Translation

In the film Infernal Affairs [a 2002 Hong Kong action film that was adapted into 2006's The Departed Hollywood film], there is a line: “This is the best of times, this is the worst of times”.

Whether you’re living in the best of times or the worst of times is a choice that’s entirely in your hands. We must face these bustling, flourishing, bizarre, and restless times, which are pregnant with hope, and at the same time, loss. We must remove the scales from our eyes and see clearly that we are living in times that demand giving of ourselves. For everyone who hopes to be successful, the things you can give/spend are the only wealth you [currently] have.

Most common people are running about living their lives, working and sweating to overcome obstacles, using talent and the sweat of their brow to cast their futures and achieve a great life. Life is the same the world over, the development of human societies requires paying out and reaping the benefits, and [sometimes] even sacrifice.

On the ancient topic of paying out and then reaping the benefits, no explanation is needed, when progress [i.e., paying out] is made a step at a time, gains will definitely come.

So what about sacrifice, that higher level of “paying out/giving of oneself”?

I remember reading a story in a magazine some time ago that was simple but thought-provoking. It was called “The Desert Spring”.

There was a traveller who was in the lonely process of crossing a desert. He had already drank the water he’d brought with him, and his increasing thirst had driven him to hopelessness. In his last moments of struggling for his life, he saw a great green tree in the distance, and pushed madly on towards it. There was no water at all around the tree, just dry desert sand, and scattered across it, several skeletons of men who had obviously died of thirst under the tree.

What was really strange was that there were traces of digging in the earth under the tree. Disregarding everything else, our traveler began to dig and eventually had dug out a deep pit using his bare hands. To his surprise, in it was hidden a football-sized jar, full of clear water.

He couldn’t wait to open the jar, but on the top was a slip of handwritten parchment that read, “If you pour every single drop of this water into the pit, you will receive an entire pool of spring water.”

The traveler was truly trapped. Without thinking of the trustworthiness of what was written on the paper, he thought of his surroundings. It was an ocean of dry desert; the jar could only satiate a little bit of thirst and prolong death for so long; even if he drank it all in one gulp he couldn’t count on just that to keep him alive in the desert. On the other hand, if what was written on the paper was a lie, he would certainly die [almost immediately] of dehydration.

His throat was burning and his physical strength had already left him, if he didn’t drink water very soon he would quickly die. He looked around, gazing at the skeletons around him, and then used the only strength he had left to pour the water into the pit. The water quickly sank into the dry sand and in a moment, there was no trace of it at all.

The traveler waited a little bit, extremely regretful, having personally poured the lifesaving water into the hopeless pit. He fell, powerless, by the side of the pit, when he heard the sound of flowing water. In the pit, a puddle of clear spring water had sprung up, and the traveler was saved! He packed away the water in his own containers, and filled the jar with water again, sealing it with the strip of paper and burying it in the pit. Eventually, he made it out of the desert.

This story seems incredible, but it’s actually reminding us of an iron [i.e., unchangeable] truth: at times, by “paying out” so much that it approaches sacrifice, you can create a miracle.

If you still haven’t found your desert spring, it’s because your travels haven’t yet taken you far enough, and you haven’t yet given enough of yourself.

Brief Commentary

The job market is exceedingly difficult for young Chinese college graduates these days, and success can be difficult to come by in a place where job fairs can look like this (see photo at left). Many graduates live together in cramped apartments, working jobs they once thought were well below their qualifications and pay grade. These “ant people“, as they have been called, are a significant demographic, and it’s interesting to analyze the acosta’s desert traveler story with them in mind. The message that success comes from sacrifice and faith could be dangerous for a group that’s already sacrificed much and, in some cases, had to redefine success in light of the dearth of high-end well-paying jobs. After all, for those working menial jobs and living in one-room apartments with eight former classmates, what else is there to sacrifice?

It’s hard to get a handle on exactly what acosta’s readers think of the idea. Several of the early comments have expressed their agreement, others said in various ways “easier said than done”, but many just posted “cute” animated gifs. Still, this, more than any of the dissident political stuff we like to discuss on English blogs, is the kind of discussion that’s going on in the internet in China. Here’s a small window into one of China’s most popular blogs; what do you think?

Post from: CN Reviews

Acosta: The Desert Spring

The following is a translation of this blog post by Hong Huang. Hong Huang (sometimes spelled Hung Huang) is a magazine publisher and an extremely popular blogger on the Chinese internet. For more on her, readers can check out this post on Danwei.

Translation: China’s Soft Power Army

Zhang Ziyi on the January cover of iLook

In 2006, Professor Zhang Yiwu wrote in his article “How to Sell Chinese Culture” in New Weekly, “One Yao Ming, one Zhang Ziyi are more effective than ten thousand Confuciuses. “Jewel in the Palace” [a popular Korean drama] is a good example of Korea getting both high culture and low culture [into other countries].”

“Only if we emphasize Zhang Ziyi the way we emphasize Confucius does Chinese culture have a future.”

These sentences were quickly twisted by media-watchers into “Peking University Professor Says Confucius isn’t as Good as Zhang Ziyi” and “One Zhang Ziyi is Better Than 100 Confuciuses,” etc., then it was published on the internet, and poor Professor Zhang took quite a lashing online. It was so bad that even in this issue of our iLook Reader magazine, which is on soft power, Professor Zhang is still having to explain himself.

When I went online to look up information about the incident, I found a statistic saying that 99% of netizens were opposed to the statement  ”One Zhang Ziyi is Better Than 100 Confuciuses.” In that case, it seems I really am one of the poor, deserving-of-abuse 1%.

First of all, as far as China is concerned, I think soft power and hard power are equally important. Secondly, we currently have hard power, but our soft power is very weak. In terms of manufacturing, we are a giant exporter, but in terms of culture, we are importers; we import 15 times more culture than we export. Third, we often talk about the great achievement of thousands-of-years-old Chinese culture, as if China today had no culture to speak of.

Put it this way, let’s look at the great “soft power armies” of other countries: France’s definitely wear Dior army uniforms, carry Louis Vuitton satchels, the army marches out with glittering Cartier emblems, and when they fire over a volley of red wine, China’s fashion industry definitely lines the streets to welcome them, as though they were looking upon excellent fashions. The most unwelcoming thing they might do is strip them and send the French home naked!

And if it’s America? There would be a column of Mickey Mouses, a column of Donald Ducks, and a column of Tom and Jerrys. There would be Transformers, Superman, Batman, and Spiderman; Chinese children under 16 would happily think it was a promotional activity for a toy store.

And then there’s the Chinese soft power army; if we go with what netizens want, then it’s a 2000-year-old rotten old man? If Confucius hadn’t once denounced the daughters of peasants, most Chinese wouldn’t know what “the Master” was talking about even if he spoke all day.

Soft power can’t open a bunch of schools, or bring thousand-year-old etiquette back to life, and speaking official jargon that no one can understand isn’t soft power, either.

Soft power should be an army of Zhang Ziyis, who wouldn’t exclaim upon seeing that! No matter who we attacked, no one would resist. Right? So don’t look down on those who are alive, or those who are smaller or prettier than you. Soft power is something that, when you see it once, you want to hand over your guns, can Confucius do that? Explain all you want, but you can’t explain [how that would work].

This month’s January 2010 issue of iLook has special meaning, as it will be published in Taiwan as well as on the Mainland. We are happy to announce that ours is the first copyrighted Mainland periodical to be published in Taiwan. The magazine [called Metro City in Taiwan, apparently] will hit newsstands in Taiwan on January 20th.

This counts as our contribution to China’s soft power, it’s also why we were absolutely sure we wanted Zhang Ziyi to be on the cover on both sides of the Strait. If it was Confucius instead, [prospects for the magazine] would have been hopeless, right?

Post from: CN Reviews

Hong Huang: Zhang Ziyi and “China’s Soft Power Army”

Kudos to Kai Pan for all the work he did in laying out his argument. The winner, however, is Chinayouren.

Bastard! *shakes fist*

Richard also summarizes:

“Freedom of choice” sounds wonderful. It sounds a little less wonderful when it’s “freedom of manipulated choice.”

…except the thrust of my argument is that “no choice and no freedom” sounds a whole lot less wonderful than “freedom of manipulated choice”.

Fortunately, Richard also left a comment going into detail with his disagreement, which I’ll quote below and respond to. Before doing so, I do want to state very plainly that I’ve been a fan of The Peking Duck for a long time. I usually agree with Richard’s point of view and I generally respect him, even if we have and have had some very strong disagreements (mostly over rhetoric).

Here we go with Richard’s comment:

I have to disagree. First, since the results are manipulated and the deck well stacked, it won’t leave such a terrible void in most Chinese people’s lives.

Agree it won’t leave such a “terrible void” in “most” Chinese lives, just the market share of Chinese internet users Google commanded, which I personally feel is a significant amount of people. I’m worried for those people and any Chinese netizen that could’ve been a future Google convert. Unfortunately, I really don’t think many people are thinking much about them or what they want.

The market will fill that void soon enough if it’s so gaping.

I agree the market will fill it if it’s so gaping. Yet given how “well stacked” the deck is, I personally feel Google is better equipped and positioned to deliver more to the Chinese internet user even in such a hostile, unfair, stacked-deck environment. It’s not that I don’t expect someone to fill the void, it’s that I have more confidence in Google doing it better and thus offering significantly more value to the Chinese netizen.

Second, if google does indeed end up leaving China (a big if) it will do far more than merely cause Westerners some brief self-satisfaction. It will create a serious dilemma for other companies doing business with China and will force the world to rethink what it means to cooperate with China.

I agree that Google leaving China will do more than just give some Westerners some brief self-satisfaction. I just don’t think it’ll result in as much dilemma and rethinking Richard thinks it will. Foreign companies have been working in and with China long before Google agreed to self-censorship. I respectfully think Richard is overestimating the relevance of Google’s departure to the vast majority of industries and businesses. I’m not saying it won’t cause ripple effects. It will. I just don’t think it’s going to be as revolutionary in the business world as Richard (and many other journalists, commentators, and pundits) think it will be.

Richard also says Google leaving China is “a big if”. I actually suspect likewise, but right now we still have Google saying it is going to uncensor Google.cn, possibly to probably playing a game of chicken with the Chinese government censors, seeing who will flinch first. If and when Google uncensors Google.cn, I’m curious as to what people, especially Richard, think will happen next. Will it get blocked but Google.com won’t? Or will it get blocked and then so will Google.com? We’re all making educated and reasoned predictions here, but I’m trying to figure out what will happen in the context of how it hurts the Chinese internet users.

I’m not saying that these are necessarily good things, but they would almost certainly happen. It would create all sorts of issues among China’s educated classes, whose support China counts on.

I agree that Google’s departure will create issues among China’s educated classes. Unfortunately, I think they can be mollified so long as the most practical tools Google offers, that may be so integrated into their professional lives so much that it would be a monumentally painful loss if they could not longer access and use them, remains accessible. And this wouldn’t be web search. This would be Google Apps like GMail, Google Docs, etc.

There would have to be considerable loss of face for China as well, though it’s hard to say how much they care about that.

I agree that there will be a considerable loss of face for China. But is that what we’re after? To embarrass China? To make it lose face? Without a question, I believe China has done many–too many–shameful and embarrassing things. It deserves what it gets. But this isn’t China forcing Google to leave. It’s Google forcing China to force it to leave by reneging on an agreement. The only argument against that is to say China is now breaking its part of the agreement and making it so uncomfortable for Google that Google has to leave, which I can accept if Google tells us just what it is. Until then, it’s more like a girlfriend threatening to leave until she gets something her boyfriend isn’t willing to give but she previously was fine with. Again, she’s free to change her mind, but what about their pooch (the Chinese internet users)? What happens to the dog?

So while it would be a shame for the Chinese who use google to be deprived of a choice, no matter how manipulated and bastardized it may be, the greater effect would be on China’s reputation both among its own citizens and among the global community China has been eagerly courting. It would be a painful step backwards. Compared to this full-frontal assault on China’s reputation, the “self-satisfaction” that may be felt by some Westerners can only be described as trivial.

I’m not comfortable with the attitude of using this as a “full-frontal assault” on China’s reputation. I think there’s a huge amount of “self-satisfaction” underpinning even the desire to do so. It’s retribution for all perceived slights, disagreements, and frustrations. I understand the inevitability, even necessity, of geo-political hardball, but cheering this on over how much face China is going to lose and how much trouble it will cause the Chinese government amongst not just the international community but also its own people is a little disturbing. This is the attitude that fuels China’s argument that foreigners are trying to destabilize it, trying to keep it down.

That might be playing into China’s hand.

Post from: CN Reviews

Google Leaving China Will Not Be A Revolution, Televised Or Not

The most amusing thing in the Google crisis is all the commentators crying about the loss of Google.cn and its negative consequences for the freedom of the Chinese.

No.

Wrong.

At least for this English-language China blogger.

I don’t believe that a censored Google.cn is far better than no Google.cn, much less cry about it.

I believe that Google in China is better than no Google in China. I cry about the loss of Google in China and its negative consequences for the freedom of the Chinese. It isn’t about the loss of Google.cn itself. There are several reasons, which I’ll get to in a second.

Evil is Search Engine Manipulation with Google’s name on it

But first, Uln’s argument is that the loss of Google.cn is a good thing for Chinese users because Google.cn engages in search engine manipulation (SEM). In other words, while the “engine” underneath Google.cn is the same as Google.com, the results shown are different, manipulated under agreement with the Chinese government censors to hide results the Chinese government finds objectionable and doesn’t want its populace to see. An internet user in China using Google.com would be able to see all the results but might get blocked when he or she tries to click on a result that leads to a blocked website. The user would be reminded of the government’s censorship. However, an internet user in China using Google.cn would see only manipulated results, effectively hiding both the information and the censorship. That Google.cn explicitly notifies users when results are manipulated is dismissed by Uln as being largely inconsequential because users begin to ignore it or it is often placed below the list of results.

These are all valid criticisms of Google.cn and, by extension, Google itself. Uln argues that this compromises the integrity of the Google brand name and value proposition (do no evil, we provide information, etc.) thereby betraying the trust of its Chinese users who see the Google name slapped on Google.cn as meaning something about the information Google.cn will provide. Uln writes:

When you type a “sensitive” term and G.cn removes all the results except the People’s Daily and Xinhua, Google’s responsibility is double: not only it supports those often objectible views on the first page, but it also implicitly states that it is the ONLY opinion existing in the World.

And the worse is, the Chinese who believed that would be right to do so, because Google’s well known principles clearly specify their commitment to give all the information available  in a democratic way.

G.cn is a shame for Google and it is probably the single most evil page on the Chinese internet (because it manipulates just like Baidu, but lends the brand name of Google to the manipulation).

But is a loss of Google.cn a good thing?

No.

Google.cn is Choice

Google.cn represents choice. It gives Chinese internet users another option for searching the web other than Baidu. Yes, there is Yahoo and there is Bing but neither of them are remotely as big as Google.cn, even if Google.cn is second place to Baidu. It gives Chinese internet users access to Google’s internet indexing and search methodology and algorithms. Even as Google.cn suffers the same manipulation of potentially displayed search results as Baidu, it provides different ordering and ranking of displayed search results.

This different ordering and ranking is precisely one of the main reasons why Google beat Yahoo and other search engines (MSN Search, Ask.com, etc.) elsewhere in the world. Google’s search engine returned better sorted and more relevant search results to users. Why continue finding your answers in the 3rd or 5th Yahoo search result when Google gave it to you in its first result? People started using Google because it delivered what they were looking for more efficiently.

That’s what a good search engine is about, providing the best search results for any given user inputted query, and Google is a good search engine.

Yes, having incomplete search results due to government-mandated self-censorship is bad, but Chinese users are not searching for potentially censored or blocked material all day long on Google.cn. They, you know, use it to do other fairly mundane things that don’t get the Chinese government censors’ panties in a twist. They look up news on celebrities, research product information, find the latest scores to last night’s NBA game, etc. etc. etc. Google.cn provides a valuable service to its users in China because it still helps them find the information they are looking for using qualitatively different and valuable methodology and algorithms than Baidu.

Google.cn gives Chinese internet users a choice.

Choice is freedom.

Losing Google.cn is a loss of choice.

Less choice is less freedom.

Therefore, loss of Google.cn is arguably a negative consequence for the freedom of the Chinese. It may even be something worth crying about.

The reason why “a censored google.cn is better than no google.cn” is exactly this. Google.cn still provides different results of value in the vast majority of Chinese web searches. This was very much part of the whole utilitarian argument that Google gave for agreeing to market and censor Google.cn in the first place. Even with the same scrubbed search results as Baidu, Google still has some competitive advantage worth offering to Chinese netizens through Google.cn.

No, the competitive advantage isn't only Chinese-specific Google logos.

Without Google.cn, its users will switch to Google.com, which is better anyway

Uln argues that…

Google.com is a Search Engine that is:

1- Exactly as good quality as Google.cn (identical index)
2- Without the manipulation of Google.cn
3- AND much less censored than Google.cn

…which is definitely true.

So, like Uln, some people may be asking why Chinese users use the self-censored Google.cn instead of the freely accessible Google.com? Uln answers:

And the only reason why Chinese don’t use it is that Google.cn sounds more Chinese to them, and they just don’t care enough.

No, it isn’t because Google.cn sounds more Chinese to them, it is because Google.cn is more Chinese to them.

I don’t think there’s enough emphasis given to display language being a major reason why people prefer Google.cn over Google.com. The vast majority of Chinese internet users instantly feel intimidated and overwhelmed by any website that is not written in Chinese. This is a big reason why Chinese people say “Google.cn is for the Chinese”. We can’t underestimate the importance of first impressions.

“But you can change the interface language of Google.com to Simplified Chinese…”

Never underestimate the importance of first impressions.

Hell, people even cite “google” being hard to spell for Chinese people as being a reason why Google is behind Baidu. Ever wonder why Google owns g.cn?

I feel there’s a tenuous compromise between the CCP censors and Google right now that allows Google.com to remain freely accessible despite it not providing the same manipulated search results as Google.cn. This is as long as the majority of Chinese internet users willingly head for Google.cn, as long as they see Google.cn as being tailored specifically for them, the Chinese. It’s like the GFW still allowing proxies to work so long as it achieves its mission with blocking the vast majority. The CCP information control scheme is not about preventing everyone from knowing certain things, it’s about preventing too many people from knowing certain things.

If Google.cn is no more and this leads former Google.cn users to simply migrate to Baidu, then maybe — just maybe — Google.com will remain freely accessible in China. However, if it results in too many former Google.cn users subsequently adopting and using Google.com, the CCP will indeed worry.

So a question then is how much will Google push the envelope with an unblocked Google.com. After all, Google will still have a business necessity and plan for capturing Chinese internet users, right? Even if Google does nothing to appeal to mainland Chinese users, leaving it the way it is, it could still get blocked if too many mainland users flock to it. If Google, however, intentionally seeks to make Google.com user-friendly enough to bring in substantial Chinese people to search and get its non-manipulated results, then it will be seen as a threat to the Chinese government’s efforts to control information and thus it will definitely face the possibility of being blocked outright.

And when that happens, Uln’s conclusion here…

Most probably the disappearance of G.cn will push the present G.cn users to switch to G.com, and the outcome will be increased freedom in the Chinese internet.

…will definitely look short-sighted and naive.

His argument isn’t hard to understand, though. Uln argues that this forced migration from a shut-down Google.cn to Google.com is a good thing because Google.com at least offers non-manipulated search results. Even if the Chinese users still can’t click through to the blocked websites due to the GFW, at least they can see and read the search result excerpts and, more importantly, know that such information exists out there. They would at least be aware of the existence of those dissenters and dissenting opinions that the Chinese government ideally doesn’t even want them to be aware of. That’s more freedom, right? That’s good, right?

That’s more freedom, right? That’s good, right?

Yeah, that’s good. It’s better than nothing.

Yeah, except until the Chinese government realizes that, blocks Google.com, and it indeed becomes nothing.

Nothing for the Chinese internet user. No Google.cn, no Google.com, no Google search methodology and algorithms. Only Baidu.

No choice.

No freedom.

Of course, Uln acknowledges such near the end of his post:

On the other hand, some commenters are already saying that I am too optimistic, and that the CCP will quickly come to the same conclusion I have come and block Google.com.

Without Google.com, the Chinese will learn of the Great Firewall and how to get around it, which is better anyway

But Uln continues:

The good news is that EVEN if they do block Google.com, the situation will still be better than today. The Chinese Google users will start to miss the G, and they will start to use web proxies to access Google.com, expanding their use and making the Chinese net population more conscious of the GFW and of the ways to cross it.

I’m not so sold on that situation still being better than the situation today. It is extremely optimistic, almost unreasonably so, to think a blocking of Google.com will by itself, or through the former Google users, make the general Chinese internet populace more conscious of the GFW and of the tools that could be used to cross it. Remember, most of the Chinese internet doesn’t use Google. It wouldn’t be a loss for most Chinese netizens because it wouldn’t directly affect their internet lives. If they aren’t inconvenienced in a practical manner, how can we expect a meaningful expansion of GFW-consciousness or use of GFW-circumventing tools?

Are we really hoping former Google.cn and then Google.com Chinese users are going to be freedom fighters? That they’ll become internet freedom and anti-censorship activists, handing out information on proxies and VPNs to the masses, enlightening them all?

For web searches, Baidu is the easy alternative. The one stickiness point will be Google productivity tools like Google Apps and, most notably, GMail. It will probably be easier to use a proxy or VPN than to accept losing one’s e-mail account, and this is definitely more so for companies and organizations. Yes, we’ll get a lot of these people but they’re likely and already plenty aware of the GFW, of proxies and VPNs. The real coup is not in these people expanding their use of proxies and VPNs or hoping they’ll help the general Chinese net population become “more conscious of the GFW and of the ways to cross it”, it is in them being inconvenienced so much that they demand the government unblock Google.com.

Yet, even then, it may only go as far as so they can use their productivity tools, not necessarily Google’s web search.

So where’s the “increased freedom in the Chinese internet” in that?

How is that situation really better than now?

Because a few more people will learn about the GFW and fewer still will bother to find out how to use proxies and VPNs? All this at the expense of broader daily practical choice and productivity for all the existing Chinese Google users and future would-be Google converts?

Some people surely see this trade-off as being worth-it, as being acceptable, as being desirable.

Me? I’m not so sure.

Why Google.cn is Evil and should leave China

That’s the title of Uln’s post.

It’s also a straw man.

This was never about whether or not Google.cn would or should leave China. It was about whether or not Google would or should leave China. I hope everyone caught onto the difference from the beginning. Everything is hinging on whether or not Google.cn is what allows Google, and also Google.com, to remain in China. We cannot approach answering this question without considering Google being blocked from China entirely if it doesn’t play ball with the Chinese government on Google.cn. If Google refuses to play ball on Google.cn, by uncensoring it or just shutting it down, we have to consider what may happen to Google.com. We should even expect the worst. In fact, that’s what we do best when it comes to Chinese government censorship, right? Why are we even entertaining that Google.com will remain unscathed and freely accessible in mainland China at all?

I’m not going to say there are only two possibilities. Life can surprise us at times. But requiring Google to censor its Google.cn search results was always, at heart, about the Chinese government’s insecurities with letting its citizens know too much information it fears will bring chaos to their order. It was not about dicking with Google just because it could. How reasonable is it to even suggest that access to an unrestricted Google.com can persist in mainland China, behind the Great Firewall, without a restricted Google.cn running cover?

Uln declares:

In fact, I maintain that Google.cn is the most evil product to ever have existed in the Chinese internet, and the World will be a better place without it.

No, I strongly disagree. I think it offered Chinese internet users valuable choice in most practical matters. Yes, I wish it could do so without manipulated search results but life is not black and white and sometimes we have to make the best of what we can control. You have to be in a game to win it.

No, I don’t think “the World” will be a better place without Google.cn. I think certain people in “the World” will rejoice for about a week and then continue on living their merry lives, using Google as they always have, and not really care one way or another that nearly 400 million internet users in China no longer have a user-friendly version of Google at their disposal. So no, “the World” will not be a better place, just temporarily more smug.

China, on the other hand, will definitely be a worse place without it and Chinese internet users will definitely be worse off for it.

Recommended Reading:

• “Google China cyber espionage saga” from ZDNet’s Zero Day (h/t ESWN)

Post from: CN Reviews

Google In China Is Better Than No Google In China

Set from Flickr user Junyu Wang (王俊煜):

Flowers on the sign:

Candlelight vigil:

Photographers and people gathering around:

Google headquarters at night:

Aeriel view from the building earlier in the day:

From Twitter user bonnae come some photos (source on img.ly):

Some more photos at Tinypic user foku:

Post from: CN Reviews

Google China photos: because I’m without words

The Chinese government seeks a harmonious society. But it’s Facebook’s social games that are cooperative, while China’s closer resemble the Ultimate Fighting Championships. Of China’s top 10 social games, 9 feature competitive actions that hurt other players (see graphic); the one exception is Renren Restaurant, an exact copy of Playfish’s Restaurant City on Facebook. Of Facebook’s top 10 games, only 1 features competitive actions. Chinese players cherish intense competition.

The post has more details on the game actions, which include enslaving and humiliating friends, bombs in the hospital, and looting at the farm.

Mischief Accomplished: worms added to friend's farm

Why all the Schadenfreude, Stealing, and Status?

Three speculations as to why Chinese games are more competitive.

1) Chinese Education System

Are Chinese children hard-wired for competition at a young age? Do Chinese become accustomed, even fond, of the tools required to succeed in a hyper-competitive education system? Are social games a lifelong detox from the gaokao?

2) Culture

Though ambiguous and slippery, culture is often cited as a source of societal differences (and even geopolitics, in Samuel Huntington’s Clash of the Civilizations) But real-life crime rates, including theft, are not notably higher appear in China (though harsher punishments and lackadaisical reporting muddle the issue). So why should they be in social games? Luxury goods, booming in China, help make the case that status is especially important in Chinese culture.

Nasty actions in the Wonder Hospital game

3) Specific to Social Games

Perhaps Chinese are more apt to add “friends” on social networks, even if there’s no close personal relationship. That could lead to fewer reservations about stealing from your “friends.” China’s prolific online friendships are evidenced by the finding that Chinese have more online than offline friends. Or perhaps Chinese netizens simply have a better sense of humor than Westerners when it comes to the value of virtual goods.

The new China Social Games Blog

China Social Games is a blog dedicated to tracking the hottest games, networks, and trends. Though already wildly popular in China (and on Facebook), social gaming is still in its infancy. Games are just starting to become truly social, so the China market is evolving, innovative, and yes, extremely competitive. China Social Games offer up-to-the-minute coverage as the market grows, consolidates, and Western players enter.

Our latest guest posts:

• TechCrunch: China To Police Social Games
• VentureBeat: China’s growing addiction: online farming games
• VentureBeat: The year it exploded: 10 hottest Chinese social games of 2009

China Social Games is brought to you by the BloggerInsight team, regular contributors to CNReviews. Follow @CNsocialgames on Twitter.

Post from: CN Reviews

Social Games: Are Chinese More Competitive Than Westerners?

As 2010’s first show in the non-profit, volunteer-run island6 Arts Center located in Shanghai’s 50 Moganshan Lu art district, “Fakirs” opens on January 16th at 8pm and will explore visual research on paranormal studies. Circus acrobats, magicians, illusionists and artists will perform feasts of magic to animate the evening.

More exhibition info can be obtained at the island6 official website »

Date & Time

Opening Party:

8:00 P.M. January 16, 2010

Exhibition:

From January 16, 2010 to March 05, 2010

Address

2nd Floor, Building 6, 50 Mo Gan Shan Rd.,

Shanghai, 200060, China

中国上海莫干山路50号6号楼2楼

Cost

Free

Post from: CN Reviews

“Fakir” @ island6 Arts Center, Shanghai: January 18 – March 05

What was interesting and memorable about 2009?

Interested in your answer to this question.  To jog your memory, we compiled our “best” posts of the year.  Here’s part two of our “CN Reviews Best of 2009,” covering the topics we touched on in the second half of 2009 (including some stuff in June).  Part one is here.

People

In June, Kai brought us up to date on what happened to Chai Ling, the controversial TAM incident protester turned software company executive.  She brought defamation charges onto the filmmakers of the award-winning documentary “The Gate of Heavenly Peace” where “she arguably came across as a sniveling self-centered, power-hungry, emotional wreck quoted as secretly desiring bloodshed to advance her ends.”

In June, Kai also covered Barcamp Shanghai (coverage overview) and TedxShanghai (coverage overview), including some write-ups of:  Jenny Bai on Youth Pop Culture and how make China cool;  Renee Hartmann of enovate on selling to the China youth Market;  John Fan on the challenges of serving the China’s internet market from a Taiwan base;  Toine Roojimans on payment systems in China;  Gang Lu, on the overall state of the social internet in China;  Stefano Negri of McKinsey on China’s rapid urbanization; and Andrew Yu on how travel can be transformative, and his NGO 1kg.org

In July, Kai met up with Tania Branigan, correspondent of the Guardian, and spoke about her experience covering the Urumqi riots and the general topic of Western coverage of China.  The Guardian also did an excellent piece called China at the Crossroads which includes video and photography from colleague Dan Chung who also posts at DSLR News Shooter blog and did a great timelapse and slow-motion video on the National Day parade in October.

In August, I met up with Rebecca MacKinnon and wrote about her perspective on the internet’s uncertain future globally and US-China relations.  I also noted that prominent Chinese tech blogger Keso was suspended from Twitter, probably because the use of VPN services, and shortly after we publicized this, his account was reinstated.

In September, Thomas Friedman wrote an editorial contrasting China’s “one-party autocracy” with the U.S.’ “one-party democracy.”  Here’s an excerpt of his post:

Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today.
One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power.

This drew some reaction from Richard Berger at Peking Duck who felt that Friedman was papering over the significant flaws in the Chinese system:

Namely, that that kind of authority comes only with a very heavy price, and that while the CCP may be “reasonably enlightened” about energy, natural resources and ensuring sustainability, these benefits are balanced, and sometimes far outweighed, by its knee-jerk self-protective tendencies, which put the party’s survival on the very top of its priority list…

We felt that Western reactions to Friedman were largely defensive and overreacting, in a way the flip side of the “easily hurt feelings of the sensitive Chinese netizens defending China’s fragile online honor.” (paraphrasing Kaiser Kuo).

In September, I wrote about Jack Ma’s speech at the Clinton Global Initiative (see below).  Kai also rounded up the usual suspects in his post about great China blogs that translate Chinese news content, including:  Roland Soong, Oiwan Lam, Bob Chen, et al; Fauna, and Key.

In September, we were 2nd after the WSJ in breaking the news on Kai-Fu Lee’s resignation from Google, and we broke the news (in English) on the name of Kai-Fu Lee’s new firm, Innovation Works.  We also interviewed Keso on Lee’s transition. BloggerInsight followed up with a poll of bloggers that uncovered a sense of the constraints that Lee was under at Google.

In October, we discovered David Moser’s Blue Ocean Network who profiled Jeremy Goldkorn & Michael Anti and the Chinese blogosphere.

In November, we wrote about Kaiser Kuo’s speech at TedX Honolulu entitled “Red Guards vs. Rednecks” and the effects of online extremism creating a growing rift between Chinese and the West.

During the 2nd half of the year, Kai also experimented with CNReviews Quotes, where we featured short quotes from:  Elaine Chow, Roland Soong, Josh from Cup of Cha, Alec Ash, Charles Custer, Col. Timothy Reese, Paul Carr, Jeremiah Jenne, Carol Bartz, Andy Keller, Kelly Hammond, and Howard French.

Business

In July, Kai highlighted an Ogilvy China report on the opportunity in 4th-6th tier cities and encouraged entrepreneurs to get out of Beijing and Shanghai to see how life is different in these other cities.  I didn’t even know cities were tiered beyond 1st and 2nd tier!

In August, BloggerInsight posted on the top 4 reasons why Chinese social networking is different.  One insight I appreciated: “Young Chinese netizens view their SNS profiles as representations of themselves to the world, establishments of self territory outside of their parents’ and schools’ oversight. For them, social networking is about standing out and building a reputation in an online world. Local social networking sites do a great job of catering to this need for self-expression.”

Meanwhile, in August I was invited to attend a Churchill Club roundtable hosted by Symbio.  Speakers included: Linda Chen (Partner, KPMG), Jacob Hsu (CEO, Symbio), Harry Shum (Corporate VP, Search Development; Microsoft), and Lip-Bu Tan (President & CEO, Cadence Design Systems, Inc.). My coverage in two parts (part 1, part 2) included some discussion of the nature of innovation in China, the myth of cheap labor (in certain industries), the cost advantages of China eroded by the high cost of senior people and “always having to have a Plan B,” and techniques for retaining staff through rewards on one hand, and guilt on the other.

In September, I attended the Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting (CGI) and seemed to be the only blogger/journalist covering the China related news (all CNReviews CGI posts tagged cgi2009).  I posted on the fact that Jessica Alba was there, but no China.   Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba Group, was the only major representative of China.  Together with Grameen Trust, Alibaba announced its involvement in Grameen China.  Also in attendance was  Calvin Chin of Qifang.  Wang Yusuo of ENN Group announced a partnership with Duke Energy to work on clean coal and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).  There was extensive discussion about approaches toward innovation in social entrepreneurship.

In September, BloggerInsight continued to cover social game trends featuring iPartment, which was designed to appeal to teen girls who, you guessed it, would attract pimply teen boys.  As a result of that post, we now rank #3 in Google for the term “hot teen girls China.”  Thanks a lot, BloggerInsight!

In December, Ying Xue (founder of BloggerInsight) wrote about the future of microblogging in China and her talk at Ad:Tech China.  She was later quoted in a CNN piece about trends in this space.

Life

In June, Baoru (Katherine) posted on a report that Chinese students have longest study hours.  During the Gaokao examination season, Kai pulled together a review of some posts from Wang Jianshuo (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), James Fallows, and Jeremiah Jenne.

In July, Kai commented on the widely read spoof of Chinese journalism by The Onion.  Kai’s take: “While most of the pieces are pretty amusing (some are pretty lame, as if they were trying too hard), I have to agree with Elaine when she concludes that the satire overall falls a bit short from the ludicrous content of genuine state-sponsored Chinese journalism and rhetoric.”  I thought it rang pretty true!

Kai also wrote about Transformers in China and how Chinese netizens saw it as American propaganda.   Roland Soong comments “outlines three arguments for how Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was a big showcase advertisement for the sale of American arms, propaganda for all countries to cooperate with the United States, and an idealization of American soldiers.”  Will Moss followed up with an Imagethief post aptly entitled “Hard robots, soft power.”

Kai also highlighted a post about FLG persecution by Charles Custer at ChinaGeeks:

There is nowhere on earth we can learn about or read about without bias, but even given the assumption that bias exists everywhere, China might be the worst country in the world to attempt to study if you’re trying to assess the veracity of anything remotely controversial.

In July, the Urumqi riots were well underway, and Kai covered an interesting story about why the Uighurs didn’t get the same love as the Tibetans from the West.  One writer concluded that they were simply “less photogenic.”  Whatever that means.

In September, Kai followed up with a post that talked more about Han discrimination toward Tibetans, inspired by a Chinese writer at Alec Ash’s 6 blog who said “it is not easy to comment on Tibet [for Han people]”

In September, we continued to muse about manufacturing reality with media with an excellent follow up post about The Onion spoof and some commentary from a blogger called the Last Psychiatrist, which basically talks about the propaganda power of media.

We also followed the blowback from the Lou Jing incident.  Lou Jing is a Shanghainese girl who’s father was African-American and mother is Shanghainese.  After appearing on DragonTV’s Jia You! Oriental Angels, she was faced with online racism in Chinese BBSs, translated by chinaSMACK.  However, Kai noted that foreigners attacking Chinese racists reveated their own racism:

Just as the examples of Chinese racism were outrageous were the foreigner comments predictable. In the face of ridiculously ignorant and malicious racism by many Chinese netizens, many foreign netizens flooded chinaSMACK’s comment section with equally ignorant and malicious racism against the Chinese. “A hah! I knew Chinese society was racist!” the chorus crooned.

Chinayouren also offered some commentary on racism in China.

Kai also generated some discussion around Taiwan’s status, weaving between the Straits to say that while eventual reunification is in Taiwan’s best interests, Taiwan currently is a de facto, independent state.

October was the scene of National Day celebrations, which we reported would be larger than the Olympics.  Kai shared a contemplative piece about Shanghai side streets, away from the manufactured excitement of the parade itself.

November brought more commentary on American interference with China’s internal affairs, and Kai’s general indifference to that.  We also talked about the movie 2012 and whether or not it was really praising the Chinese (more youth reaction to 2012 reported by enovateChina).

Yes, Obama made his first visit to China, but we (and Chinese netizens) were more entranced by a beautiful girl wearing red and black.  Wonder if her name is “Creamy.”

In December, Kai shared his experience on overnight trains between Shanghai and Beijing and whether or not to take it vs. flying. Min also wrote about 2010’s Chinese holiday schedule.

Well, that’s what we blogged about.  Pretty sure a lot of interesting stuff happened in 2009 that we didn’t blog about.

What did you find interesting and memorable about 2009?

Post from: CN Reviews

CN Reviews looks back at 2009 – part 2

Photo credit: ED Jones/AFP/Getty Images via Boston.com

So what did you find interesting and memorable about 2009? In April, we (led by Kai Pan) rebooted CNReviews with the goal of focusing on interesting people, business opportunities, and aspects of life in China.  Here’s part one of two of “CN Reviews Best Of 2009″ from my perspective (Kai may differ), covering the first half of 2009.

People

In January, Rebecca MacKinnon wrote a great letter to Obama (in Huffington Post) that highlighted four key misunderstandings that Westerners have about China, namely:  (1) popular opinion does actually matter to the authoritarian CCP, (2) that young Chinese don’t see the West as liberators, (3) that popular support for the government is greater than most Western people think, and (4) the Chinese are not “an undifferentiated mass of brainwashed drones.”

In April, Jackie Chan created a Western media sh1tstorm with his comments that “Chinese need to be controlled.” Translated by the AP (via Taipei Times):

I’m not sure if it’s good to have freedom or not,” Chan said. “I’m really confused now. If you’re too free, you’re like the way Hong Kong is now. It’s very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic.”  Chan added: “I’m gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we’re not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want.

Kai Pan took issue with this translation (as did ESWN) and argued that the Western media is mistranslating his words and ignoring the context of Chinese history:

Any person with a passing interest in Chinese history should be aware of the Chinese people’s preoccupation with order and chaos. Unification and revolution throughout China’s much boasted 5000 years of history has almost always bore the cause of bringing order to a China plagued with chaos. As a Chinese person, however Hollywood-ified, Chan is deeply aware of this, and his comments regarding his uncertainty over more freedom or less freedom are made with reference to what balance would best serve the interests of developing China forward as a whole.

So please, for the love of God, stop trying to make his comments into some sort of high-profile betrayal of — or backtracking from — the unassailable righteousness and immutable pinnacle of human enlightenment that is “Freedom.” Doing so says more about the colored-lenses you’re wearing than it does about Chan’s personal thoughts regarding individual rights and liberties. It also says your Chinese sucks, or you’re allowing yourself to play stupid.

In April and May, we also highlighted the progressive development of the English-language China blogosphere.  First, we noted  the growing trend of translating Chinese BBS and social media by chinaSMACK, ChinaHush and others, joining old stalwarts like Global Voices Online and Danwei.  Kai also profiled some of our favorite bloggers, including Charles Custer of ChinaGeeks and Rand Han of LittleRedBook.cn.  I then highlighted 10 Ecletic China blogs including Adam Schokora’s 56minus1, Alec Ash’s 6, Zafka Zhang’s China Youth Watch, street fashion blog Stylites in Beijing, and many others.  Finally, we compiled a list of 72+ women English-language China bloggers to prove (to ourselves) that not all China bloggers are culturally-sensitive white guys in China (many of whom we know and love, and whose Chinese is much better than mine).

Business

In March, I attended a panel at SXSW about Entrepreneurship in China that was surprisingly well attended considering it was in Austin, TX.  Kris Krug, Robert Scales, Andrew Lih, Sage Brennan, and Kaiser Kuo (from the audience) contributed some great points for Westerners interested in going to China.  Some of my favorite points were as follows:

1. Take your time to understand China.
2. You simply cannot succeed without a trusted and capable local Chinese partner
3. Question your assumptions about how things work in China.  Always.
4. Learn to handle more nuance and complexity than you are used to in the West.  Evaluate China on its own terms
5. If you want to truly change China, you must also localize your approach (in reference to the Tibetan activists during the Olympics)

In March and April, I also fretted about seeing the first clear signals that US dollar hegemony is coming to an end, with People’s Bank of China governor Zhao Xiaochaun asking the International Monetary Fund to begin playing the role that US has historically played in providing an international reserve currency.  I later wrote about 5 signs the Chinese government is preparing an escape route from the US dollar.  I’m afraid this story is far from over.

In May, our partner BloggerInsight translated a post called “Taobao is Toxic” by prominent Chinese blogger Keso which highlighted Alibaba’s push into transforming university graduates into businesspeople through becoming Taobao sellers.  The only problem is that Taobao is brutally competitive and that this initiative would merely enslave students into becoming part of the Taobao system, with little hope of success.

In May, I also took the opportunity to observe a bit of “parachute journalism,” with Sarah Lacy of TechCrunch swooping into the China VC community in dramatic fashion and writing an expose of alleged bribe-taking at Sequoia China.  The post was later quietly edited with all the major claims removed.

In June, internet control continued to be in the news with the proposed Green Dam initiative and then CCTV attacks on yellow content (aka porn) on Google (which include a “fake” student as an interview subject).  BloggerInsight then polled Chinese bloggers on their opinion regarding the CCTV attack.  Bloggers sardonically noted that Baidu also received negative CCTV press until they spent 40 mm RMB in advertising, at which point the reports went away.

Finally, we and BloggerInsight also highlighted the opportunities in the Chinese travel industry, and mused about the future of travel metasearch in China.

Life

We captured some of the current events that affected people living in China in 2009 and covered some other random topics along the way.

What’s life without food? In January, I reposted a version of Min Guo’s excellent slideshow of regional differences of Chinese New Year food.

In February, David Feng committed an act of journalism by breaking the news on the CCTV fire (TVCC building, actually) on Twitter and driving to the CCTV building to live-tweet and take photos of the fire which burned the TVCC/Mandarin Oriental building to a crisp.

In April, Kai waded into the discussion on racism in China. Kai also stirred up some controversy by highlighting the fact that many expats come to China and then not really make an effort to develop “real” friends who are local Chinese.  Min Guo also translated a few posts from overseas Chinese community site Wenxue City highlighting a Chinese returnee’s experience coming back to Shanghai after time outside of China.

In May, Kai also provided an exceptional news summary on the Swine Flu response in China. We also remembered the victims of the Wenchuan earthquake on the 1 year anniversary on May 12.

June 4 was Chinese Internet Maintenance Day in China, with over 390 sites down for scheduled maintenance.  I blogged about edited memories and consensual amnesia on this sensitive anniversary.  Kai also commented on Mark Anthony Jones‘ Fools Mountain blog post that questioned the dominant Western narrative of the TAM Crackdown.  We also remembered where we each were in 1989, and highlighted some newly released Tiananmen photos of the event.  Finally, BloggerInsight blogged about Chinese bloggers’ perspective on the 20th anniversary June 4.  I’m proud of our coverage on this important historical event.

That’s it.  In the vastness of the topical areas we broadly covered, what happened in the first-half of 2009 that we should remember?

Post from: CN Reviews

CN Reviews looks back at 2009 – part 1

We have indeed gone together, during these two years. While thankful to our commenters and especially my fellow writers, I thought it would be worth sending link-love to the top 20 blogs that have linked to us and sent traffic our way.  In our peripatetic musings these past 2 years, they have offered us intellectual bread and water, gave us shelter, protected us from evil trolls, and otherwise kept us on our odyssey. Now if only we knew where we were going…

Thanks:

• EastSouthWestNorth (url: zonaeuropa.com) by Roland Soong – See Roland’s CNBloggerCon 2009 post on “Is Dialogue Possible?” and his 2008 CNBloggerCon prepared remarks.  Roland, we are fellow travelers on your journey to encourage East-West (and Mainland, HK, Taiwan) dialogue. Will Roland ever provide RSS feeds to all sections?  Time will tell.  Twitter: @eswn
• China Law Blog (CLB) by Dan Harris – Never thought I’d find a “law” blog interesting, but like a good lawyer, CLB goes beyond the law to highlight topics on China business and society that help those who do business in China or with Chinese partners.  In one sentence, I’d say CLB is about “sh1t that goes down in China and how you can avoid it.”  Consequently, this is an important blog to read! Twitter: @danharris
• chinaSMACK – IMHO, the launch of chinaSMACK is the most important event that has happened in the world of English-language China blogs in the last two years–who else new has expanded audience to English-language China blogs?  Why read something that resembles the college course on China you slept through, when you can indulge your inner voyeur by reading hot, viral stories in translation?  If you’re feeling 很黄很暴力 (hen huang hen baoli, very yellow very violent) come to chinaSMACK.  Then go to ChinaHush, who has gone beyond imitation to becoming a pitch-perfect complement (nice work, Key) to Fauna’s SMACK and in some ways even more interesting.  Fauna, when am I going to see more than 1/2 of your face?  You tantalize.  Twitter: @chinasmack
• Danwei (Chinese mirror Danwei.tv) – Sometimes a bit erudite for my techy, petty bourgeois tastes, Joel Martinsen, Alice Xin Liu, Eric Mu, and Jeremy Goldkorn do great work in bringing China to the world.  Too bad all the thanks they get is a nice URL block from the Net Nanny.  Lessons from observing Xu Zhiyong and Jeremy: no good deed goes unpunished in China.  Twitter: @danwei, @axliu, @goldkorn
• ChinaOnTV – Wasn’t expecting to see ChinaOnTV in our stats, but we had partnered with them to put together some interviews around May 2008. I also think they have a bug generating traffic in our direction!  Thanks for working with us, Johnson Q and Thalia! Twitter: @chinaontv
• China.Alltop.com – OK, its an 1-page China blog aggregator.  But we’ve been honored with above-the-fold linkage since the inception of the page.  So thanks Guy Kawasaki, Neenz Faleafine, and Christine Lu for your trust in us.  Twitter: @neenz, @christinelu, @guykawasaki
• The Peking Duck – Richard Burger’s blend of political, economic and social commentary is is many ways the archetypal China bridge blog.  Richard, I’ve learned a lot from you, and from the battle royale that often happens in your commentstream.  Twitter: @thepekingduck
• Shanghaiist – When we talk about what we want to be when we grow up, Shanghaiist often comes up. Elaine Chow, Cary Hooper, Kenneth Tan, and contributors, thanks.  Twitter: @shanghailaine, @shanghaiist, @singaporeano, @CaryHooper
• Fools Mountain -  The Yin to Peking Duck’s Yang, Fools Mountain contains political, cultural, social and economic commentary that some would consider to be largely “pro-China.”  Instead of the archetypal Western (mostly-male) blogger in China, Fools Mountain is mostly people (apparently mostly-male) of Chinese heritage living in the West.  Its an important blog that also has a very active commenter community.  Kudos to you:  Admin, BXBQ, Tang Buxi, and the rest of the blogging team.  Twitter: ????
• Wangjianshuo – I consider Jianshuo to be one of my blogging mentors, and have enjoyed following his blog since about 2005.  My original desire was to build CN Reviews into a blog community of both native English speakers and native Chinese speakers like Wang Jianshuo who blog in English.  But with 338 million Intenet users, there appears to be only one (or maybe a small handful) of Wangjianshuo’s.   Anyway, many thanks for your encouragement and your friendship.  Twitter: @jianshuo
• Wall Street Journal China Real Time Report – The China Real Time Report nee China Journal is probably the best China business blog run by a mainstream media outlet.  The Wall Street Journal also has some of the best overall China coverage out there.  Folks I follow online and in print:  Andrew Batson, Sky Canaves, Loretta Chao, Ian Johnson, Shai Oster, Juliet Ye. Twitter: @ChinaRealTime,  @WSJChina, @skycita, @AndrewBatson
• ChinaGeeks – We’ve already made clear our bromatic feelings for fellow blogger Charles Custer, of China Geeks, and his compadre Chris Hearne.  ChinaGeeks is the up-and-coming commentary blog of the China blogosphere.  Charter 08, Racism in China, Hu Yaobang, Ai Weiwei, May Fouth, Gaokao in translation, Chinese patriotism…I especially appreciated your perspective in the month prior to the 20th anniversary of the TAM incident.
• Global Voices Online China – GVO just turned five…congratulations!  Read their story over at co-founder Rebecca MacKinnon’s blog RConversation or over at Global Voices itself.  Some folks that have done good work at GVO China: Bob Chen, Oiwan Lam, John Kennedy, and many newer contributors that I’m not that familiar with.
• China Digital Times (CDT) – Led by Sophia Beach and Xiao Qiang, CDT is an aggregator blog that covers a broad range of social and political topics about China. Twitter: @CDTimes, @CDT
• James Fallows – He’s provided a nuanced perspective on China to Western audiences.  I especially appreciated his series on Gaokao that gave me some insights into the Chinese educational system.  I also appreciated his perspective on Chinese diversity, individualism, internal political competition within the Party, relative openness of the Chinese economy in contrast to other East Asian economies, etc. in this Aspen Ideas Festival exchange between him and Chimerica-fearmongering, castle-owning Niall Ferguson (video).  Honestly, I am trying to get through Niall’s arrogant style to get to the substance of his argument, which is worthy of some consideration.
• Time’s China Blog -  This blog shut down 9/18 (see Simon Elegant’s farewell post with comments replete with haters and spam).  Thanks for your support.  Twitter: @austinramzy
• Lost Laowai (LLW) – Mostly the brainchild of Ryan McLaughlin, LLW is a group blog serving the expat community in China.  Thanks, Ryan! Twitter: @lostlaowai, @thehumanaught
• GraniteStudio – Jeremiah, thanks for including us in your 以文會友 list!  GraniteStudio is wide-ranging and provides a historical perspective to current events.  Twitter: @GraniteStudio
• Imagethief – Will Moss brings humor, good-hearted irreverance and general interestingness to the often heavy topic of US-China relations and mainstream media gaffes on both sides of the Pacific.  Twitter: @imagethief
• Ifgogo.com – Guo Qirui (aka Aw Guo, or Awflasher) started this group blog to encourage Chinese to blog in English.  Over the years, I’ve become friends with several authors:  Lisa Lee, Cat Chen, and Aw himself.  I wish there were more Chinese bloggers Twitter: @awflasher, @CatChen

Thanks!

Gansu Expressway photo courtesy: Chinadaily BBS

Post from: CN Reviews

CN Reviews’ 2nd Anniversary: thanks to our blog friends