C4DT interviews Florence Graezer Bideau on Chinese tech regulation

“China intends to fill the void in a world characterized by a vacuum of values”

Florence Graezer Bideau is a sinologist at EPFL’s College of Humanities and the Politecnico di Torino. She works at the crossroad of anthropology, history, and innovation policies to understand the relations between culture and power in contemporary China.

From a cultural point of view, one of the most striking examples of China’s regulatory measures was the attack on social media’s “celebrity culture”, widely described as a pervasive Western influence. How do you explain it?

Florence Graezer Bideau: China’s celebrity culture is indeed increasing with the rapid development of creative industries. It is now something they share with the West. The real difference lies in China’s strong tradition of role models. During Mao’s era, the communist party imported the soviet model of the mine worker hero Stakhanov with Wang Jinxi, known as the Iron Man. The population was expected to identify with him and to learn from him. In each district, you had a model worker, a model teacher, a model leader who were supposed to drive the population to higher moral standards. That goes alongside a long tradition of what anthropologists call the “civilization process”: it is about promoting behaviors, values, and norms to shape citizens.

The problem is that celebrities nowadays propose values that are not necessarily in line with what the state would like to instill. Some celebrities were recently attacked for sexual harassment, fans clubs argue on the internet using foul language. For Chinese authorities, this is unacceptable. In the West, it is common for artists to display unorthodox discourse and practices, much less so in China.

You mentioned the USSR as a starting point for Chinese role models. Does this mean that models are mostly a thing for the communist party, or do they have a deeper connection with the country’s history and culture?

The Chinese Communist culture was very much influenced by the USSR, including with the political use of models, but it has indeed more ancient roots. For example, the Chinese educational tradition relies on the idea of intellectual masters teaching to disciples, like Confucius, whose philosophy is at the core of Chinese culture and society. The communist party has built on this heritage.

Another significant regulatory measure was the oversight of algorithms by online marketplaces, to prevent citizens from being lured into spending too much. Does the Chinese government usually intervene in consumer matters?

Right now, this issue seems an important one to Beijing. The government is trying to promote its domestic economy. With covid, people couldn’t leave the country and spend their money abroad. The communist party realized that too much was spent outside China, while their domestic economy was not as strong as it used to be. The government seeks to promote new lifestyles involving local products and local culture. This is as well part of a shaping civilization process, with the development of policies related to social engineering devices that should have concrete effects on the behavior of consumers. In such a context, it is not surprising that the government wants to limit the influence of selling platforms.

A common assumption is that China harnesses tech companies to export its political system. Do we have good reasons to think that Beijing has such intentions in the first place?

If you allow me, I will go back in history. China, or Zhongguo, means the Middle Kingdom or Central state. During Imperial China, the Chinese model of ruling was diffusing in Korea and Japan, as well as in East Asia. The culture was dominated by a strong sinocentrism, which is an ethnocentric vision considering China as a cultural, political, and economic world center. This convinced Chinese that their government model was the right one.

Since 1949 and the creation of the People’s Republic of China, sinocentrism has grown strong again, even if it remains confined to the national territory. But the multiplication of cultural centers abroad, such as Confucius Institutes in the 2000s, reflects a new soft power approach intended to spread Chinese norms and values.

It goes alongside the development of infrastructures such as dams, bridges, and highways, as well as economic acquisitions in many countries. The Belt and Road initiative is a relevant illustration of such a policy aiming to diffuse new norms and standards. In our current world, characterized by a sort of vacuum in terms of values, the Chinese government intends to fill the void. Look at Afghanistan, for example. When the US left, China was extremely careful in its statements about Taliban, because they have a card to play there. Nowadays, Beijing is definitely exporting its economic power, but is it really imposing its governance model? It is too early to tell.

What role could the tech industry play in China’s international self-promotion?

China is promoting its national leading tech brands abroad such as Huawei, Alibaba, TikTok, and Tencent, during international mega-events. It was surprising to see so many of them during the Euro foot 2021, for instance. This advertising is part of China’s public diplomacy and nation branding strategy. It sends an unequivocal message: today, China presents itself as a high-tech nation. During Mao’s era, several campaigns were launched to develop the infrastructure and modernize the nation, but they failed to change the image of the country.

It changed with the economic reforms initiated by Deng Xiaoping. More recently, the Made in China 2025 policy towards IT development was promoted across the country, and it had a significant impact on the economy and society. China is now promoting this powerful and innovative tech industry abroad. By doing so, it is clearly playing a role that the US used to play in the past.