In recent years, China’s strict surveillance and restrictions on foreign social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have highlighted the government’s unique approach to digital security. These platforms are heavily restricted and monitored within China’s borders, with access restricted or completely blocked, reinforcing the state’s efforts to regulate the flow of information. By framing foreign social media as a threat to national security, the Chinese government justifies surveillance and censorship, arguing that these platforms may encourage destabilizing narratives or foreign influence. This article analyzes China’s securitization of foreign social media through three main arguments: the portrayal of these platforms as existential threats, the use of extraordinary measures to control the influence of social media platforms, and the impact on China’s domestic security and international standing.
An Existential Threat
China’s approach to foreign social media platforms starts by portraying them as an existential threat to the country’s stability and sovereignty. Securitization theory explains that a state can label an issue as an existential security threat, allowing it to justify an extraordinary response. In this context, Chinese authorities often emphasize the dangers of foreign social media, describing it as a potential tool for foreign powers to promote dissent, incite protests and undermine government authority. This framing positions foreign social media not as mere technological tools but as mechanisms of external influence that could undermine China’s ideological unity.
This securitization narrative is reinforced through state media and official statements, which warn about the “chaos” that an unrestricted flow of information can cause in society. By portraying foreign social media as conduits for dangerous foreign ideologies, the government encourages a national consciousness that is wary of external influences. Chinese citizens are thus primed to see these platforms as a threat to their collective security and stability, contributing to public acceptance of their exclusion or strict regulation. Delivery is particularly evident in the discourse around incidents such as the Hong Kong protests, where foreign social media platforms are accused of spreading anti-China sentiment.
Additionally, this framework influences policy development, justifying the legislative and regulatory restrictions that maintain China’s “Great Firewall”. By constantly asserting that unfettered access to foreign social media will expose citizens to destabilizing narratives, the government enforces a controlled digital environment that aligns with its security goals. Therefore, threat theory within security theory is fundamental to understanding how China will create a strong, government-focused digital mandate and manage the issue to gain domestic support for the policy.
Emergency Measures
After overseas social media was deemed a security threat, China implemented emergency measures to restrict and expose these systems. Securitization theory states that once a country declares an existential threat, it can take general political measures to take immediate action. The Great Firewall illustrates this method by blocking or restricting access to platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and Google, effectively creating a secure digital space under state control. This technological barrier allows China to exercise strict control over the information that enters into its digital space, thereby minimizing outside influence and promoting domestic social media options that conform to government standards.
Additionally, for citizens who find ways to access overseas social media through VPNs, China uses a massive surveillance system to monitor and regulate their activity. This surveillance is facilitated through advanced artificial intelligence and data tracking technologies, which allow the government to track online discussions and detect content deemed “dangerous” or “subversive.” Individuals who interact with or disseminate foreign media that challenges the state narrative may face consequences, emphasizing the seriousness of China’s approach. The government’s ability to monitor foreign social media use inside China reinforces the belief that these systems are a real security threat that requires organizational oversight.
These emergency measures extend beyond virtual regulation to legal frameworks, including cybersecurity laws that require strict data monitoring and compliance for foreign agencies operating inside China. The combination of technological and legal measures shows how securitization translates into comprehensive state control. By implementing such measures, China can effectively suppress unwanted and influential foreign narratives, creating an orderly online atmosphere that prioritizes state security over international digital freedom norms.
Domestic Security
China’s securitization of overseas social media has broad implications for domestic protection and global relations. Domestically, the portrayal of these structures as security threats strengthens the public’s appeal to censorship and control. Chinese citizens, familiar with the state’s narrative of overseas social media risks, often support the measures, seeing them as defensive rather than restrictive. This broad public support assists the state in consolidating power, as the public views the measures as essential to maintaining national balance and social values that protect against outside erosion.
However, this method of securitization also has a global impact, as it challenges international norms that support a free and open internet. Foreign governments and institutions regularly criticize China’s restrictive policies, seeing them as contrary to digital freedom and human rights. Measures taken against overseas structures emphasize the ideological divide between China and countries that emphasize unfettered internet access, creating tensions within international institutions and diplomatic relations. As China continues to push for digital sovereignty, this runs counter to the liberal democratic values promoted by many Western countries, resulting in tense diplomatic engagements and ongoing debates about internet governance.
In addition, China’s model of securitizing foreign social media influences other countries that may seek similar control over their digital landscapes. By justifying regulation through securitization, China offers an attractive framework for various authoritarian regimes, which may lead to a more fragmented global internet. This should undermine global efforts to defend internet freedom and may encourage Western countries to increase their commitment to open access, creating a more polarized digital landscape. As such, China’s securitization of foreign social media has repercussions far beyond its borders, affecting global norms and international internet governance.
Conclusion
China’s strict approach to foreign social media platforms can thus be effectively understood through securitization theory, which reveals how framing these platforms as security threats justifies extensive control measures. By portraying foreign social media as existentially dangerous, imposing emergency restrictions, and shaping public opinion domestically, China constructs a narrative that legitimizes its digital sovereignty. However, this approach also challenges international internet norms and positions China as a significant counterpoint to global digital freedom. Ultimately, securitization theory provides a comprehensive framework for analyzing the complexity and impact of China’s policies towards foreign social media, offering insights into its domestic strategy as well as its international implications.
[1] Powers, S. M., & Jablonski, M. The real cyber war: The political economy of internet freedom. University of Illinois Press, 2015.
[1] Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner, 1997.
[1] Ferguson, J. “Review (Jiang, Y., Cyber-nationalism in China: challenging Western media portrayals of internet censorship in China. University of Adelaide, 2012).” Teknokultura. Journal of Digital Culture and Social Movements, 12(1), 195-202.
[1] Xu, P., Krueger, B., Liang, F., Zhang, M., Hutchison, M., & Chang, M. “Media framing and public support for China’s social credit system: An experimental study,” 2023. https://doi.org/10.25384/sage.c.6765558
[1] Yahya, F. A., & Mutia, R. T. N. “The Great Firewall of China: Praktik Kebijakan Sensor Internet Pada Era Xi Jinping.” Historia: Jurnal Pendidik Dan Peneliti Sejarah, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2023. https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/historia/article/view/50007
[1] Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner, 1997.
[1] Ferguson, J. “Review (Jiang, Y., Cyber-nationalism in China: challenging Western media portrayals of internet censorship in China. University of Adelaide, 2012).” Teknokultura. Journal of Digital Culture and Social Movements, 12(1), 195-202.
[1] Creemers, Rogier. China’s Social Credit System: An Evolving Practice of Control, 2015
[1] Ferguson, J. “Review (Jiang, Y., Cyber-nationalism in China: challenging Western media portrayals of internet censorship in China. University of Adelaide, 2012).” Teknokultura. Journal of Digital Culture and Social Movements, 12(1), 195-202.
