smartphone

Researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab published a report today that reveals how WeChat, the most popular chat app in China, censors content.

The report shows WeChat has separate censorship policies for international users and those in China with the majority of censorship targeted for Chinese accounts. It also reveals that WeChat removed notifications to users about the blocking of chat messages on the platform.

The findings are making headlines here at home and around the world.

Read the Globe and Mail

Read Bloomberg

Read The Wall Street Journal

The researchers found that there is more censorship in “group chat” messages compared to one-to-one user chats, possibly due to concerns about posts being spread to larger audiences and leading to mobilization, and that WeChat’s built-in browser also blocks certain websites for both China and international accounts.

The researchers found 41 websites blocked exclusively for Chinese WeChat accounts, including online gambling, news and media websites that critically report on China and the website of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, which reported on the Panama Papers.

“Attention usually focuses on foreign companies attempting to reach into China and facing hard decisions over how to approach its strict content regulations. WeChat has the opposite dilemma. To gain wider success the app must maintain its base in China, all while staying within the Chinese government’s boundaries, and present a compelling experience to attract international users,” says Masashi Crete-Nishihata, research manager at Citizen Lab, which is located at U of T's Munk School of Global Affairs.

Citizen Lab, which has extensive experience uncovering Internet censorship practices through network measurement and reverse engineering techniques, says the report shows the importance of understanding how apps work.

“Days are long gone when we used to interact with the Internet as an undifferentiated network,” says Professor Ron Deibert of the Faculty of Arts & Science, the director of Citizen Lab. “The reality today is that what we communicate online is mediated by companies that own and operate the Internet services we use.

“Social media in particular have become for an increasing number of people windows on reality. Whether, and in what ways, those windows might be distorted – by corporate policies or government directives – is thus a matter of significant public importance (but not always easy to discern with the naked eye).”

WeChat is the dominant chat application in China and fourth largest in the world with 806 million monthly active users. The application thrives on its huge user base in China, but like any other application in the country it must follow strict content regulations.

The report finds that WeChat enables keyword filtering for users with accounts registered to mainland China phone numbers. Remarkably, the researchers found that censorship stays on
even if users switch to a non-mainland phone number or travel to a different country – “locking in” users with mainland China accounts to its system of censorship no matter where they go.

“It’s unclear if the persistent content restrictions we've detected for China accounts is intentional, but the outcome is concerning. If you register a WeChat account to a Chinese phone number, you will always be under additional censorship even if you travel or later link your account to an international number. The idea that you can't escape a censorship system imposed on you at the time of registration is a troubling one indeed,” explains Jason Q. Ng, a researcher at Citizen Lab.

The researchers systematically tested a sample of keywords in two WeChat modes: one-to-one chat and group chat. They found a greater number of keywords blocked on group chat, which suggests that group chat is specifically targeted, potentially because of its ability to reach a larger numbers of users. Censored keywords spanned a range of content including current events, politics and social issues.

The report also found that censorship on WeChat is dynamic. Some keywords that triggered censorship in original tests were later found to be permissible in later tests. Newly censored keywords also appear to have been added in response to current news events.

“When you send a message on WeChat, it passes through a remote server that contains rules for implementing censorship. If the message contains a keyword or set of keywords that have been targeted for blocking, the message will not be sent,” explains Jeffrey Knockel, senior researcher at Citizen Lab.

The report goes on to detail how, in both one-on-one and group chat, censorship now happens without user notification. Previously if a user sent a message with a blacklisted keyword, a warning would pop up explaining the message could not be sent. Now messages are censored without giving any indication that they have been blocked.

“The removal of the censorship notices means WeChat has become even less transparent and also less dependable for its users in how it handles their communications,” says Citizen Lab researcher Lotus Ruan.

In addition to keyword censorship, WeChat implements a URL filtering system in its built-in browser. All of the sites that were exclusively blocked on Chinese accounts were fully accessible on international accounts without any warning page, but the researchers also found intermittent blocking of gambling and pornography websites on international accounts.

Unlike chat censorship, when a website is blocked on WeChat, a variety of explanatory messages are provided for why the censorship has occurred. However, it is unclear how accurately the purported explanations match up with the actual reasons for why websites are blocked. This ambiguity in attributing the source for the filtering again reflects the lack of transparency in how WeChat determines what “sensitive content” to block.

Recalling the Samsung Galaxy Note 7: U of T expert explains the blow to Korean society

lavende4 — Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:54:12 +0000

Recalling the Samsung Galaxy Note 7: U of T expert explains the blow to Korean society

lavende4 Wed, 10/26/2016 - 08:54

Cutline

A Samsung store in the Gangnam district of Seoul (photo by Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images)

Terry Lavender

Author legacy

Terry Lavender

Topic

When Samsung announced earlier this month that it was stopping production of its flagship smartphone, the Galaxy Note 7, and recalling all existing phones, the jolt was felt around the world. But in South Korea, where Samsung is the largest conglomerate or “chaebol” in the country, controlling everything from chemicals to electronics, health care and life insurance, there's a lot more at stake.

Tina Park is a PhD candidate in the department of history at the University of Toronto, focusing on the transformation of Canadian-Korean relations & history of globalization.

She spoke to U of T News about Samsung and the role of the chaebols in Korean society.

What is the chaebol system?

The “chaebol” refers to conglomerates that dominate South Korea’s economy. The word “chae” means “wealth” and “bol” means “clan” in Korean. In South Korean culture, the chaebols are like dynasties. Over the years, the descendants of the founders have retained control of the management of these companies, and the families have remained very wealthy. Among the largest chaebols are Samsung, LG, Hyundai, and SK Group, but there are dozens of others. These conglomerates are also very powerful in how much control they exercise in the South Korean economy – in the early 21st century, the chaebols produced roughly two-thirds of South Korea’s total exports and attracted a large part of the country’s foreign capital inflow. Last year, Samsung Group alone accounted for roughly 20 per cent of South Korea’s $527 billion in exports.

The chaebol structure originated in the 1960s. In the aftermath of the Korean War, the South Korean economy was impoverished, with the national GDP per capita at around US$67. When Park seized power in 1961, the South Korean government adopted an export-led industrial policy that favoured and strongly supported chaebols, such as guaranteed loans from the banking sector, protection from competition, and other legal and institutional mechanisms, which enabled them to take big risks, especially in the heavy and chemical industrialization industry in the '70s. In addition to heavy exports, these companies invested very heavily in R&D, recruited the best of South Korea’s brains and quickly emerged as competitive players in the international market. The close collaboration between the state and the chaebol was instrumental for South Korea’s economic miracle. South Korea today has the world’s 13th largest national GDP. From Koreans selling Samsung radios to Canadians in the 1970s, bilateral trade between South Korea and Canada has grown exponentially by about 3,000 times to where we are today.

How influential are companies such as Samsung in the Korean economy?

The chaebols are hugely influential in the South Korean economy because often one company would have subsidiaries in many different areas, such as electronics, food, amusement parks, hotels, semiconductors, etc. It is entirely possible for an average Korean to be born in a Samsung hospital, buy groceries from CJ &Foods, ride a Hyundai car, work for LG electronics and enjoy shopping at Lotte department store. So within South Korea, it is impossible to escape the chaebol influence.

What about their cultural influence?

In addition to their economic dominance, these conglomerates and their brands serve as a source of pride for many Koreans, both domestically and internationally. Purchasing South Korean brands is considered as an act of patriotism by many Koreans in the diaspora community, in addition to whatever economic or technological value they carry. Many young South Korean students dream of working for one of the big chaebol companies and undergo intense preparation, not only because the job market is very competitive and these jobs pay well, but also because of the social status they symbolize. A “Samsung man” for instance would appear more attractive to Korean women looking for a potential husband because it would imply that he is a well-educated and successful man with stable future. The chaebols are heavy spenders in R&D, various educational programs, the entertainment industry, and even the health care and social welfare sectors, so the latest Hallyu (Korean) wave cannot be fully understood without realizing the capital behind it. South Korea is still a very hierarchical society, so the prevalence of chaebol culture perpetuates the best and worst of capitalism. Chaebols now influence how people relate to each other, the latest trends and even the value system.

Do they have an effect on the political system?

Absolutely. Since the 60s, the chaebols have always had strong collaboration with South Korea’s political leaders and with a cult of personality associated with the founders of chaebol like Lee Kun-Hee, the chairman of Samsung Group. Concerns have been raised about corruption and bribery between the chaebol and leading politicians, and public opinion on the chaebols have tended to fluctuate a lot in the recent past. There is a certain sense of resentment at the concentration of so much wealth and political influence in the hands of leading families. Some would also argue that the dominance of chaebol culture creates an unfair playing field for small- and medium-sized enterprises, and women are still not seen very frequently in top leadership positions.

Are there any signs of the chaebol system weakening or changing?

To be sure, the chaebols are often under a lot of fire and are frequently scrutinized, but they have been slow to change for a number of reasons. First, these conglomerates have proven to be very resilient and made significant contributions to the South Korean economy.

The prevalence of the chaebols in South Korea makes it difficult for any quick change. Millions of South Koreans are involved with the chaebols, either as employees, customers or even competitors. The highly educated, extremely productive workforce, coupled with South Korea’s strong social cohesion, have all contributed to the survival of chaebols. Samsung Electronics, for instance, has long been seen as one the most technologically and commercially progressive players in the international market, largely thanks to its human capital. There are generational changes within chaebol families and a growing number of small- and medium-sized enterprises are entering the competition, but I think it will take quite a while for the chaebol system to change in any meaningful way.

Will Samsung’s setback with regard to the Galaxy Note 7 have a long-term effect on the company and its position in Korean society/economy?

The latest crisis with Samsung Galaxy Note 7 has been very unfortunate. In the quest for making things “faster, better and cheaper,” Samsung has jeopardized the safety of its customers and has not been efficient in providing solutions. South Korean customers, who have generally been very loyal to the Galaxy Android phones, are expressing frustrations about the lack of clarity on the return policy and lack of proper compensation. The full consequences of the Note 7 crisis remain to be seen in the coming years in terms of brand credibility, sales of future models and general safety issues surrounding smartphones. Samsung Electronic is the biggest subsidiary of Samsung Group, and the investors have already shaved off roughly $20 billion in Samsung’s market value. The recall will cost at least $5 billion or more and most surely affect Samsung’s market share in the smartphone industry. How quickly Samsung adopts the “lessons learned” from the Note 7 crisis will be the real test for this tech giant.