Cited by 241Media Influence and PoliticsSocial Media and PoliticsFreedom of Expression and Defamation

How Sudden Censorship Can Increase Access to Information

Open access
HOBBS, WILLIAM R., ROBERTS, MARGARET E.·2018·American Political Science Review

Abstract

Conventional wisdom assumes that increased censorship will strictly decrease access to information. We delineate circumstances when increases in censorship expand access to information for a substantial subset of the population. When governments suddenly impose censorship on previously uncensored information, citizens accustomed to acquiring this information will be incentivized to learn methods of censorship evasion. These evasion tools provide continued access to the newly blocked information—and also extend users’ ability to access information that has long been censored. We illustrate this phenomenon using millions of individual-level actions of social media users in China before and after the block of Instagram. We show that the block inspired millions of Chinese users to acquire virtual private networks, and that these users subsequently joined censored websites like Twitter and Facebook. Despite initially being apolitical, these new users began browsing blocked political pages on Wikipedia, following Chinese political activists on Twitter, and discussing highly politicized topics such as opposition protests in Hong Kong.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0003055418000084

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • China's blocking of Instagram motivated users to bypass other blocks and spurred political interest and critical online discourse.

    “Hobbs and Roberts (2018) find that China's blocking of Instagram motivated users to bypass also other blocks and spurred political interest and critical online discourse.”

    From How Dictators Control the Internet: A Review Essay (2020) · cites this paper as Hobbs and Roberts, 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
HOBBS, W. R., & ROBERTS, M. E.
Affiliations
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
  • HOBBS, WILLIAM R.
  • ROBERTS, MARGARET E.
Venue
American Political Science Review
Published
2018-04-02
Volume
112
Issue
3
Pages
621-636
ISSN
  • 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5943
OpenAlex
W3125630843
Cited by
241
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3
FWCI
46.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Political Science Review (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of California, San Diego
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Freedom of Expression and Defamation
Keywords
censorship, access to information, censorship evasion, virtual private networks, social media, Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, political activism, Hong Kong protests, Chinese internet users, online political participation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review