China has drafted powerful new legislation that would control how businesses use data to target advertising, curate social media feeds and recommend content. The government says the move will safeguard national security and protect citizens鈥� rights, but critics point out that the state will be able to delve into companies鈥� source code for monitoring and enforcement.
The mandates that algorithms should 鈥渁ctively spread positive energy鈥� and must not disrupt the social order. It also prohibits algorithms from encouraging rampant consumerism and give users the ability to turn off recommendation engines.
The regulation is the latest in a string of measures from the ruling Communist Party of China that has hit technology companies, such as limiting the time children can spend playing video games and a new Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) which is similar in scope to the European Union鈥檚 GDPR legislation. Chinese companies have seen the news hit their share prices, and know more is coming: the president of tech firm Tencent warned investors recently that .
Advertisement
at AlgorithmWatch, an advocacy group pushing for greater transparency from technology companies, says that some of the Chinese proposals aren鈥檛 dissimilar to the EU鈥檚 proposed Digital Services Act, which would require social media companies to be more transparent about how their algorithms work.
Spielkamp believes there is a power struggle emerging as technology companies grow larger. China鈥檚 burgeoning technology sector has given birth to a range of internet giants such as ByteDance, which owns TikTok, the Amazon rival Alibaba 鈥� which just reported 鈥� and Tencent, which is one of the world鈥檚 largest video game companies and offers a wide range of online services.
鈥淚 think this is partly a crackdown on these companies because they fear that they鈥檝e become too powerful. Not even the Chinese government can have a detailed understanding of these algorithms. They see that there needs to be sort of a power shift and more control over these companies,鈥� says Spielkamp.
A complex situation is playing out globally where states want access to citizens鈥� private data to ensure national security, while companies want to profit from the same data, and each is keen to restrict the other, either by lobbying or legislation.
Technology giants in the West are pushing back against state-sanctioned hacks by governments around the world to collect such data, at the same time as governments mull legislation to reduce data collection by the firms. In 2019, Facebook filed a lawsuit in California alleging that Israeli company NSO had hacked into its servers to monitor WhatsApp users on behalf of various governments. Microsoft, Google and LinkedIn have since all joined the court case. NSO has said it licenses its products to governments 鈥渇or the sole purpose of preventing and investigating terror and serious crime鈥� and denies that its products were being misused.
at King鈥檚 College London says that the new Chinese regulations come as the government has observed companies in the West such as Facebook become 鈥渂ehemoths that just do what they damn well please and are over-mighty鈥�.
鈥淪o, in that sense, [the Chinese government is] doing something that it thinks is protective,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he issue is that the party itself is going to be prioritising its own needs. For those who are politically active then this is a problem. The communist party鈥檚 security apparatus聽is going to be aware of the enormous resources that this access gives you. I don鈥檛 think this is a story where there鈥檚 anyone who鈥檚 particularly a hero.鈥�
