Rise of the $1 censors?

There's been a lot of talk on some China blogs lately about China's so-called public opinion crisis, where public opinion spirals out of the government's control. To Western readers, this is a natural part of civil society - people express their views openly. But not so in China, where Rebecca MacKinnon has dubbed the government's strategy to control public debate "cybertarianism". The Chinese government pays bloggers to weigh in on online debates in Chinese - these so-called "50-cent censors" advance the government's view of situations without declaring who is paying them to do so. I haven't yet heard of 50-cent censors operating in the comment sections of English-language websites, but I wonder if they already exist. I have met some incredible English speakers in my travels in rural China, people who asked me about George W. Bush's frequent use of certain words like "robust" to describe the economy because they spent so much time on Whitehouse.gov. The initial responses to the always excellent Arthur Kroeber's piece on FT.com about the Rio Tinto case made me wonder whether there weren't $1 censors (surely they get paid more for posting in English) at work. Arthur's piece actually comes out fairly positive for China, saying it's not as bad as Russia; the piece doesn't directly address the question of what crimes were at stake, as commentators immediately pointed out. I'm assuming (as perhaps Arthur does, though I haven't asked him directly) that bribery is widespread in China, among both foreigners and locals, and that the larger issue at stake is the consistent application of the rule of law. As the public debate (see Niall Ferguson's piece in Newsweek, as one example) continues to heat up about China's rise and the resulting shifts in the world order, it will be interesting to see how the online chatter develops.

On migrants returning home

I've been arguing for a while now that in this economic downturn, China's migrants will not be a source for instability - despite warnings from authorities in Beijing and fear-mongering from China-watcher friends of mine. Pieces like this one in last week's Financial Times echo my views. But I have also argued that many migrants will not be excited about returning home during this crisis because the Chinese countryside is a step back developmentally to people accustomed to life in the big cities. The second generation of Chinese migrants - the generation born in the 80s - is not in it so much for the money as for the experience. This is why a blog written by one of these young migrants and translated into English by China Labor Bulletin is so fascinating. It's important to remember that the writer, Xiao Sanlang, is the only person from his village to go to graduate school - so he's not typical. But his comments are sympathetic and fascinating. They raise an interesting question about the transformation of the China price from a coastal China price to an inland China price: Will workers who have been working in Shenzhen and Shanghai really want to live in the same basic conditions they fled to work at an export factory near their home, particularly if the conditions are no better and wages are lower than on the coasts?

China Price rising for computers

You heard it here first. The Financial Times is reporting today that the prices of computers are about to go up because of rising raw material and labor costs in China. I first wrote about this in my book, The China Price, and then in Slate last month. As Kathrin Hille writes in the FT, "The Taiwanese manufacturers have called for price rises following past surges in cost, but never managed to get their customers to agree. Now, however, several of the branded PC companies have agreed to share part of the burden, recognising that the entire supply chain is clamouring for price rises, according to executives at the notebook manufacturers." Read the FT story here.