The blogger’s self-discipline pledge

The Internet Society of China is soliciting public opinions about its draft “Blog Service Self-discipline Public Pledge,” which sets forth the framework for making a civilized blogosphere. The provisions apply to Internet blog service providers (BSP) within China’s borders.

The draft calls for BSPs and bloggers to enter into a service agreement. The agreement would require bloggers to guarantee that they won’t issue or distribute “pornographic or obscene information,” “information that is insulting or derogatory to ethnic, racial or religious groups or to cultural traditions,” or slander. Bloggers would further have to agree not to distribute computer viruses and to abide by IPR laws. In addition, bloggers would have to manage and supervise the comments to their blogs, removing illegal comments in a timely manner.

The draft also encourages — but does not require — BSPs to implement a “real name” registration system and to establish a “real name blog” section of their websites, where “real name” bloggers can receive top-quality service and have their blogs recommended as “outstanding products.” “Real name” bloggers have to provide their full names, an identifying “number” (e.g., national ID number, military officer number, passport number), and contact information (like a phone number or mailbox). This information need only be disclosed to the BSP; onscreen, “real name” bloggers may remain anonymous or use a pen- or nickname. The BSPs have to develop systems for safeguarding the data provided by “real name” bloggers and cannot disclose that information publicly or to third parties without the user’s permission — except as provided by law.

While the draft doesn’t break new ground in the realm of Internet regulation, it is significant for two reasons. First, the Chinese government appears to have abandoned mandatory real name registration — at least for the time being — and is offering this Public Pledge as an alternative. Second, that the Internet Society of China is soliciting public opinion on the draft is a positive development. Both points suggest that the Chinese government is sensitive to public opinion and seeking to tread carefully around this issue. If true, this would represent a welcome shift in governance style.

If you want to comment on the Public Pledge, e-mail blog@isc.org.cn before May 28.