, we need to remember our shared responsibility to safeguard the freedoms I've talked about today.

We feel strongly that principles like information freedom aren't just good policy, they're good business for all involved. To use market terminology, a publicly-listed company in Tunisia or Vietnam that operates in an environment of censorship will always trade at a discount relative to an identical firm in a free society. If corporate decision makers don't have access to global sources of news and information, investors will have less confidence in their decisions. Countries that censor news and information must recognize that, from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech. If businesses in your nation are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably reduce growth.

Increasingly, U.S. companies are making the issue of information freedom a greater consideration in their business decisions. I hope that their competitors and foreign governments will pay close attention to this trend.

The most recent example of Google's review of its business operations in China has attracted a great deal of interest. We look to Chinese authorities to conduct a thorough investigation of the cyber intrusions that led Google to make this announcement. We also look for that investigation and its results to be transparent. The internet has already been a source of tremendous progress in China, and it's great that so many people there are now online. But countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of internet users risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century. The United States and China have different views on this issue. And we intend to address those differences candidly and consistently.

Ultimately, this issue isn't just about information freedom; it's about what kind of world we're going to inhabit. It's about whether we live on a planet with one internet, one global community, and a common body of knowledge that unites and benefits us all. Or a fragmented planet in which access to information and opportunity is dependent on where you live and the whims of censors.

Information freedom supports the peace and security that provide a foundation for global progress. Historically, asymmetrical access to information is one of the leading causes of interstate conflict. When we face serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it's critical that people on both sides of the problem have access to the same set of facts and opinions.

As it stands, Americans can consider information presented by foreign governments - we do not block their attempts to communicate with people in the United States. But citizens in societies that practice censorship lack exposure to outside views. In North Korea, for example, the government has tried to completely isolate its citizens from outside opinions. This lop-sided access to information increases both the likelihood of conflict and the probability that small disagreements will escalate. I hope responsible governments with an interest in global stability will work to address such imbalances.

For companies, this issue is about more than claiming the moral high ground; it comes down to the trust between firms and their customers. Consumers everywhere want to have confidence that the internet companies they rely on will provide comprehensive search results and act as responsible stewards of their information. Firms that earn that confidence will prosper in a global marketplace. Those who lose it will also lose customers. I hope that refusal to support politically-motivated censorship will become a trademark characteristic of American technology companies. It should be part of our national brand. I'm confident that consumers worldwide will reward firms that respect these principles.

We are reinvigorating the Global Internet Freedom Task Force as a forum for addressing threats to internet freedom around the world, and urging U.S. media companies to take a proactive role in challenging foreign governments' demands for censorship and surveillance. The private sector has a shared responsibility to help safeguard free expression. And when their business dealings threaten to undermine this freedom, they need to consider what's right, not simply the prospect of quick profits.

We're also encouraged by the work that's being done through the Global Network Initiative - a voluntary effort by technology companies who are working with non-governmental organization, academic experts, and social investment funds to respond to government requests for censorship. The Initiative goes beyond mere statements of principle and establishes mechanisms to promote real accountability and transparency. As part of our commitment to support responsible private sector engagement on information freedom, the State Department will be convening a high-level meeting next month co-chaired by Under Secretaries Robert Hormats and Maria Otero to bring together firms that provide network services for talks on internet freedom. We hope to work together to address this challenge.

CONCLUSION

Pursuing the freedoms I've talked about today is the right thing to do.

But it's also the smart thing to do. By advancing this agenda, we align our principles, our economic goals, and our strategic priorities. We need to create a world in which access to networks and information brings people closer together, and expands our definition of community.

Given the magnitude of the challenges we're facing, we need people around the world to pool their knowledge and creativity to help rebuild the global economy, protect our environment, defeat violent extremism, and build a future in which every human being can realize their God-given potential.

Let me close by asking you to remember the little girl who was pulled from the rubble on Monday in Port-au-Prince. She is alive, was reunited with her family, and will have the opportunity to help rebuild her nation because these networks took a voice that was buried and spread it to the world. No nation, group, or individual should stay buried in the rubble of oppression. We cannot stand by while people are separated from our human family by walls of censorship. And we cannot be silent about these issues simply because we cannot hear their cries. Let us recommit ourselves to this cause. Let us make these technologies a force for real progress the world over. And let us go forward together to champion these freedoms.

《韩寒：中国官员必修课之第一讲 兰州悲剧》

正如一位网友所说，中国现阶段的主要矛盾是人民群众日益增长的智商和官员们不断下降的道德之间的矛盾，但是，在道德下降之余，他们的判断力，决策力，眼 光，公关能力，口语表达，个人魅力，危机处理能力也在不断的下降，经过我多年的观察，我发现其实很多事，本来没事，但经过一些官员出面处理以后，小事化 大，大事化炸,最后成为焦点新闻。在这里，我将讲述一些在我国如何正确处理一些危机和政府事物的技巧和常识，以帮助各个领导更快的升官发财。今天的是第一 讲。我们从一条新闻说起:

据甘肃省新闻网报道,甘肃将要组建一支650人的网络评论员队伍，正确的引导舆论。

这条新闻起先是由甘肃省自己的内部新闻网发布，甘肃省本想将此当做重大的政绩工程来宣传，本意是想向上级政府邀功请赏。甘肃的政府各部门特地在兰州开会，省宣传部部长特地讲话，最后作为新闻对外发布。

在互联网上，我们经常看到有人说，兰州悲剧了。当然，甘肃省的领导们肯定不知道这句话什么意思。如今我们真正看到兰州悲剧了。在这个新闻发布以后，被各大 网站转载，但是今天打开这些网站，发现所有的新闻链接都已经失效，没有一条能够打开。是谁能和谐省宣传部呢，当然是宣传总部。甘肃省的领导们对圣旨的领悟 能力极差。他们犯下了重大的错误。马屁拍在老虎屁股上。

网络评论员也叫五毛党，乃是地下党。你把成立一支地下党的消息以及名单直接公布了，乃是大忌。这个消息应该是一个密件，由专人送达上级部门，那么上级部门 必将重重有赏。这个新闻直接透露了政府一直不愿意承认的一个事实，那就是五毛党的存在。如果一个人想要获得赞美和拥护必须要靠花钱收买别人的嘴才可以，那 说明这个人肯定够丑的。这条新闻直接摧毁了上级部门努力营造的假象。兰州宣传部门的领导看来一辈子升官无望。

另外，这条新闻的灾难性在于，他完全暴露了五毛党的结构组成以及基本人数，并且容易被一些网友所利用,新闻里说，今年甘肃省要加快网监、网评队伍建设，形 成以50名网络评论“高手”为核心层、100名网络评论“好手”为紧密层、500名网络评论“写手”为外围层的网评队伍体系。

在甘肃省这么一个小省里，尚且需要新增添650的专业网络评论员，那么好事者很容易推算出，在全国范围内，专业网络评论员的数量应该不下十万人。假设每个 网络评论员的年工资平均为五万元人民币，那么政府每年要为自己夸奖自己支付50亿人民币，也就是25000个希望小学，或者十分之一个三峡大坝，或者杨浦 大桥加南浦大桥加东方明珠打包带走还是双份，或者30架波音737，或者一个中型航空母舰，或者90台在汶川地震中急缺的只向俄罗斯租借到一台的空中巨无 霸米26H直升机。这个数据如果不小心让人知道了，非常容易引起人民群众和政府之间的矛盾，往自己脸上贴金乃是人之常情，贴金就要花钱，但往自己脸上贴航 母的确说明这脸有点太大了。好在还没有好事者这样推算过，至今也没有人提出过质疑，算是万幸。

通过这场兰州悲剧，各位领导们也知道了领会上级精神和误会上级精神之间其实只有一念之差，各省市宣传部领导们应该引以为戒。

Google的中国「蓝海战略」

上週二Google宣佈其「新中國政策」(註一)，在互聯網世界激起陣陣漣漪：過去一段不短的時間，各國政府早已慣於將「進入中國市場」看成解決它們各自經濟困境的良方，但Google卻反其道而行，宣佈可能退出中國市場。上周二Google宣布其「新中国政策」(注一)，在互联网世界激起阵阵涟漪：过去一段不短的时间，各国政府早已惯于将「进入中国市场」看成解决它们各自经济困境的良方，但Google却反其道而行，宣布可能退出中国市场。 Google這項舉動，不應割裂地演繹為一間公司的政策，而應更宏觀地看成是為各種企業甚至國家的新中國政策。 Google这项举动，不应割裂地演绎为一间公司的政策，而应更宏观地看成是为各种企业甚至国家的新中国政策。

從Google的聲明看來，使其「威脅」退出中國市場的導火線，是它所指「來自中國」的網上攻擊，至於「幕後黑手」，該公司點到即止沒有說是中國政府，雖然有些人認為它已強烈地暗示了這個想法；到底，誰從這些攻擊獲得最大的利益？从Google的声明看来，使其「威胁」退出中国市场的导火线，是它所指「来自中国」的网上攻击，至于「幕后黑手」，该公司点到即止没有说是中国政府，虽然有些人认为它已强烈地暗示了这个想法；到底，谁从这些攻击获得最大的利益？ 如果發動攻擊的是一個人，我們通常以「黑客」稱之，但如果發動攻擊的是一個國家，我們可以怎樣稱呼它呢？如果发动攻击的是一个人，我们通常以「黑客」称之，但如果发动攻击的是一个国家，我们可以怎样称呼它呢？ Google 視這些攻擊為駱駝背上的最得一根稻草，陰謀者則可演繹為Google以此為藉口，到底這事誰「是」誰「非」，套一句陳腔濫調，則是「觀點與角度」的問題。 Google视这些攻击为骆驼背上的最得一根稻草，阴谋者则可演绎为Google以此为借口，到底这事谁「是」谁「非」，套一句陈腔滥调，则是「观点与角度」的问题。 但Google今次將事情連繫到一個更長期的問題：中國政府要求Google.cn的搜尋器按其審查規定過濾結果。但Google今次将事情连系到一个更长期的问题：中国政府要求Google.cn的搜寻器按其审查规定过滤结果。

Google.cn自二零零六年運作起，一直抗拒所謂「依法」審查內容，該公司指，進入中國市場是希望這種情況日後會改善，但事與願違：中國政府不單恒常地針對該公司，自去年起更向它實施制裁，中國的防火長城甚至把Google的服務「定期」隔於牆外，令有些網民戲稱這是Google的生理週期。 Google.cn自二零零六年运作起，一直抗拒所谓「依法」审查内容，该公司指，进入中国市场是希望这种情况日后会改善，但事与愿违：中国政府不单恒常地针对该公司，自去年起更向它实施制裁，中国的防火长城甚至把Google的服务「定期」隔于墙外，令有些网民戏称这是Google的生理周期。 中國政府的行動顯示其要加強操控互聯網，正與Google的期望完全相反。中国政府的行动显示其要加强操控互联网，正与Google的期望完全相反。

Google的聲明指，這類來自中國的網絡攻擊包括使用釣魚(phishing)電郵，監視軟件和黑客程式竊取Google使用者的電郵密碼。 Google的声明指，这类来自中国的网络攻击包括使用钓鱼(phishing)电邮，监视软件和黑客程式窃取Google使用者的电邮密码。 以筆者所知，在香港，每逢選舉期，這些技倆也普遍地用於一眾泛民的候選人及其助選團身上。以笔者所知，在香港，每逢选举期，这些技俩也普遍地用于一众泛民的候选人及其助选团身上。 雖然這些攻擊一般來說很難捉到幕後黑手，但將這些攻擊說成是個別事件卻是令人難以置信的事情。虽然这些攻击一般来说很难捉到幕后黑手，但将这些攻击说成是个别事件却是令人难以置信的事情。

由於Google的聲明內關於這些網絡攻擊的資料有限，上週整個世界無數人士就作了各種各樣的猜測，首先，Google這樣做的目的，真是純粹因為與其宏遠的價值觀和目標，和公司的社會責任？由于Google的声明内关于这些网络攻击的资料有限，上周整个世界无数人士就作了各种各样的猜测，首先，Google这样做的目的，真是纯粹因为与其宏远的价值观和目标，和公司的社会责任？ 雖然很多人為Google的膽色擊掌歡呼，但其實更多內地網民不想它撤離。虽然很多人为Google的胆色击掌欢呼，但其实更多内地网民不想它撤离。 Google的做法得到雅虎(據說也是受攻擊的公司之一)支持，但雅虎的中國合作伙伴、雅虎擁有四成股權的阿里巴巴卻反指雅虎「草率」，自己就必定聽聽話話，遵守一切中國法律，其他公司如微軟和百度亦不認同Google撤退。 Google的做法得到雅虎(据说也是受攻击的公司之一)支持，但雅虎的中国合作伙伴、雅虎拥有四成股权的阿里巴巴却反指雅虎「草率」，自己就必定听听话话，遵守一切中国法律，其他公司如微软和百度亦不认同Google撤退。 各方指指點點，但Google這樣做實情是為了什麼？各方指指点点，但Google这样做实情是为了什么？

是撤退？是撤退？ 是進攻？是进攻？

中國的輿論率先指出，Google退出只不過因為其市場佔有率只有三成，輸給土產的搜尋器百度的三分二市場佔有率。中国的舆论率先指出，Google退出只不过因为其市场占有率只有三成，输给土产的搜寻器百度的三分二市场占有率。 筆者認為，這是典型的「大中國」思維，卻非事實。笔者认为，这是典型的「大中国」思维，却非事实。 中國是一個非常龐大的市場，三成的佔有率一點也不少。中国是一个非常庞大的市场，三成的占有率一点也不少。 微軟和雅虎的搜尋器市場佔有率遠低於三成，但這些公司沒有宣佈退出中國市場。微软和雅虎的搜寻器市场占有率远低于三成，但这些公司没有宣布退出中国市场。 Google是一間遠比百度龐大、市值高、現金多的公司，相對於它投入在各種各樣長遠，或是「唔等使」的計劃，在中國的一點點虧損，根本算不上什麼。 Google是一间远比百度庞大、市值高、现金多的公司，相对于它投入在各种各样长远，或是「唔等使」的计划，在中国的一点点亏损，根本算不上什么。 Google敗走中國，只不過是井底蛙之見識。 Google败走中国，只不过是井底蛙之见识。

筆者認為，Google考慮退出中國市場的主要「消極」可能性，是風險原因。笔者认为，Google考虑退出中国市场的主要「消极」可能性，是风险原因。 「不為也，非不能也」可以破壞公司聲譽，更可能令公司毁於一旦。 「不为也，非不能也」可以破坏公司声誉，更可能令公司毁于一旦。 Google從分析中，得知這些網絡攻擊針對一些異見人士，如果他們「不為」，知而不行，便要冒很大的風險，而這些風險，不只令公司變得聲名狼藉。 Google从分析中，得知这些网络攻击针对一些异见人士，如果他们「不为」，知而不行，便要冒很大的风险，而这些风险，不只令公司变得声名狼藉。 大家或許還記得雅虎因為「遵守」中國法律，將山西記者師濤的資料交給國內執法者的個案：雅虎的主席楊致遠要親自出席美國國會的聽證會解釋事件，還要鞠躬道歉和賠償數以百萬美元給師濤的家人。大家或许还记得雅虎因为「遵守」中国法律，将山西记者师涛的资料交给国内执法者的个案：雅虎的主席杨致远要亲自出席美国国会的听证会解释事件，还要鞠躬道歉和赔偿数以百万美元给师涛的家人。 這種事情，對於一間龐大的國際企業而言，所受的損害並非丁點盈利可以彌補。这种事情，对于一间庞大的国际企业而言，所受的损害并非丁点盈利可以弥补。 萬一同樣事情發生在Google這間以〝do no evil〞為取向的公司，代價會遠比雅虎來得要高。万一同样事情发生在Google这间以〝do no evil〞为取向的公司，代价会远比雅虎来得要高。

另一個「事實」的可能性，是美國政府藉Google出手向中國施壓。另一个「事实」的可能性，是美国政府借Google出手向中国施压。 筆者認為這個可能性極高。笔者认为这个可能性极高。 傳聞美國國務卿希拉莉數週前曾與Google的行政總裁Eric Schmidt共晉晚餐，而筆者得知稍後她更將會在華盛頓與一些中國著名博客會面，討論網絡自由。传闻美国国务卿希拉莉数周前曾与Google的行政总裁Eric Schmidt共晋晚餐，而笔者得知稍后她更将会在华盛顿与一些中国著名博客会面，讨论网络自由。 其實，在奧巴馬早前訪華時已有傳聞他將在北京與博客會面，也許為了保持當時良好氣氛，事情卻拖至如今。其实，在奥巴马早前访华时已有传闻他将在北京与博客会面，也许为了保持当时良好气氛，事情却拖至如今。 加上美國政府也就Google所述及的網絡攻擊向中國政府作出外交照會，從各樣的蛛絲馬跡看來，整件事件顯然是有計劃的政治事件。加上美国政府也就Google所述及的网络攻击向中国政府作出外交照会，从各样的蛛丝马迹看来，整件事件显然是有计划的政治事件。

即使多數人形容Google在撤退，但筆者認為Google此舉的「積極」可能性，是其「藍海戰略」：開創一個沒有對手的新市場。即使多数人形容Google在撤退，但笔者认为Google此举的「积极」可能性，是其「蓝海战略」：开创一个没有对手的新市场。 在傳統的產品和服務而言，一間公司退出市場是真的撤離。在传统的产品和服务而言，一间公司退出市场是真的撤离。 舉例來說，如果汽車公司離開一個市場，就無法在那個市場出售汽車，一家航空公司離開了一個國家，就沒有人可在該國乘搭其航機。举例来说，如果汽车公司离开一个市场，就无法在那个市场出售汽车，一家航空公司离开了一个国家，就没有人可在该国乘搭其航机。 但互聯網服務卻不一樣，Twitter和Facebook只在美國設伺服器，但卻在全球提供服務，包括不歡迎他們的中國或伊朗，影響著這些國家。但互联网服务却不一样，Twitter和Facebook只在美国设伺服器，但却在全球提供服务，包括不欢迎他们的中国或伊朗，影响着这些国家。 從這角度看，「撤離」這種說法便會不攻自破。从这角度看，「撤离」这种说法便会不攻自破。

所謂Google「進入」和「撤離」中國的定義，只不過是否在那裡設伺服器、租寫字樓和請人而已，但在互聯網世代這些都未必須要。所谓Google「进入」和「撤离」中国的定义，只不过是否在那里设伺服器、租写字楼和请人而已，但在互联网世代这些都未必须要。 Google與其忍受中國政府施加在本土搜尋服務帶來的麻煩，倒不如關掉那部份的服務，而將伺服器設在中國以外提供服務，例如Gmail等。 Google与其忍受中国政府施加在本土搜寻服务带来的麻烦，倒不如关掉那部份的服务，而将伺服器设在中国以外提供服务，例如Gmail等。 老實說，兩者的分別，在今天來說分別並不大。老实说，两者的分别，在今天来说分别并不大。 中國是全球互聯網用戶最多的國家，與其在國內受氣，Google甚至美國政府何不推出翻牆軟件，協助更多中國用戶翻牆，呼吸自由空氣，成為全球自由互聯網用戶的生力軍？中国是全球互联网用户最多的国家，与其在国内受气，Google甚至美国政府何不推出翻墙软件，协助更多中国用户翻墙，呼吸自由空气，成为全球自由互联网用户的生力军？ 現在這些軟件多是由資源有限的非政府組織如Tor計劃或「自由門」等提供，在研發、支援上限制頗多。现在这些软件多是由资源有限的非政府组织如Tor计划或「自由门」等提供，在研发、支援上限制颇多。 如果Google委派一、二百個研究員開發一套更強的翻牆軟件和持續更新，情況必定改觀。如果Google委派一、二百个研究员开发一套更强的翻墙软件和持续更新，情况必定改观。

如果Google真的這樣做，便能創造一個新的市場：真的進入它被拒的國家，以自由資訊吸引眾多今天不能方便地使用其服務的數億中國網民，正正是百度得到政策協助而「坐享其成」的市場。如果Google真的这样做，便能创造一个新的市场：真的进入它被拒的国家，以自由资讯吸引众多今天不能方便地使用其服务的数亿中国网民，正正是百度得到政策协助而「坐享其成」的市场。 相比向這些政府叩頭，仍只能在大幅受限制的情況運作，獲取細小的市場佔有率，確是「除笨有精」！相比向这些政府叩头，仍只能在大幅受限制的情况运作，获取细小的市场占有率，确是「除笨有精」！ Google作出「威脅」前，顯然知道中國政府不易讓步，故必已有兩手準備。 Google作出「威胁」前，显然知道中国政府不易让步，故必已有两手准备。 但更精彩的戲碼還在後頭：其它公司如微軟和雅虎會如何回應呢？但更精彩的戏码还在后头：其它公司如微软和雅虎会如何回应呢？ 他們會束手讓Google獨自在藍海揚帆，而且還能站在道德高地，而自己卻繼續甘於屈服於大中國的淫威下嗎？他们会束手让Google独自在蓝海扬帆，而且还能站在道德高地，而自己却继续甘于屈服于大中国的淫威下吗？

網絡戰爭令商業和政治之間的界線變得模糊，規矩也不再一樣，Google更再一次迫使我們「在盒子外思考」，不依章法出牌。网络战争令商业和政治之间的界线变得模糊，规矩也不再一样，Google更再一次迫使我们「在盒子外思考」，不依章法出牌。 未未，因此而變得不一樣，也希望可以更自由。未未，因此而变得不一样，也希望可以更自由。

"I am just speculating"

[This blog post by China's top blogger was deleted by the blog hosting service Sina.com.]

I am just speculating.  
By Han Han.  January 17, 2010.

2010:     
    China begins an Internet clean-up campaign with the slogan: "If you stop beating someone for 3 days, he/she may get on the roof and remove tiles."  (Note: 三天不打，上房揭瓦 is a Chinese saying.  When applied to children, the notion is that you beat your child in order to make him/her behave (as in respecting authority, maintaining discipline and being a good citizen) and, conversely, if you don't beat your child, he/she will misbehave.  It also applies to wife-beating.)

2010:     
    The relevant department expands the list of banned terms.  The Chinese word for "file" (which has the same sound as Party) and the English letter "D" disappear in mainland China.  Dangdang was changed to Angang, while Douban became Ouban.

2010 June:

    The government inaugurates the "Protect the Children" campaign.  Children's Day is elevated to the same status as National Day.  It is also announced that all information that is unfavorable to the healthy development of children and adolescents will be strictly prohibited.  At the same time, the Shanghai World Expo introduces the slogan "World Expo, World Expo, catch ten thousand adulterous couples in bed" in order to conduct online and offline anti-pornography (anti-"yellow") campaigns simultaneously.  The government makes it clear that anything and everything connected to pornography shall be censored because they stand for obscenity and feudalism.  Elementary school students are mobilized to march in the streets to demonstrate against anything pornographic ("yellow").

2010 July: 
    The Elementary School Students Patriotic Committee finds out that the five yellow-colored five-pointed stars on the national flag are inconsistent with contemporary progressive ideas.  The relevant department decides to change the five-pointed stars from yellow to red.


2010 August: 
    The government discovers that the red five-pointed stars are the same color as the background, so that it is hard to find them.  Representatives of elementary school students propose the five-pointed stars be changed into green color, to represent green scarves and Green Dam.

2010: 
    Based upon the recommendations of the Elementary School Students Loving Care Committee and representatives of elementary school students, the government tightens the censorship standards on photographs, with guiding principles such as "erect nipples equal bare nipples."

2010: All Internet forum masters are formally given public service worker status.

2010: 
    The government introduces a brand new Internet Great Wall.  This Great Wall system is based upon the collective wisdom of innumerable of experts from all walks of life in China.  They work together at a military base.  The satellite photos of their work site was misinterpreted by people inside and outside of China as those of an aircraft carrier under construction.

2011 January: 
    The government allocates 100 billion yuan to hire Internet commentators from its next round of economic stimulation package.  The pay for Internet commentators rises from 50 cents per post to 1 yuan per post.  The target for 2011 is to have 100 billion positive posts.  The Fifty-cent Gang members at the various forums weep in gratitude because their long, arduous work over the years has finally allowed them to join the big team.  From there on, the ratio of Internet commentators versus normal people is about 50:50 at the large Internet forums.

2011:  
    Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter announce that they are re-entering China and opening up registration.  At the same time, the aforementioned websites announce from the United States that they are not developing any businesses in China.  But their announcements are instantly censored, so that nobody in China knows.

2011:
     All those who register at the aforementioned websites are systematically tracked down by the Great Wall system.  Their computers are re-installed.  Afterwards, if the users want to visit a general-purpose website, they can only reach People.com.cn and Xinhua; if they want to visit a forum, they can only go to Strong Nation Forum and Tiexue Forum; if they want to visit a video site, they can only go to CCTV 1.  Once the system is re-installed this way, there is no way to undo the settings.

2011: 
    The price of computers goes up by 100%.  Computer scalpers proliferate.  When users buy new computers, they find that they can only access the aforementioned websites.


2011: 
    Housing prices go up by 100%.  At the real estate transaction websites, the housing unit must be identified as either "full Internet access" or "restricted Internet access."

2011: 
    Southern Metropolis Daily and Southern Weekend are renamed Male Metropolis Daily and Male Weekend, and reclassified as marital agency newspapers.  The ratio of Internet commentators and ordinary people there reaches 9 to 1.


2011: A certain city leader comes under human flesh search.

2011: 
    In the second round of Internet clean-up, all search engines are closed.  The major portals and the newspapers publish articles with titles such as "Searching made us lazy people," "Internet searching seriously detrimental to ability of elementary school students to use their brains" and so on.  The leaders say, "we never use Internet searching.  The situation today says clearly that Internet search has a hundred bad points and nothing good whatsoever."

2011: Baidu is acquired by Pepsi Cola and becomes an official beverage website.

2012: 
    Sina.com reports that a certain village leader received 500 yuan in bribes.  This news story is rated as the top news story in China for the year 2012 with more than 500 million page views.  Many people read it repeatedly.  Even after censorship, there are more than 1 million comments.  Many people think that this was a new high point in watchdog journalism.  But according to the Internet polling, 90% of netizens still think that the news story should not have been published because it destroys social stability and may lead to ethnic splits.


2012:  Elementary school students denounce Sina.com for having an erect nipple.  Sina.com is shut down for re-organization.


2012:
     All forums stop accepting registrations or comments.  The Chinese Writers Association and the Chinese Literary Union take over the Internet to become Internet content providers.  The Internet goes back from Web 3.0 to Web 0.3.  The Internet is read-only with no comments being allowed.


2013: 
    The Elementary School Students Healthy Development Committee denounces Sina.com for having another erect nipple.


2014: Sina.com ("new wave" in Chinese) is acquired by Mountain Dew ("powerful wave" in Chinese) and becomes an official beverage website.


2015: 
    The government cuts off the Internet altogether.  A universal online computer is introduced.  This is the only way to go online.  This computer does not have a keyboard.  You are only given a mouse.  The slogan for the re-organization project is "You only have a mouse -- what can you do?"


2016: 
    The number of Internet users in China drops down to 1 million.  All websites are merged into a single website.  It does not matter what URL you enter because you will be directed to that website.  All updates are synchronized to the People's Daily.  In the same year, the Internet industry disappears in China.  This causes 5 million people in the Internet-related industry to lose their jobs either directly or indirectly.  The disappearance of e-mail means that the previously closed but now revived Postal Office hires 100,000 of them.  But 4.9 million people still have no jobs.  At the same time, almost 1 million Fifty-cent Gang members lose their jobs.  The Fifty-cent Gang members complain that they worked like dogs for their whole lives but now they don't even get pensions.


2016: The People's Daily writes: One industry was sacrificed in return for the stability of the nation, but it was worthwhile.


2016: 
    comments that the nation faced the risk of break-up if the Internet industry had continued.  The anti-China forces outside the nation and the splittists inside China were using the Internet to incite the masses.  Fortunately, the relevant departments took strong measure and prevented the situation from worsening.


2016: 
    Zhou Jiugeng is vindicated.  He gets out of jail and becomes the Minister of Information Industry.  Meanwhile Yu Qiuyu is appointed as the Minister of Culture.


2016: 
    The 1 million jobless Fifty-cent Gang members have no other skills and therefore could not find new jobs.  They could not feed themselves.  Several tens of thousands of Fifty-cent Gang members gather in Beijing.  During Children's Day, 150,000 Fifty-cent Gang members sit down in front of the government headquarters office to conduct a silent hunger strike.  They ask the government to arrange jobs for them, give them credit for their prior work, and grant them public service worker status retroactively.  The People's Daily writes that the government never had the job position of Internet commentator.  Therefore, all those Fifty-cent Gang members wrote on their own.  The Fifty-cent Gang members are unable to show any labor contract to prove that they had an worker-employer relationship with the government.


The spokesperson for the Fifty-cent Gang members say that they were underground agents who had done great work to secure national stability.


The government gives the Fifty-cent gang members three days to leave Beijing or face arrest.  People's Daily writes that if one praises the government, one should not apply pressure on the government.  Praising the government cannot be a condition for obtaining money.  Praises should be uncompensated.


2016: 
    The Fifty-cent Gang members continue their hunger strike.  The citizens say that they fully support the hunger strike by the Fifty-cent Gang members.  They also do not provide any food to hunger strikers and they block off all possible channels that can bring food in.  Thus, they make sure that the Fifty-cent Gang members will stick to their hunger strike.


The next day, Minister of Culture Yu Qiuyu visits the scene of the hunger strike and reads the "Tearful advice to the Fifty-cent Gang."  The Fifty-cent Gang members say that Minister Yu's speech is too profound for them to understand.


2016: 
    The Fifty-cent Gang is accused of the crimes of illegal assembly, illegal marching, illegal demonstration, attacking the government, violently resisting against the law, smearing the government, endangering public security, disrupting social order, spitting in public, etc.  The organizers are arrested.  But the government says that they will be lenient towards blind followers who don't know the truth and offer them an opportunity to reinvigorate themselves: they give 50 cents to each of them to feed their hunger.  comments on the scene: Fifty-cent Gang members see fifty cents and break out in tears.


2016: 
    The Fifty-cent Gang crisis is peacefully resolved, once again showing the ability of the Party and the government to maintain stability.  The Fifty-cent Gang leader tells the CCTV reporter on camera: "I am so sorry about before."


2017:
     Unemployment figures continue to rise drastically.  The collapse of the Internet industry leads to a serious economic recession.  The government says that the manufacturing industry will be the backbone of the nation once more.  China will use all its natural resources to export at low prices.


2017:
     Hostile anti-China forces overseas get together and mislead the United Nations and various nations to pass a resolution to forbid the importing of Chinese goods anywhere in the world in order to express their opposition to the shutdown of the Internet in China.  The Chinese government issues strong condemnations.  They say that the administration of the Internet in China is an internal matter which other countries have no right to interfere with.  The other countries counter that it is also an internal matter for them to ban Chinese goods and China has no right to interfere with that either.


2019:  
    It is the military parade on the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the nation.  On that day, the government announces that China will lock down its national borders and concentrate on strengthening itself so that all reactionary forces will tremble in fear.  On that day, China makes a statement to the rest of the world: "If you stop beating someone for 3 days, he/she may get on the roof and remove tiles."  Many nations say that they don't know how to translate this sentence.


2020: ...


2020:  
    Earth is destroyed.  The descendants of the Mayans say that it is normal to see a margin of error of plus or minus ten years on such events.

五毛入行初级系列教程——迷魂文法

将网友们所列举的几种常见的脑残文法综合起来，以供有关人士对照阅读
在这里，特意向参与这些文法整理的原创网友们致敬！

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：隔壁家那鸭蛋更难吃，你咋不说呢？

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：请拿出建设性的意见来，有本事你下个好吃的蛋来。

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：下蛋的是一只勤劳勇敢善良正直的鸡。

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：比前年的蛋已经进步很多了。

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：你就是吃这鸡蛋长大的，你有什么权力说这蛋不好吃？

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：你这么说是什么居心什么目的？

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：自己家鸡下的蛋都说不好吃，你还是不是中国人

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：tmd，我怀疑你是轮子

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：光抱怨有什么用，有这个时间还不如努力去赚钱

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：台湾网T，gun，这里不欢迎你

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：幼右心理阴暗，连鸡蛋不好吃也要发牢骚

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：该鸡蛋被一小撮不会下蛋的母鸡煽动导致变臭

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：该用户发言已被管理员屏蔽

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.中国的鸡蛋就难吃，美国的鸡蛋就好吃？卖国贼！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.台湾的鸡蛋好吃，你去呀，看不核平了你！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.中国的鸡蛋已经可以打败美国的鸭蛋，自豪！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.祖国的鸡生的蛋，再难吃我也不嫌弃！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.外国主子给你多少钱，你在这儿胡说？

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.你竟敢说我们养鸡场的鸡蛋难吃？你站在谁的立场上说话？

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.端起碗吃蛋，放下筷子骂娘，不知好歹，忘恩负义，无耻！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.难吃的鸡蛋是极少数，绝大多数鸡蛋是好的，是优秀的，是经得起考验的！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.这是少数不法分子在蒙蔽不明真相的群众！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.这是别有用心的煽动，你想干什么？

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.这是谣言，我可以负责任地说，我们的鸡蛋都是合格的！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.这是没有根据的，希望媒体能客观报道。

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.我看，有些人的鸡蛋不怎么样，我们的鸡蛋好五倍！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.正确的导向是我们养鸡场之福，错误的导向是我们养鸡场之祸！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.我们养鸡场处于初级阶段，必须坚持基本养鸡方法二十年不动摇！

A.这鸡蛋真难吃。
B.我们要建设有自己特色的养鸡场，让母鸡下出有自己特色的蛋！

A，这只鸡蛋真难吃。
B，虽然口感差了点，但对我们的身体是有益的，如果擅自引进一只美国蛋，我们的吸收系统和胃的承受力乃至整个内分泌，恐怕都会崩溃的。——理性左派学者。

A，这只鸡蛋真难吃。
B，这只鸡蛋难吃和地震无关——地震专家。

A，这只鸡蛋真难吃。
B，有国外敌对势力擅自对我国鸡蛋说三道四——刘建超。

A，这只鸡蛋真难吃。
B，中国鸡，加油！——中国爱国青年。

A，这只鸡蛋真难吃。
B，鉴于北京食客无理取闹地说鸡蛋难吃，我们两次赴京说服劝解，无效。——上海警方

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：这是近日网上有人别有用心的造谣。

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：你是少数不明真相的人，怎么可能难吃呢？

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：国福民强，你杂不换鸡肉吃？

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：没有一只蛋是十全十美的，所以就无权对蛋说三道四！

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：大清的蛋好不好吃，清朝人 民最清楚

A：这鸡蛋真难吃。
B：想想旧社会，穷人连饭都吃不上，每天咽糠吃野菜， 今天的幸福生活是无数先烈用生命和鲜血换来的， 你要好好珍惜啊

A；此鸡蛋真难吃
B；这是鸡下蛋的初级阶段，要吃好鸡蛋，要到高级阶段，这初级阶段是一个很漫长的过程。

《纽约时报》中国网民翻墙运动报道幕后

《纽约时报》关于中国大学生、社会活动人士翻墙(scaling the wall)的报道，没想到这么快就发布了。
在我的记忆中，这是《纽约时报》第一次以“翻墙”作为主要内容做的报道。昨天下午，我在公交车上接到新闻助理打来的电话，虽然我在《纽约时报》上海 分社的实习已经结束，但知道我对翻墙和 Twitter 还有一定了解，希望我邀请几位对翻墙和 GFW 较为了解的中国 Twitter 著名使用者进行采访。
翻了一遍我 Twitter 上 follow 的用户，确定“可能吧”网站作者 Jason Ng (@jason5ng32)是个非常理想的采访对象。他的“可能吧”网站从一开始定位于纯技术，到最近越来越开始关注公众话题，实在是被逼无奈——当局的 互联网政策越收越紧，越来越多与政治无关的技术类站点也被当局列入屏蔽黑名单，致使如 Jason Ng 之类此前走技术路线的博客作者也被逼走进了维护互联网正常访问权利的队伍里。
前《财经》杂志执行主编王烁在他最新的博文《可能吧的被演变》中 提到，“可能吧作者群不一定意识到已经从 Geek 变身公共知识分子”。其实，何止可能吧的被演变，当中国当局对国内绝大多数 BT 影视站点采取关停措施之后，很多不闻时事的90后就纷纷开始用他们的方式调侃广电总局；当中国著名博客服务提供商 Blogbus 因为域名解析问题而无法访问之后，更有 Blogbus 的用户在不解之余，表示要租用域名使用 WordPress 建立独立博客。
这一切使得在中国的大学生群体、媒体人士和社会活动人士中都掀起了翻墙运动高潮，而 Google 宣布可能退出中国市场的消息传出后，更让国内互联网用户不禁后怕：我们的互联网有朝一日是不是真的会变成“中国局域网”呢？
《纽约时报》在这篇报道中，把中国的翻墙群体形容成“数字异议者”(digital dissidents)，我认为可能并不妥当。翻墙群体虽然越来越庞大，但从整体来看，其中真正对当局的执政持有异议的人士并不占多数，更多的翻墙者仅仅 是出于对 Youtube、Facebook 等被封网站的依赖而加入翻墙行列的，他们并无持不同政见。
当然，即使他们的愿望良好，但他们也有可能不自觉地已经进入了敏感地区。Jason Ng 的可能吧网站就由于开始关注敏感话题，曾被有关方面要求指定删除网站上某些敏感博文。
在中国，人人都不知道，哪些话说了、哪些文章写了，就会出问题。