When the CCP Threatens International Students' Academic Freedom
Pandemic-era technologies like Zoom hold great promise, but also create unexpected problems for international students sent back to their home countries.

When Hong Kong's national security law went into effect in June 2020, critics warned that forcing the long-independent special administrative region into China's fold would winnow away at both legal free speech rights and hallowed cultural norms. Critics have been sadly vindicated: Police forces have raided the newsrooms of publications that are critical of China and arrested journalists; students and faculty report professors who criticize Beijing to tip lines; and plenty of people have fled their homes, seeking refuge overseas via the U.K.'s generous special visa policy. But the COVID-19 pandemic has forced these issues to transcend borders in unexpected ways, threatening academic freedom for those who chose to study in the U.S., too.
Early in 2020, for example, many American professors had to deal with a novel conundrum: Students from Hong Kong were sent back home, but still Zooming into their university classes in America. "I don't think people understand how… a speech rule in China suddenly becomes a speech issue in the United States. It's kind of jarring," Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's (FIRE) Sarah McLaughlin's tells Reason.
China has long been the number one feeder of international students to the U.S.; for the 2020–21 school year, more than 317,000 Chinese students were enrolled at American higher ed institutions. Hong Kong sends about 6,800 students overseas to American universities each year. Thus, McLaughlin says, the question arose at the start of the pandemic when foreign nationals were temporarily expelled from the U.S.: "Is it safe for them to learn?"
American professors started "try[ing] to find the safest way to teach without censoring themselves," McLaughlin says. They have taken certain discussion off of certain platforms; started using blind grading and allowing students to not submit papers under their own names; changed some conversations to be one-on-one instead of group discussions where another student could possibly record or disseminate the comments of a student living under Beijing's thumb. Some professors, like Rory Truex at Princeton, issued warnings in their syllabuses, saying in essence that if a student was currently residing in China, they should wait to take a given class until they're back on American soil.
Academics elsewhere have stooped to disturbing self-censorship to stave off Chinese Communist Party (CCP) censors. A teaching assistant at the University of Toronto declared he'd been told not to talk about certain issues online because it could put some students at risk; a guest lecturer-journalist from the Hong Kong Free Press declined an already-agreed-to speaking opportunity at the University of Leeds because he had been instructed by hosts to avoid focusing on the Hong Kong protests out of concern for the safety of Chinese students attending the lecture remotely.
In some ways, videoconferencing technology like Zoom enabled learning to continue unabated when international students were sent home from America. But for students in Hong Kong, the national security law—which seeks to bring Hong Kong under tighter CCP control, imperiling speech rights—collided with pandemic-era tech solutions to create a tricky situation; professors have called on Zoom to provide certain contractual promises related to sharing private information with the Chinese government and complying with the CCP's censorship demands. But the company has been either quiescent on that front or actively bad: a China-based ex-Zoom employee has been charged by federal prosecutors with secretly censoring Tiananmen Square vigils held via the platform in 2020. The Verge reports that "[Xinjiang] Jin allegedly identified users who discussed 'disfavorable' political and religious topics, then worked with other employees to stop these users from participating in calls," asking "US-based employees to provide account information about dissidents planning to commemorate the events," and getting the company to block the accounts of several users who were hosting Tiananmen events from Hong Kong in New York, due to the fact that some attendees were based in China.
Ultimately, "Chinese authorities…detained potential participants inside China and in at least one case, it threatened the family of a participant living abroad." Though Zoom apologized, disquieting situations like these leave international students and their U.S.-based professors wondering about the technology's security and how to retain anonymity while attempting to study from their home countries.
Some schools like Dartmouth have pursued technical fixes, "including removing identifying information and metadata from submitted assignments, disabling video on Zoom and turning off recording and transcription," as well as allowing "students [to] be excused from participation grades in assignments where anonymity is 'not possible.'" And, for now, some number of students—the U.S. embassy in Beijing estimated a little under one-third as of the start of the 2021 school year—have been allowed to return to on-campus instruction in the U.S., to the extent that it exists, allowing them to take part in more robust discourse far from the prying eyes of the state.
Professors in Hong Kong, and international students from Hong Kong who study in the U.S. (not to mention their mainland Chinese counterparts), already had to worry about what might happen if a student takes a phone out and films comments made during classes. With the widespread adoption of remote learning, that's gotten exponentially worse, says McLaughlin. "Whether it's the intent or not, the effect of forcing everything online makes it a lot easier to hunt down, censor, and punish speech that's critical of the government."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Don’t give the Democrats ideas.
Interesting... when discussing the potentially problematic merging of global interests and relative economic (corporate freedom), a lot of times when you bring this up, you're dismissed and told to stop worrying.
"I don't think people understand how… a speech rule in China suddenly becomes a speech issue in the United States. It's kind of jarring," Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's (FIRE) Sarah McLaughlin's tells Reason.
Yeah. Nobody has any concept of how an emissions standard or a mask mandate in a larger urban center could be jarring to people who not only have no concept, but even no need for the intervention. Whenever such a thing does occur, the unwashed rural hicks need to just quit chattering about evil globalist conspiracy nonsense, move to the city, and get with the program.
Long live the 1st Amendment! Long live Section 230! BOTH of these (BOTH SIDES of the same coin!) will help us fend off a full-scale invasion here, of these kinds of censorious ideas, from the CCP... From the BidenFuhrer's reign... And from (Government Almighty forbid!) phase II of the TrumpfenFuhrer's reign!
(Now admittedly we ALSO need "Section 230 for hardcopy rags"!)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances as long as they moderate in good faith.
Why couldn't they have just stopped at "Congress shall make no law."? The end.
Who, TOTALLY rad; MOST excellent!!!!
SQRLSY loves special legal immunity for big corporations.
Noy-Boy-Toy… No matter HOW many times you tell your “Big Lie”, it is NOT true! You’re part of the mob, aren’t you, gangster? For a small fee, you tell small businesses that you will “protect” them… From you and your mob! Refute the below, ye greedy authoritarian who wants to shit all over the concept of private property!
Look, I’ll make it pretty simple for simpletons. A prime argument of enemies of Section 230 is, since the government does such a HUGE favor for owners of web sites, by PROTECTING web site owners from being sued (in the courts of Government Almighty) as a “publisher”, then this is an unfair treatment of web site owners! Who SHOULD (lacking “unfair” section 230 provisions) be able to get SUED for the writings of OTHER PEOPLE! And punished by Government Almighty, for disobeying any and all decrees from Government Almighty’s courts, after getting sued!
In a nutshell: Government Almighty should be able to boss around your uses of your web site, because, after all, Government Almighty is “protecting” you… From Government Almighty!!!
Wow, just THINK of what we could do with this logic! Government Almighty is “protecting” you from getting sued in matters concerning who you chose to date or marry… In matters concerning what line of work you chose… What you eat and drink… What you read… What you think… Therefore, Government Almighty should be able to boss you around on ALL of these matters, and more! The only limits are the imaginations and power-lusts of politicians!
Students in China should create their own zoom software.
They did. It's called WeChat. Totally secure.
"There are only two kinds of languages..." is a pretty privileged statement.
I wonder how this compares to German students in Britain or the US from 1933-39. I bet there were snitches then too. Some people are just born snitches, even when they don't care for one side or the other; they just like snitching, makes them feel powerful I guess.
I'm turning you in for that! You gonna BURN, baby! (I get a "punishment boner" thinking about it!)
This isn't surprising, the CCP owns a ton of us professors
"us professors"? You're a professor? Good to know!
(What do you profess, anyway?)
All Chinese students in the US should be registered as foreign agents.
Why would you do that when all you have to do is monitor Eric Swalwell's office.
*BAM*
I'm here all ze veek. But seriously, just keep an eye on Swalwell and who he's sleeping with and BAM, Chinese agent.
Professors in Hong Kong, and international students from Hong Kong who study in the U.S. (not to mention their mainland Chinese counterparts), already had to worry about what might happen if a student takes a phone out and films comments made during classes. With the widespread adoption of remote learning, that's gotten exponentially worse, says McLaughlin.
"They will never call us out for struggle sessions." - Progtards everywhere
That the left will eat their own is the really shitty consolation prize if they win.
Not totally on point but, "China has long been the number one feeder of international students to the U.S.; for the 2020–21 school year, more than 317,000 Chinese students were enrolled at American higher ed institutions." If Communism is so great why are they coming to U.S. universities? Why aren't hundreds of thousands of Americans flocking to Chinese universities? Just another illustration of how Communists are parasites of, and need to mimic the more Capitalist countries. Of course, our colleges and universities are well versed in Communist ideals, but I'm referring to math, science and engineering courses.
"China has long been the number one feeder of international students to the U.S.; for the 2020–21 school year, more than 317,000 Chinese students were enrolled at American higher ed institutions."
Anybody familiar with Root Cause Analysis?
Besides the name is there any actual communism practiced in China?
O/T - Biden administration to withdraw Covid-19 vaccination and testing regulation aimed at large businesses
Trying to pretend that SCOTUS hasn't done that for them.
"Although OSHA is withdrawing the vaccination and testing ETS as an enforceable emergency temporary standard, the agency is not withdrawing the ETS as a proposed rule. The agency is prioritizing its resources to focus on finalizing a permanent COVID-19 Healthcare Standard," the statement read.
Why?
Why double down on this when the vaccine efficacy for preventing infection is quite low for the current strain? That's like requiring we all get a flu shot with the formula from 2017. Even if it worked well then, it will not do nearly as much for the flu that's going to run around next winter, or the winter after that.
Take a vaccine if you want it. But doing so is not going to achieve herd. Omicron is too infectious, and evades current antibodies (including naturally acquired). By the time OSHA makes a regulation, it'll all be extremely out of sync with what's happening in the real world.
So Neil Young wants Joe Rogan removed from Spotify or him. I think we can live without Young's dog-in-heat vocals for... well, forever. Buh bye.
I hope Neil Young will remember...
...Southern Man doesn't need him around any howl!
(My dog doesn't give a howl, either. Butt me & my dog BOTH wonder how the 400 children fared, after... Ya picked a bad time to leave me, Lucille! 400 children and the crop's in the field!)
Even Neil Young apologized for his bigoted songs about the South. The problem with racism has never been “the South”, the problem has always been Democrats.
Neil Young should remake the song “Southern Man”, with “Democrat”; it fits perfectly into the lyrics—three syllables—and makes a lot more sense.
Of course, Young never learned from this, being just as bigoted and ignorant today as he was back then.
The arrogance of these “entertainers” is astounding. Spotify doesn’t even need to make this decision on principle, just cold hard financial calculations says the should dump Neil Young even if he were popular. But I can’t imagine a lot of people still listening to him.
No examples of info the CCP doesn't want to hear from liberal college professors. I bet telling the little chicoms there are 6.02x10^23 genders is forbidden.
Are you daft or something? You can’t “threaten” what doesn’t exist.
Chinese citizens have no freedoms, academic or otherwise. The fact that the CCP permits them to enroll in US university courses to steal US technologies doesn’t change that.
WOW This is helpful
It's not just classes in the US that are being effected by CCP crap. Americans with colleagues and coworkers inside the PRC are afraid to even send emails to their associates for fear of what could happen to those behind the bamboo curtain.
Communism sucks.
meh... If they have associates who still haven't fled from communism they deserve what they have
they voted their way into communism; they can't shoot their way out whenever they are sufficiently dissatisfied.