New China Law Fines Influencers If They Discuss 'Serious' Topics Without a Degree (iol.co.za) 74
schwit1 shares a report from IOL: China has enacted a new law regulating social media influencers, requiring them to hold verified professional qualifications before posting content on sensitive topics such as medicine, law, education, and finance, IOL reported. The new law went into effect on Saturday. The regulation was introduced by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) as part of its broader effort to curb misinformation online.
Under the new rules, influencers must prove their expertise through recognized degrees, certifications, or licenses before discussing regulated subjects. Major platforms such as Douyin (China's TikTok), Bilibili, and Weibo are now responsible for verifying influencer credentials and ensuring that content includes clear citations, disclaimers, and transparency about sources. A separate report notes that if influencers are caught talking about the "serious" topics, they will face a fine of up to 100,000 yuan ($14,000).
Under the new rules, influencers must prove their expertise through recognized degrees, certifications, or licenses before discussing regulated subjects. Major platforms such as Douyin (China's TikTok), Bilibili, and Weibo are now responsible for verifying influencer credentials and ensuring that content includes clear citations, disclaimers, and transparency about sources. A separate report notes that if influencers are caught talking about the "serious" topics, they will face a fine of up to 100,000 yuan ($14,000).
will dr pepper be banned? can't have that useing t (Score:2)
will dr pepper be banned? can't have that useing the DR name tag.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not going back to Mr Pepper! I CAN'T DO IT, MAN!
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to get Dr Pepper outside of the U.S., and even if you do find it, it's horribly made.
I was in Ireland and the U.K. last month. I could not find a decent bottle of Dr Pepper in either country. It was just gross. I ended up throwing a lot of it away. Totally disgusting.
Re: will dr pepper be banned? can't have that usei (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it is!!! You wouldn't believe how horrible it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel (Score:2)
I feel liked I'm being duped here.
Re: (Score:2)
Or scroll to the bottom of the front page and read duplicate. :)
Re: (Score:2)
It's new again, just like AI. Read the same post from noon. No one pays attention. Will it appear again tomorrow?
Re: (Score:3)
You're wrong, we're provided a valuable opportunity to voice our opinions on the issue once more.
Re: (Score:3)
A cursory glance at the social media cesspit is enough to make this action sound desirable. Spin is hardly needed.
And for the record, I'm a shill for the Republican party, as I was informed of here on Slashdot. Not a Chinese shill.
Re: Spin (Score:2)
Desirable to an extent, untilâ¦
1. You realise that thereâ(TM)sa bunch of people out there with legitimate expertise but no formal qualifications. Think, people like everyday astronaut, who has no formal engineering or rocketry education, but whose videos are always well researched and cited.
2. Politics can oh so easily become a âoeseriousâ topic. No degree from the places we approve of? No talking about how shot our policies are!
Re: Spin (Score:2)
Re: Spin (Score:2)
If you understood math as well as GÃdel would you too commit suicide by self-starvation (like a good Jain)?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd prefer solutions that penalise people for posting false information vs only allowing vetted authorities to post in the first place; although that still has the issue with who decides what is false.
The way things are now I cant say I'm against it. (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
1000% what you said.
There's been so many protests in 2024 and 2025 in China over labor and banking problems. Now, if you want to talk about how the Chinese economy is failing the working class Chinese... that's a jailing!
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if you want to talk about how the Chinese economy is failing the working class Chinese... that's a jailing!
did you ask the influencer that told you that for some certification?
Re: (Score:3)
I can see the appeal. It we really do have a serious problem of "Dunning-Krugers" spouting utter nonsense online with confidence and presentation that reaches a significant audience of similarly ill-educated people, convincing them to take action that is wrong and harmful. They don't think "huh, maybe I should seek out the opinions of professionals on this matter" and instead just fall back on ego-soothing anti-intellectualism and conspiracy theory nuttery. There are a lot of these people, and their ill-
Re: (Score:3)
As much as I dislike it when the ill-educated spout nonsense on a popular platform, I have to support their option to do so because censorship is even worse.
agreed. the defense against misinformation is mental resilience in the population, which can only emerge from education and critical thinking. there's no way around it, but somehow there isn't a single government in the world that seems inclined to that.
i'll just point out that this is not about personal opinions, dissent or general speech, but about communications over "activities that require a high professional level, such as medical and health, financial and economic, legal, and educational services". s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So the Chinese government (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's up to the audience to recognize whether or not the speaker knows what they're talking about. I find it's usually pretty easy to tell.
Re: (Score:1)
If you want to turn people on to critical thinking, the way to do that is certainly not to outsource that thinking to the government.
The CCP is certainly not interested in that. They simply want to maintain the rule of their party.
Re: (Score:2)
Controls the schools. So they control what is taught and they control the orthodoxy around it completely.
but do they teach creationism?
Re: (Score:3)
Plus, some pe
Re: The way things are now I cant say I'm against (Score:1)
Re: The way things are now I cant say I'm against (Score:2)
If you go back to Dionysodorus in Socratic dialogues, will you find that misinformation was real popular in classical Athens, too?
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot should take note (Score:5, Funny)
Posting an article on Slashdot should also require a degree.
People have difficulty reading, leading to double posts like this one.
TFA was posted on Slashdot already, within 24 hours:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftech.slashdot.org%2Fstor... [slashdot.org]
Truth to power (Score:2)
Re: Slashdot should take note (Score:2)
Define 'Influencer' (Score:3)
> Think back to the Covid-19 pandemic fake cures, antivax rhetoric, and pseudoscience spread like wildfire, often amplified by influencers with millions of followers but no medical background.
Or, indeed, last Tuesday -> https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fart... [whitehouse.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
There's the problem. If that law existed here, you know RFK and Trump would be immune.
Re: Define 'Influencer' (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can find experts to espouse any view.
Heck, remember Surgeon General of Florida (who is a doctor) doesn't recommend vaccines. And there are plenty of scientists that deny climate change is happening.
And let's not forget the person who started the whole "vaccines cause autism" thing was a doctor.
So as much as the law might do something, I doubt it will do anything. It might just stop people parroting stuff, but qualified
Re: Define 'Influencer' (Score:2)
Was Fauci intellectually dishonest in ignoring margins of error?
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with "social distancing" is the media didn't understand the concept of distance in the graph of social connections, and neither did the general public. Judging by your post, Anonymous Cowards don't understand the concept to this day.
Re: (Score:2)
Your link includes citations from Harvard, mt Sinai, and Johns Hopkins - I thought those were real experts, with credentialed medical experts in peer reviewed journals - what exactly is the issue?
What a similar law would restrict is prevent politicians from acting like climate experts and it would protect dr fauci when he invents things like the 6 foot social distance based on nothing - but, he's a doctor, so, an expert!
Re: (Score:2)
6 ft social distance was invented by news media, so yes, it would have prevented it. Here's the original meaning that got misunderstood by the zeitgeist. [wikipedia.org] Its so thoroughly misunderstood that even some of the papers cited on THE OTHER social distancing wikipedia page are talking about the original meaning.
Duplicate : https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftech.slashdot.org%2Fstory%2F25%2F10%2F (Score:2)
Dupes a story still on the main page!!!
Come on man!!
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftech.slashdot.org%2Fstor... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What if they have 0.0175 radians?
Just China, being China (Score:3)
They have no equivalent to our First Amendment. And so they restrict speech for people not deemed to be educated or certified on certain topics. Not really a bad idea, until it runs into one's right to speak. We do have restrictions on some types of commercial speech to protect the public from false "experts". We can't shut them up. But we can restrict their ability to offer services for hire in many areas. Medical, legal, engineering, investment, etc. You can say what you want in these areas. But you can't hire your expertise out unless you are certified by the authority having jurisdiction over that profession.
Problem: Influencers have a different economic model than your traditional domain expert. They are paid by third parties, based on the traffic that they attract. But not the people who may be depending on their expertise. So our licensing system falls flat when the "expert speech for pay" is bypassed. It would take us some real legislative wrangling to bring this under control without a big fight over First Amendment issues. But the Chinese just say, "You make a living as an expert. You had better actually BE an expert."
Re: (Score:2)
This is mostly a good post, thanks for posting.
Where it falls flat is your assertion that "influencers" are some kind of experts. I disagree. They're just entertainers. In court, I think they make that argument and easily win any cases you're trying to make by claiming they're purporting to be experts.
I may be wrong. That happens sometimes. It from what I can see, they're just entertainers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, I wouldn't look to the UK for free speech guidance, you have been arresting folks for social media posts for a while.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All bets are off for the UK. Nothing I say is intended to be read in, replied upon or accurate for the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
there's the assumption that there can be only one path to expertise
But who certifies that path? Or those paths?
I can start my own school (unaccredited). With blackjack and hookers. Are you going to let me perform brain surgery on you?
Re: (Score:2)
Problem: Influencers have a different economic model than your traditional domain expert. They are paid by third parties, based on the traffic that they attract. But not the people who may be depending on their expertise. So our licensing system falls flat when the "expert speech for pay" is bypassed. It would take us some real legislative wrangling to bring this under control without a big fight over First Amendment issues.
Deriving profit from generating outrage is absolutely a problem. One possible solution is to expand definition of libel to encompass subjects of broad interest, where public statements have to meet "reckless and intentional disregard for truth" standard. Then have federal prosecutors pick cases and prosecute them in civil courts. Even that is very dangerous, as it will inevitably lead to political prosecutions, where process is the punishment.
But the Chinese just say, "You make a living as an expert. You had better actually BE an expert."
No, the Chinese say: "We decide who is an expert, so we now also
Re: (Score:1)
Therefore (Score:2)
These people have much to lose and will carefully toe our line on these serious topics.
Can't talk about finance without a degree (Score:2)