Last Friday the entire China market was shocked by a newly announced draft regulation by the National Press and Publication Administration (NPPA) on the online game industry.
Gotta love the WSJ and FT having articles titled "new gaming crackdown regulations", but the articles having no mention of what any (proposed) polices or changes are.
Dec 29, 2023·edited Dec 29, 2023Liked by Robert Wu
It's a draft, so I guess they expected feedback, but not quite this strong. However, I have to say it's kind of refreshing.
In the USA for example, with the exception of Lina Khan's FTC, the bills are actually written by the industry and delivered to the departments and the public only finds out after the fact, or in a few cases if they have powerful lobbies that have not yet been corrupted (I'm trying to think of a valid example, AARP use to be such an organ until the insurance industry took over the board).
Hence it's kind of great that a department drafts a regulation to protect the public without the revolving door and/or direct lobbying weakening the effort before the public gets to see it and to set an expectation. Possibly this could be done in a less messy way, but sometimes the mess is a way of excluding corruption. (edit: certainly this reaction is proof that corporate capture of the regulator has not yet happened, so lets maybe rejoice?).
Thank you! My job as a consulting engineer was to bring a contrarian perspective. It's not the way to win a popularity contest, so I'm grateful when someone is willing to take a pause and at least consider it.
Gotta love the WSJ and FT having articles titled "new gaming crackdown regulations", but the articles having no mention of what any (proposed) polices or changes are.
It's a draft, so I guess they expected feedback, but not quite this strong. However, I have to say it's kind of refreshing.
In the USA for example, with the exception of Lina Khan's FTC, the bills are actually written by the industry and delivered to the departments and the public only finds out after the fact, or in a few cases if they have powerful lobbies that have not yet been corrupted (I'm trying to think of a valid example, AARP use to be such an organ until the insurance industry took over the board).
Hence it's kind of great that a department drafts a regulation to protect the public without the revolving door and/or direct lobbying weakening the effort before the public gets to see it and to set an expectation. Possibly this could be done in a less messy way, but sometimes the mess is a way of excluding corruption. (edit: certainly this reaction is proof that corporate capture of the regulator has not yet happened, so lets maybe rejoice?).
Thanks for this comment! You can always bring me fresh perspective to think about
Thank you! My job as a consulting engineer was to bring a contrarian perspective. It's not the way to win a popularity contest, so I'm grateful when someone is willing to take a pause and at least consider it.