CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 92Freedom of Expression and DefamationMedia Influence and PoliticsCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies

How Market Dynamics of Domestic and Foreign Social Media Firms Shape Strategies of Internet Censorship

Pan, Jennifer·2017·Problems of Post-Communism
DOI 10.1080/10758216.2016.1181525
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

There is ongoing debate over whether authoritarian regimes can maintain control over information given the rise of social media and the Internet. In this debate, China is often cited as a prime example of how authoritarian regimes can retain control, but to date, there has been limited research on whether China’s online censorship strategies can be replicated in other authoritarian regimes. This article shows that China’s ability to censor social media rests on the dominance of domestic firms in China’s market for Internet content. The absence of U.S. social media firms in China allows the Chinese government to engage in censorship through content removal, which can quickly and effectively suppress information. In contrast, for most other regimes, the market for social media is dominated by U.S. multinational firms, e.g., Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and in these contexts, content removal is an immense challenge. This article then examines the prospects of instituting content removal by developing domestic social media or importing Chinese platforms, and finds that most authoritarian regimes are unlikely to be able to duplicate China’s online censorship efforts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10758216.2016.1181525

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • It is often easier for a country to control domestic social media companies, offering governments more leverage than they would enjoy with international firms.

    “It is also often easier for a country to control domestic social media companies (e.g., to encourage content filtering and/or proregime platform policies), offering governments more leverage than they would enjoy with international firms (105).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [105]

  • The increased role of private actors may change states' capacity for digital repression.

    “Indeed, the increased role of private actors may change states’ capacity for digital repression (105).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [105]

  • The form of public-private repressive collaboration likely depends on regime and market characteristics.

    “Moreover, the form of this collaboration likely depends on regime and market characteristics (105), making it important to ask under what conditions different forms of public-private repressive partnerships will exist and/or thrive.”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [105]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 65 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pan, J.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Pan, Jennifer
ORCID
Pan, Jennifer
Venue
Problems of Post-Communism
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-08-24
Volume
64
Issue
3-4
Pages
167-188
ISSN
  • 1075-8216 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-783X
DOI
10.1080/10758216.2016.1181525
OpenAlex
W2517985622
Cited by
92
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
FWCI
57.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Problems of Post-Communism (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Freedom of Expression and Defamation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Keywords
internet censorship, social media, authoritarian regimes, market dynamics, content removal, China, information control, platform dominance, YouTube, Twitter

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