Academics and publishers rebel against censorship requests from China

Politics & Current Affairs

A summary of the top news in Chinese politics and current affairs for August 22, 2017. Part of the daily The China Project newsletter, a convenient package of Chinaโ€™s business, political, and cultural news delivered to your inbox for free. Subscribe here.


After Cambridge University Press (CUP), one of the worldโ€™s oldest publishing houses, first censoredย and then un-censoredย 315 academic articles from its China Quarterlyย journal at the behest of Chinese authorities, it has been revealed that two other academic outlets have also been pressured to self-censor in China. Academics, journals, and institutions around the world are expressing alarmย at the further suffocation of freedom of speech in the Peopleโ€™s Republic.

  • The Journal of Asian Studies, also published by CUP, said โ€œauthorities asked its publisher remove about 100 articlesย from its website in mainland China,โ€ but that โ€œthe request was refused,โ€ the SCMPย reports.
  • Reutersย reportsย that LexisNexis, a โ€œprovider of legal, regulatory and business information,โ€ revealed that “earlier this year LexisNexis Business Insight Solutions in China was asked to remove some content from its database.” The statement continues, โ€œIn March 2017, the company withdrewย two products (Nexis and LexisNexis Academic) from the Chinese market.”

Academic societies and scholars are even less happy with Chinese authorities than usual.

  • The Association for Asian Studies published a statementย in response to CUPโ€™s censorship battle with Chinese authorities: โ€œThe officers of the association areย extremely concernedย about this violation of academic freedom, and the AAS is in ongoing discussions with CUP about how it will respond to the Chinese government.โ€
  • Dr. Michiel Kolman, president of the International Publishers Association, gave a statement in support of CUP and against Chinese censorship, the Guardian reports. He added, โ€œThere is no upside to censorship โ€” it simply hampers human progress and stimulates fear and resentment.โ€
  • Noted China scholar Geremie R. Barmรฉ observesย a larger, dispiriting trend of a resurgence of a โ€œburn the books, bury the scholarsโ€ tactic taken in Chinaโ€™s past. He writesย that โ€œunder the rule of Chinaโ€™s Chairman of Everything, Xi Jinping, a man who has more than a little of Mao about him, the noose has been tightening once more. No books have been burned yet (but who knows how many manuscripts have been relegated by the censors to data death on hard drives or to the desk draw, where they lie in wait for some future relaxation?).โ€

Predictably, news of CUPโ€™s decision to defy censors was โ€” you guessed it โ€” censored in China. Read the Guardianโ€™s summaryย of that development, and in the same publication see an op-edย from Tim Pringle, editor of the China Quarterly journal, which was originally censored last week.