Chinese propaganda machine ramps up over censorship of Papi Jiang videos

At the beginning of this week, I wrote about the Chinese government crackdown on Papi Jiang, the VC-funded viral web celeb. Jiang, a fast-talking web comedian, was ordered by China’s State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film, and Television (SAPPRFT) to clean up her act over the use of a few curse words. She was subsequently forced to take down virtually every video on her channels (only one video remains on her Youku account, for example).

The whole thing seemed a bit odd – since when is cursing not allowed on the internet – and many speculated that the move by SAPPRFT had less to do with the specifics of Papi Jiang, and more to do with sending a message that China’s web celebrities will be controlled.

In the days since SAPPRFT’s order went public, media coverage of the incident and the ensuing fallout also seems to suggest that this move has been about celebrity control. There seem to be two things that China’s public opinion handlers are hoping China’s internet users take away from this.

One: internet fame isn’t worth pursuing

Over the past week, I’ve seen numerous articles like this one from yesterday’s Guangzhou Daily, with headlines blaring that web celebrity is fleeting and unstable as a source of income. Most of these articles feature conclusions that seem designed to put people off from pursuing internet fame, like this one:

Industry insiders assert, “There are no fans in the internet celebrity economy, just people observing a spectacle. Moreover, the personality-focused internet celebrity model is at odds with the de-individualized nature of the internet, so it’s extremely easy to be replaced on the internet by the latest hot topic.” “Do you think that people who are just following the crowd can really become long-term fans of one particular person?”

(Photo by Cory Doctorow)

While there’s no arguing that internet fame can be fickle, it definitely seems like these articles are pushing an agenda. In fact there are many examples in the West of internet celebrities who got initial attention via some schtick and built that into a fanbase. Heck, that’s basically the MO of every major channel on Youtube, and some of them have been operating (commercially successfully) for years.

And even in China, web fame doesn’t fade as quickly as the Guangzhou Daily article suggests. Seven years after her rise to internet fame, everyone still remembers Feng Jie, and she’s been trying to get people to forget about her. Some of China’s most famous video game streamers are also examples of long-term success in internet celebrity.

Two: America censors web celebrities just like we do

The more surprising message Chinese media apparently wants to push: delisting a web celebrity over curse words is totally normal. This article from state-run media outlet CNR makes an article that our American readers may find interesting:

American internet celebrities mostly become successful because of their fresh personalities, but a fresh personality doesn’t mean one can become headstrong. Li Xi says that American web celebs must respect the basic norms of the media. Especially when some internet celebrities go to blogs or social media sites, and use these platforms to publish their information. Usually when they publish this information, the website’s employees will do a screening, and if they confirm it’s related to some vulgar content or coarse language or against public morals, they will screen or delete the content. So the content that the public sees has come through this filter, so it’s relatively healthy.

For those few who may not already be aware, let me be clear: this is industrial-grade horseshit. I cannot think of any American social media or blogging platform that pre-screens content from web celebrities or from any other user. And when content does get deleted from American content platforms like Twitter or Facebook, it’s virtually always because it violated the site’s terms of use, not because it contains coarse language or violates public morals.

Implications