IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notnic/2024-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Segment and rule: Modern censorship in authoritarian regimes

Author

Listed:
  • Kun Heo
  • Antoine Zerbini

Abstract

We analyze the incentives of authoritarian regimes to segment access to censored content through technology. Citizens choose whether to pay to access censored online content at a cost fixed by the regime: the firewall. A low firewall segments access and generates more compliance than full censorship – a high firewall – ever could. Regime opponents self-select into consuming censored content, and comply conditional on positive independent reporting. Regime supporters exclusively consume state propaganda, which secures their compliance. This segment-and-rule strategy can be engineered by making local news outlets uninformative, or by affecting the intrinsic benefit from access.

Suggested Citation

  • Kun Heo & Antoine Zerbini, 2024. "Segment and rule: Modern censorship in authoritarian regimes," Discussion Papers 2024-04, Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP).
    • Handle: RePEc:not:notnic:2024-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/research/groups/nicep/documents/working-papers/2024/2024-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Manacorda & Andrea Tesei, 2020. "Liberation Technology: Mobile Phones and Political Mobilization in Africa," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 533-567, March.
    2. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2019. "Information Design: A Unified Perspective," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 44-95, March.
    3. Marco Battaglini, 2002. "Multiple Referrals and Multidimensional Cheap Talk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1379-1401, July.
    4. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2015. "The Limits of Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 921-957, March.
    5. Emiel Awad, 2020. "Persuasive Lobbying with Allied Legislators," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 938-951, October.
    6. Bernard Caillaud & Jean Tirole, 2007. "Consensus Building: How to Persuade a Group," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1877-1900, December.
    7. Hobbs, William R. & Roberts, Margaret E., 2018. "How Sudden Censorship Can Increase Access to Information," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(3), pages 621-636, August.
    8. Anton Kolotilin & Tymofiy Mylovanov & Andriy Zapechelnyuk & Ming Li, 2017. "Persuasion of a Privately Informed Receiver," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85(6), pages 1949-1964, November.
    9. Levi Boxell & Zachary Steinert-Threlkeld, 2019. "Taxing dissent: The impact of a social media tax in Uganda," Papers 1909.04107, arXiv.org.
    10. Gehlbach, Scott & Sonin, Konstantin, 2014. "Government control of the media," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 163-171.
    11. Dragu, Tiberiu & Lupu, Yonatan, 2021. "Digital Authoritarianism and the Future of Human Rights," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(4), pages 991-1017, April.
    12. Sergei Guriev & Nikita Melnikov & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2021. "3G Internet and Confidence in Government," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2533-2613.
    13. Lutscher, Philipp M., 2023. "When Censorship Works: Exploring the Resilience of News Websites to Online Censorship," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(4), pages 1342-1350, October.
    14. Scott Ashworth & Ethan Bueno de Mesquita, 2006. "Monotone Comparative Statics for Models of Politics," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(1), pages 214-231, January.
    15. Zhaotian Luo & Arturas Rozenas, 2023. "Ruling the Ruling Coalition: Information Control and Authoritarian Power-Sharing," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 18(2), pages 183–213-1, April.
    16. Guriev, Sergei & Treisman, Daniel, 2020. "A theory of informational autocracy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    17. Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994. "Monotone Comparative Statics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-180, January.
    18. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    19. Bardhi, Arjada & Guo, Yingni, 2018. "Modes of persuasion toward unanimous consent," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(3), September.
    20. Chris Edmond, 2013. "Information Manipulation, Coordination, and Regime Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(4), pages 1422-1458.
    21. Arieli, Itai & Babichenko, Yakov, 2019. "Private Bayesian persuasion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 185-217.
    22. Yuyu Chen & David Y. Yang, 2019. "The Impact of Media Censorship: 1984 or Brave New World?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(6), pages 2294-2332, June.
    23. Huang, Haifeng & Yeh, Yao-Yuan, 2019. "Information from Abroad: Foreign Media, Selective Exposure and Political Support in China," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 611-636, April.
    24. Egorov, Georgy & Guriev, Sergei & Sonin, Konstantin, 2009. "Why Resource-poor Dictators Allow Freer Media: A Theory and Evidence from Panel Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(4), pages 645-668, November.
    25. Lin Hu & Anqi Li & Xu Tan, 2021. "A Rational Inattention Theory of Echo Chamber," Papers 2104.10657, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ekaterina Zhuravskaya & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2020. "Political Effects of the Internet and Social Media," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 415-438, August.
    2. Dirk Bergemann & Paul Duetting & Renato Paes Leme & Song Zuo, 2021. "Calibrated Click-Through Auctions: An Information Design Approach," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2285, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Boxell, Levi & Steinert-Threlkeld, Zachary, 2022. "Taxing dissent: The impact of a social media tax in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Andrew T Little, 2023. "Bayesian explanations for persuasion," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 35(3), pages 147-181, July.
    5. , & Frechette, Guilaume & Perego, Jacopo, 2019. "Rules and Commitment in Communication," CEPR Discussion Papers 14085, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Farzaneh Farhadi & Demosthenis Teneketzis, 2022. "Dynamic Information Design: A Simple Problem on Optimal Sequential Information Disclosure," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 443-484, June.
    7. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    8. Yingkai Li & Boli Xu, 2024. "Falsifiable Test Design in Coordination Games," Papers 2405.18521, arXiv.org.
    9. Li, Fei & Song, Yangbo & Zhao, Mofei, 2023. "Global manipulation by local obfuscation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    10. Donati, Dante, 2023. "Mobile Internet access and political outcomes: Evidence from South Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Chan, Jimmy & Gupta, Seher & Li, Fei & Wang, Yun, 2019. "Pivotal persuasion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 178-202.
      • Jimmy Chan & Seher Gupta & Fei Li & Yun Wang, 2018. "Pivotal Persuasion," Working Papers 2018-11-03, Wang Yanan Institute for Studies in Economics (WISE), Xiamen University.
    12. Bjørnskov, Christian & Freytag, Andreas & Gutmann, Jerg, 2022. "Coups and the dynamics of media freedom," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    13. Ozerturk, Saltuk, 2022. "Media access, bias and public opinion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    14. González, Felipe, 2020. "Collective action in networks: Evidence from the Chilean student movement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    15. Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Bayesian Explanations for Persuasion," OSF Preprints ygw8e, Center for Open Science.
    16. Park, Hyungmin, 2023. "Developmental Dictatorship and Middle Class-driven Democratisation," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1485, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    17. Hiroto Sato, 2023. "Robust implementation in sequential information design under supermodular payoffs and objective," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 27(2), pages 269-285, June.
    18. Davide Cantoni & David Y Yang & Noam Yuchtman & Y Jane Zhang, 2019. "Protests as Strategic Games: Experimental Evidence from Hong Kong's Antiauthoritarian Movement," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 1021-1077.
    19. Rafkin, Charlie & Shreekumar, Advik & Vautrey, Pierre-Luc, 2021. "When guidance changes: Government stances and public beliefs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    20. Philipp Denter & Martin Dumav & Boris Ginzburg, 2021. "Social Connectivity, Media Bias, and Correlation Neglect," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(637), pages 2033-2057.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:not:notnic:2024-04. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Hilary Hughes (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nicepuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.