Counterpoint: Fears for Weibo's political future overblown online

Compulsory real-name registration for China's microblog platforms, required by Beijing municipal government, will begin Friday. But as a researcher into mass communication, I cannot agree with this move, given the current situation.

First of all, the authorities claim that they need the new regulation to curb cyber crimes and to stop rumors and other anti-social behaviors online, but modern Internet technologies can already assist police with locating and identifying anonymous offenders without knowing their names first. Thus, real-name registration is not necessary, and unless the authorities have really run out of methods, they should leave real-name registration option in their vault.

The policy should only be used as a last resort to maintain social safety, because imposing it will cost people their right to expression to some degree.

It is the government's duty to design policies that can benefit the whole society rather than make its own work easier. Otherwise, the policy should be suspended.
It is true that the coming of microblog has posted tough challenges to traditional governance. A competent government could learn how to deal with it while improving its own capability along the way. Simply installing a compulsory real-name system in a bid to dodge the learning curve is just lazy ethics and poor governance.

The real-name system will inevitably add an extra layer of caution in people's online communication. They can no longer talk freely as they used to, and this will weaken the power of public criticism of government officials and other people who hold power, as netizens will have to watch their mouths. We shouldn't forget that the freedom to criticize power is one critical characteristic of a modern democratic society.

Some may argue that one has to hide if one is speaking the truth. I suggest they first answer, why is democratic voting always anonymous? Why do professionals remain anonymous when giving peer reviews?

Anonymity can free people from their social bounds, allowing them to express their most honest thoughts and ideas without mundane concerns, so it has a valuable role in our society and we are entitled to use it.

The regulation has a legitimacy problem. As a policy that will effectively take away a certain freedom from the public, its legal status should have been thoroughly debated in the National People's Congress and have deputies voting on its adoption.

However, the regulation has been passed unilaterally by a local government with limited public consultation. It is fairly obvious that the process is flawed.

Even if all the above doubts can be settled, the government still needs to satisfy one most important question: Can it promise not to abuse the power granted through this regulation and voluntarily restrict itself from tapping into people's privacy and other personal rights?

Since real-name registration will restrain people from exercising some of their rights and freedom, it is only fair if the regulation can also bind the government to certain principles, like ensuring the public's powers to supervise the authorities, and setting up clear guidelines to track and punish those who are caught violating people's rights. The authorities should at least disclose these details to the public when it is going to implement the regulation.

In addition, the authorities need to set up mechanisms that can deal with conflicts that may arise after the policy is imposed, particularly those specific to the government's role in such disputes as it cannot be both a player and a referee.

Then who will be the referee, and what principles can the referee refer to in its decision?

All in all, before these questions and issues can be solved, pushing for the real-name registration regulation is inappropriate, and I cannot throw my support behind it.

The author is deputy dean of the School of Journalism at the Renmin University of China. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn