Demidov, Oleg (2012). Social Networks in International and National
Security. In Security Index: A Russian Journal on International Security, 18:1,
23-36.
(Accessed online at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19934270.2012.634122)
In this article, Oleg Demidov
examines the impact that internet technology and social networking in
particular have on security. He analyses the possible destabilizing effect
technology can have on national security, ultimately questioning whether it is
a security risk or not, with reference to the Arab Spring. Demidov defines
‘social networks’ first, rightfully highlighting that it is a broad spectrum,
and narrowing it by giving examples, such as Facebook and Google+, and
referring to an approved definition of ‘social network’ to state key features
sites must contain in order to be a social network.
Demidov examines the role that
Arab Spring played in government reform regarding social media. He states that
although freedom and speech were largely supported by the international community,
it is unlikely that social networking communities have the power to become a
non-state actor, and that an international country would fuel the decline of a
government. He outlines the threats that social networking poses, for example,
cyber anonymity and terrorist threats online work towards destabilizing
security because it is difficult to determine where threats come from. A key
factor in his argument is that he provides the reader with strong possible
alternatives, and highlights the strengths of governments supporting the use of
social networks, for example using Twitter and Facebook as a ‘public
announcement system’ to broadcast safety procedures in the event of a national
emergency.
Demidov asserts that while social
networking communities played an important part in Arab Spring, there is no
need to view them as a security threat.
Tejada, C. (2012, May 8) China
Expels Al-Jazeera Foreign Correspondent. Wall
Street Journal. Retrieved from: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/05/08/china-expels-al-jazeera-correspondent/
The
author and speaker in the video, Carlos Tejada, speaking from Beijing, explains
the situation in China at the moment, expanding on information given in the
text regarding the expulsion of an Al-Jazeera journalist from China. Tejada
explains that although the Chinese government have failed to give a reason, it
is largely believed that the journalist’s work on a video regarding black jails
in China attributed to her subsequent expulsion. There is an imbedded video of
Melissa Chan’s video on black jails on the site, as opposed to on the other two
sources. Tejada implies that this is the likely reason, and that officials in
China are beginning to worry about foreign media coverage and their content,
after Arab Spring, fearing a Jasmine Revolution in China. However, as Tejada is
speaking as a journalist currently in China, his knowledge of the subject would
likely be more accurate as the extent of the crackdown would be felt,
highlighting that rules for foreign media organizations obtaining visas have
become stricter. The interviewer states that China has not expelled a foreign
journalist since 1998, but neglects to mention what this could imply for the
future of foreign journalists in China. Tejada confirms that there is a tenser
climate following Chan’s expulsion, by saying that China has already stated
that foreign journalists need to obey the rules.
Osnos, E. (2012, May 8). China
Expels a Correspondent. The New Yorker Blogs. Retrieved from: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/evanosnos/2012/05/china-expels-melissa-chan.html
The
writer, Evan Osnos, gives an opinion on what he thinks of Melissa Chan’s
expulsion from China, stating in his opening sentence that ‘China is moving
backwards’. Osnos, like Tejada, is writing from Beijing, but he provides a more
in-depth conclusion that this will have on China’s relations with the rest of
the world. Moreover, Osnos has been producing journalism and has studied
Chinese policy for over fifteen years, and the majority of his work on the New
Yorker centres on China, and controversial issues within it. Osnos claims that
China’s decision signifies a move backwards, towards ‘Soviet-era strategy’,
explaining that China cannot expect to contain or censor foreign journalists by
expulsion if they want to maintain their claims that they are a soft power.
Moreover, Osnos, as opposed to Tejada and Lee, goes on to quote from the
Foreign Correspondent’s Club China, of which Melissa Chan was a secretary this
year, which strengthens his argument as it provides us with the picture that
the future of journalism in China is dismal. Osnos, like Tejada, says it is
most likely due to Chan’s praised work on corruption in China. Osnos also
provides more information on foreign journalists having problems with Visas,
stating that over the past two years, more than twenty-seven foreign
journalists have had a four-month approval wait for their Visas. Osnos asserts
that this will hardly present China as an internationally friendly state.
Wen,
P. (2012, May 9). China expels al-Jazeera TV journalist. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from:
Phillip Wen's article in the Sydney Morning Herald is also of Beijing origin, however, as opposed to the other two articles covering Melissa Chan's expulsion, Wen highlights more the reaction it has generated from agencies such as the Foreign Correspondents Club China, and this article presents us with a stronger sense of censorship regenerating in China, even though, as Wen states, this is the first occurrence for more than a decade.
Phillip Wen's article in the Sydney Morning Herald is also of Beijing origin, however, as opposed to the other two articles covering Melissa Chan's expulsion, Wen highlights more the reaction it has generated from agencies such as the Foreign Correspondents Club China, and this article presents us with a stronger sense of censorship regenerating in China, even though, as Wen states, this is the first occurrence for more than a decade.
Although there is no mention of the Communist Party in either Osnos nor Tejada's articles, Wen uses 'the ruling Communist Party' in his article, as opposed to writing 'the Chinese government', or alternatives. The use of the word Communist in that article brings up negative connotations and could give some people the view that China's policy is becoming more hardline and reflecting its previous Communist stance. Although hardline when it comes to human rights activists, China has, up until this point, worked towards promoting an atmosphere less tense than previous years. However, in the context of the recent Arab Spring and the implications that brought to government's, it is understandable that China could fear an uprising, only accentuated by journalists like Chan, whose work in China centred on corruption and Chinese 'black jails', which Wen does not state or imply, although it is made obvious in Tejada and Osnos' articles that this could lead to China's reason.
Moreover, Wen neglects to cover in depth the effects that this may have in the future, although he mentions it in passing.
