不开玩笑，愚人节在中国被禁了 [美国媒体]

No joke. April Fools' Day has been banned in China.

不开玩笑，愚人节在中国被禁了。

The ancient tradition of hoaxing and playing practical jokes on the first day of April has fallen victim to China’s crackdown. Like democracy and free speech, it is a Western concept that simply isn’t welcome here.

4月1日的开恶作剧玩笑的古老传统现在成了中国的牺牲品。愚人节是西方的概念，在中国不受欢迎。

“’April Fools' Day’ is not consistent with our cultural tradition, or socialist core values,” state news agency Xinhua announced on social media Friday. “Hope nobody believes in rumors, makes rumors or spreads rumors.”

“愚人节不符合我们的文化传统，也不符合社会主义核心价值观，”官媒新华社周五在社交媒体上称。“希望没有人信谣、造谣和传谣。”

As part of a long-running effort to win control of the narrative on social media and deter dissent, China’s Communist Party launched a campaign three years ago to criminalize the spreading of rumors. Xinhua’s post suggests an April Fools' Day prank that mocked or undermined the Party could have potentially serious consequences.

作为控制社交媒体言论和阻止异见的长期努力的一部分，中国自三年前开始把传谣作为一项犯罪。新华社的发帖暗示了如果开党的玩笑，后果可能很严重。

But some social media users couldn’t help but see the funny side.

但是一些社交媒体用户还是看到了好笑的一面。

“Every day is April Fools' Day,” one user posted.

一名用户发帖说，“每天都是愚人节。”

“This is Xinhua’s joke, don’t you see?” another wrote.

另一名则写道，“你看不出来吗？这是新华社的愚人节玩笑。”

Others wondered if Party controlled China Central Television had received the memo.

其他人想问是否党媒中央电视台也收到了指示。

“Watch CCTV news, have China’s April Fools’ Day,” posted one user.

“看CCTV新闻，过中国的愚人节。”一人发帖说。

“In the West, it’s only for a day, but a certain (TV) station is fooling 365 days non-stop,” another wrote.

“在西方，愚人节只有一天，但是某电视台一年365年不间断的愚人。”

That China’s propaganda apparatus has a problem with satire has long been evident. In 2012, The People’s Daily fell for a satirical report in The Onion voting North Korea leader Kim Jong-un the sexiest man alive. The Communist Party newspaper ran a 55-page photo spread in tribute to Kim, quoting the Onion as celebrating his devastatingly handsome looks, round face, boyish charm and strong, sturdy frame — not realizing it was satire.

中国宣传机器很明显是长期被嘲讽。2012年的时候，洋葱新闻的一篇讽刺报道，说金三胖是活着的最性感的男人，人民日报信以为真。人民日报登了55张金正恩的照片，引用了洋葱新闻的报道，来赞美金正恩的俊美长相、圆脸、男孩子般的魅力和强壮的体格。人民日报没有看出来洋葱新闻的报道是带讽刺的。

Li Zhurun, a former journalist and university professor, realized 16 years too late that he had been fooled by an April Fools' Day gag. In 1981, he read a report that cadets at West Point were being taught about legendary Communist Party soldier Lei Feng. He put the story in a report, and it was widely circulated and believed in China. It wasn’t until 1997 that he realized the original story had been published on April 1.

前记者和大学教授李主润在16年之后才意识到他被愚人了。1981年，他看到一篇报道，说西点军校的学员将要学习中国共产党的传奇士兵雷锋。他把这个故事写进一份报告，这个报告在中国广为流传并被人们相信。直到1997年他才发现原故事是在4月1号刊登的。

On Friday, one social media user had an ironic suggestion for the Party authorities.

周五，一名社交媒体用户对党的权威机构提出了一个讽刺的建议。

“Today is April Fools' Day in the West when you can publicly lie and not be punished. Why don't we do the opposite and make this day 'truth telling day'?” the user wrote. “Hopefully today we can speak the truth, express our true feelings, show our true colors, spread the truth without being restricted or punished, without getting blacklisted as inciting crime.”

“今天是西方的愚人节，你可以公开说谎而不必受罚。为什么我们不反过来，把这一天作为真话节？希望今天我们能说真话，表达真实感受，显示真实的自己，传播真实，而不必受限制和受罚，不必被当做煽动罪。”

Edward Michaels
What I find amusing is the lead photo of this article. The "cat in front of the Premier XI" is actually taken from a very funny situation. The wood behind the posters is actually the walls of an overnight "nail house"--a shanty in other words. To prevent it being torn down, as it was ordered by the Shanghai local poliwogs, the residents decided to plaster the entire structure with posters of the Pres. of China, so it WOULD NOT get torn down! Pretty clever if you ask me.

我发现这篇文章配的照片很有意思。“习近平前面的猫”的拍摄环境很有趣。海报后面的木头其实是“钉子户”的房子的墙面。为了防止被强拆，居民决定把整个房子都贴上习主席的海报，所以就不！会！被！拆！了！很聪明啊

masmedi
That's not a ban, Washington Post. Xinhua's opinion account issued an opinion on social media. It has as much legal force as your opinion. I wonder if your article can be categorized as a rumor that Xinhua was talking about. 

华盛顿邮报，这个不是禁止。新华社在社交媒体上发表了一条意见。不比你的意见更有法律效力。我在想你的文章是不是能被归类为新华社所说的谣言里面。