With these three axes in mind, we can compare variouscountries to better understand their approaches to theInternet. Almost all countries use codes to censor childpornography and to track illegal behavior that may goagainst government interests (WikiLeaks, Edward Snowden).However, some countries are far more pervasive in theirapproach to surveillance and internet control. The OpenNetinitiative found that Egypt, France, Germany, India, theUnited Kingdom, and the United States had no evidence oflimiting netizens' internet freedom, while they found Chinato engage in pervasive filtering in all areas. North Koreastands alone with its isolated version of the internet. Alongwith China, countries like Iran, Myanmar, Tajikistan, andAfghanistan have been increasing their internetfiltering(OpenNet). Thus we begin to witness how as eachcountry can have a unique approach, the internet may not bethe cosmopolitan safe haven we had dreamt about in itsearly days; it may instead be a new tool for surveillance andideological propaganda(Fuchs; Mai; Chomsky and Hesse).

Internet usage has been growing at an exponential rate. Onany day in the last 5 years, there were on average 640,000people online for the first time(Roser et al). Social mediaplatforms are modifying standards of socialization as theyinherently change our ways of interacting with each other.Platforms like Facebook have upwards of 2 billion monthlyusers(Roser et al), making social media a contentiousbattleground for political and social matters(Sechenova).

With these staggering numbers in mind, it is easy to imaginethe internet as a free cosmopolitan community whereeveryone has a voice, but this is far from the truth. LawrenceLessig explained in his book "Code and Other Laws ofCyberspace" that every era has regulations set by governingpowers, and the age of the internet is not devoid of thesehegemonic influences; the regulators have becomeinvisible(Lessig). Governments seem to regulate and censorour internet experiences through code, as algorithms gainincreasing power in shaping our realities.

The OpenNet Initiative set out to monitor and reportinternet censorship and surveillance around the world. Theyindicate that most countries use code to control the mediacirculated on the internet, with varying degrees ofpervasiveness to netizens' cyber-privacy. They tracked thenumber of restrictions on political and social expression, aswell as access to digital tools(Opennet). They found threeareas which defined "Internet freedom":

Infrastructural and economic barriers to access specifictechnologies or applications; legal control over internetaccess providers.

Filtering and blocking of websites; manipulation of content;the diversity of online news media; control over social mediaactivism

Restriction of online activity; surveillance and limits onprivacy; and repercussions for online activity, such as legalprosecution or imprisonment;

China's internet filtering system uses a code that permitskeyword filtering, allowing the government to block anycontent with keywords that mark it as "illegal". This systemis said to be one of the most robust algorithms in theworld(Stockman and Gallagher). However these intenserestrictive lists at once slow down the internet, can becircumvented by proxy websites, and often block both legaland illegal sources. Keywords that are blocked include"Tianamen Square", "Falun Gong" , "taiwanese independence"(Etc.)(Lee and Liu)... The idea of legality also rides closelywith the concept of Chinese values (Perris).

After having outlined the more visible elements of Chinesecensorship, it must be noted that there are other lesstransparent ways of controling its population. The Anhuiprovince started a unit of their police department addressedto limiting illegal cyber behavior, this unit has since spreadto provinces all around China. These forces are said toexhort a "tight control" over what residents can access onthe internet. The are also responsible to limiting the spreadof "negative news", information that may be critical of thegovernment. This police force has made a blacklist ofjournalist who promulgated "Unapproved news". They alsopursued soe journalists in justice who had leaked somegovernment information to western news outlets.

Another controversial example of the Chinese approach toweb censorship is the establishment of a group of workerstasked with posting positively about the Chinese governmenton social media. They received their name because it wassaid that each post they publish was remunerated by about50 cents. It is thought that around 280,000 citizens are apart of this group, with a purpose of spreading positivepropaganda on the social networks dominated by theChinese people.

Alongside these previously mentioned examples, it is widelyaccepted that government officials have strong influenceswithin the news and entertainment media industries throughactions conducted by the State Administration of Press,Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPREF)(Aho andDuffield). Chinese cyber-censorship has become moreintensive in the last couple of years, since Xi Jinping hassworn to better China's control over the internet. For thisreason, the government has banned many western websitesand social media. Though some researchers claim this is forcultural preservation, my senior project research argued thatthe youth is not disillusioned by this government control,and increasingly uses Virtual Private Networks (VPN) toaccess the wider Internet (Sechenova).

China is renowned for its isolationist political stance, and forits reliance on political propaganda and censorship inquelling dissent and controlling its population(Sechenova).With the arrival of the Internet, China has beenexperimenting with different ways to regulate the internet.These sets of code based regulatory policies are recognizedas the great Chinese firewall and operate through thefollowing agents:

The Chinese government is known to wield its legal powernot only on its citizens, but also the corporations providinginternet. These Internet Service Providers (ISP) are thenmandated to enact the larger restricitions in fear of losingthe Chinese market(Sechenova).

Even though the United States does not censor its internetas assiduously as China, it still predominantly controlscontents such as pornography, gambling and informationthat would even remotely promote anti- government speechand actions. Some might argue that the lack of contentrestriction has allowed for a spread of misinformation totake place on social media(Harsh and Taneja). This highlightsthe contentions behind the concept of free speech, as itpushes us to question what defines hate speech. A largeamount of power is thus being wielded by coders andpolicymakers in shaping the future of this cosmopolitanplatform.

Article 19 Universal declaration of Human Rights sets outthat "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion andexpression; this right includes freedom to hold opinionswithout interference and to seek, receive and impartinformation and ideas through any media and regardless offrontiers"(United Nations), thus we must consider the risksand benefits presented by internet and wide spread socialmedia usage, as it becomes increasingly prevalent aroundthe world. There are a variety of ways to approach theinternet, but with the increasing acknowledgment of thepower and scope of this platform, it is time to install somewider international policies to establish the future of ourinternet use and to preserve our freedom.

Bibliography:

Adam, Isabelle. What Would McLuhan Say about the Smartphone? : Applying McLuha� s

Tetrad to the Smartphone. 2016.

Bernays, E. L. Propaganda. H. Liveright, 1930,

https://books.google.com/books?id=7K7ZAAAAMAAJ.

Boulding, Kenneth E. “The Medium and the Message.” The Canadian Journal of

Economics and Political Science / Revue Canadienne d’Economique et de Science

Politique, vol. 31, no. 2, [Canadian Economics Association, Wiley], 1965, pp. 268–73,

doi:10.2307/140071. JSTOR.

Castells, Manuel. “Communication, Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society.”

International Journal of Communication, vol. 1, no. 1, 1, Feb. 2007, p. 29.

“Chinese President Xi Jinping Warns against ‘immoral’ Art.” BBC News, 16 Oct. 2014.

www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-29645574.

“China’s Cyber Censorship Figures | Reporters without Borders.” RSF, 12 Mar. 2021,

https://rsf.org/en/news/chinas-cyber-censorship-figures.

“China’s Cat-and Mouse Game Blocking Web Content No Model for EU.” EUobserver,

https://euobserver.com/opinion/148415. Accessed 13 May 2021.

DiRESTA, RENEE. “COMPUTATIONAL PROPAGANDA: IF YOU MAKE IT TREND,

YOU MAKE IT TRUE.” The Yale Review, vol. 106, no. 4, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd,

Oct. 2018, pp. 12–29, doi:10.1111/yrev.13402.

Fuchs, Christian. Propaganda 2.0: Herman and Chomsky’s Propaganda Model in the Age of

the Internet, Big Data and Social Media in the Age of the Internet, Big Data and Social

Media. 2018, pp. 71–92, doi:10.16997/book27.f.

Gentle, Michael. “China’s Data-Privacy Law vs. GDPR.” Medium, 16 Nov. 2018,

https://medium.com/the-balance-of-privacy/chinas-data-privacy-law-vs-gdpr-566fde8c2

13c.

Grier, Sonya A., et al. “Crossover Dreams: Consumer Responses to Ethnic-Oriented

Products.” Journal of Marketing, vol. 70, no. 2, Apr. 2006, pp. 35–51. DOI.org

(Crossref), doi:10.1509/jmkg.70.2.035.

Hennion, Antoine. “The History of Art - Lessons in Mediation.” Réseaux. The French

Journal of Communication, translated by Liz Libbrecht, vol. 3, no. 2, 1995, pp. 233–62.

DOI.org (Crossref), doi:10.3406/reso.1995.3298.

Herman, Edward S., and Noam. Chomsky. Manufacturing Consent : The Political Economy

of the Mass Media. 1st ed., Pantheon Books, 1988,

http://www.gbv.de/dms/bowker/toc/9780679720348.pdf. WorldCat.org.

Latour, Bruno. “On Recalling Ant.” The Sociological Review, vol. 47, no. 1_suppl, May

1999, pp. 15–25. DOI.org (Crossref), doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03480.x.

Latour, Bruno. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Harvard

University Press, 1999.

Lee, Jyh-An, and Ching-Yi Liu. Forbidden City Enclosed by the Great Firewall: The Law

and Power of Internet Filtering in China. SSRN Scholarly Paper, ID 2035788, Social

Science Research Network, 7 Mar. 2012. papers.ssrn.com,

https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2035788.

Lessig, Lawrence. “Code Is Law.” Harvard Magazine, 1 Jan. 2000,

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2000/01/code-is-law-html.

Mai, Jun. “Xi Renews ‘Cyber Sovereignty’ Call at China’s Internet Event of the Year.”

South China Morning Post, 3 Dec. 2017,

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2122683/xi-jinping-renews-

cyber-sovereignty-call-chinas-top.

McDonel, Stephen. “Why China Censors Banned Winnie the Pooh.” BBC News, 17 July

2017. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855.

McLuhan, Marshall, and Eric McLuhan. Laws of Media: The New Science. Repr, Univ. of

Toronto Press, 1999.

Nations, United. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, United Nations,

https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights. Accessed 13

May 2021.

OpenNet Initiative. https://opennet.net/. Accessed 13 May 2021.

Pedro-Carañana, Joan. “The Propaganda Model in the Early 21st Century Part I.”

International Journal of Communication, vol. 5, Jan. 2011, pp. 1865–905.

Quiang, Xiao. “The Grass-Mud Horse, Online Censorship, and China’s National Identity.”

UC Berkeley School of Information,

https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/news/2012/grass-mud-horse-online-censorship-and-c

hinas-national-identity. Accessed 5 May 2021.

RSF. “Sixty Years of News Media and Censorship | Reporters without Borders.” RSF, 1 Oct.

2009, https://rsf.org/en/reports/sixty-years-news-media-and-censorship.

Roser, Max, et al. “Internet.” Our World in Data, July 2015. ourworldindata.org,

https://ourworldindata.org/internet.

Schivelbusch, W. The Railway Journey: The Industrialization and Perception of Time and

Space. University of California Press, 1986,

https://books.google.com/books?id=890nCC_kZeIC.

Sechenova, Marina. “Fahrenheit 451: Burning through the Great Firewall of China.”

Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law, vol. 3, no. 2, 2016, pp.

283–314.

Serra, Joaquim. “Beyond Propaganda and the Internet: The Ethics of Journalism.”

Comunicação e Sociedade, vol. 25, June 2014, p. 301,

doi:10.17231/comsoc.25(2014).1876.

Sparks, Colin. “Extending and Refining the Propaganda Model.” Westminster Papers in

Communication and Culture, vol. 4, Aug. 2007, doi:10.16997/wpcc.86.

Stevenson, Christopher. “Breaching the Great Firewall: China’s Internet Censorship and the

Quest for Freedom of Expression in a Connected World Note.” Boston College

International and Comparative Law Review, vol. 30, no. 2, 2007, pp. 531–58.

Stockmann, Daniela, and Mary E. Gallagher. “Remote Control: How the Media Sustain

Authoritarian Rule in China.” Comparative Political Studies, vol. 44, no. 4, SAGE

Publications Inc, Apr. 2011, pp. 436–67. SAGE Journals,

doi:10.1177/0010414010394773.

Taneja, Harsh, and Angela Xiao Wu. “Does the Great Firewall Really Isolate the Chinese?

Integrating Access Blockage With Cultural Factors to Explain Web User Behavior.”

The Information Society, vol. 30, no. 5, Routledge, Oct. 2014, pp. 297–309. Taylor and

Francis+NEJM, doi:10.1080/01972243.2014.944728.

Varis, P., and Xuan Wang. “Superdiversity on the Internet: A Case from China.” European

Public Law, vol. 13, Jan. 2011, pp. 69–81, doi:10.4324/9781315730240.

Woolley, S. C., and P. N. Howard. Computational Propaganda: Political Parties,

Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media. Oxford University Press,

Incorporated, 2018, https://books.google.com/books?id=YUVvDwAAQBAJ.

“Xi: China to Promote Cultural Soft Power- China.Org.Cn.” China.Org, 1 Jan. 2014,

http://www.china.org.cn/china/2014-01/01/content_31059390.htm.

Xi Jinping and the Chinese Dream | The Economist.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160510092423/http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/

21577070-vision-chinas-new-president-should-serve-his-people-not-nationalist-state-xi

-jinping. Accessed 5 May 2021.

Ziff, Bruce H., and Pratima V. Rao, editors. Borrowed Power: Essays on Cultural

Appropiation. Rutgers University Press, 1997.