Recently disclosed by official Chinese media, some public officials have acted as “moles,” providing unreleased information on officials who are due to be investigated or reassigned to operators of social media platforms. This information is then hinted at in advance in a metaphorical way to indicate the upcoming investigation of the officials. Through various chat groups, the information is sold layer by layer, with membership fees reaching up to 399 yuan (Chinese currency), creating an underground trading market reliant on anti-corruption information within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
According to a report by “Ban Yue Tan,” a publication under Xinhua News Agency, some self-media accounts have been known to release complete resumes of officials before they are investigated, using homophones, code names, and suggestive language. For example, on July 6, 2025, a WeChat public account published a detailed resume of Zhou Xianwang, former party group member and vice chairman of the Hubei Provincial Committee. Two days later, the CCP Central Commission for Discipline Inspection website announced that Zhou Xianwang was under investigation.
Liu Yuning, a constitutional scholar in Qianjiang, Hubei (alias), told Dajiyuan that the CCP authorities have strict control over online media with frequent account suspensions. To avoid censorship and suspension, netizens have to resort to alternative ways. He explained, “For instance, when a business shuts down or goes bankrupt, they film a video of the closed door, showing no one entering or leaving; they post a leader’s resume without making any comments; or they release a video showing closed doors in a row, indicating all the shops are closed. Netizens use these methods to convey information, reminiscent of the era of sending messages by signals.”
The article revealed that after the information on officials being investigated or reassigned was leaked, it would initially spread in certain chat group apps where new members have to pay a fee to join. Once the operators of some public accounts get hold of the information, they post suggestive content on their public accounts to attract readers into new paid groups.
Investigating officers stated that typically, each public account is associated with three to four chat groups. The entry fee for the primary group is lower, ranging from tens of yuan, while the new or so-called premium groups charge higher fees, some even reaching 399 yuan. Group administrators regularly change and close groups to evade detection.
Liu Yuning believes that the ability of these accounts to accurately predict officials being investigated multiple times indicates the information does not come from public data analysis but is provided by insiders within the CCP system who prematurely disclose information obtained from the discipline inspection system. This so-called ahead-of-time prediction actually has a source – someone is selling information. He remarked, “This shows that the CCP’s internal system is not airtight; at critical moments, someone will leak information in advance.”
The article also exposed that since August 2025, a first-level director of a departmental party committee in Guiyang, Duan (pseudonym), collected information on personnel changes and anti-corruption through the internet and collaborated with six relatives to operate nine WeChat public accounts. These accounts publish officials’ resumes, implying promotions or investigations, and profit from it.
An employee at a certain bureau in a city in the western region was also accused of registering a WeChat public account, frequently releasing officials’ resumes that hinted at their upcoming promotions or downfall. The article directly referred to these internal leakers within the system as “moles” and suggested tracing the sources of internal information.
Qian Wanlin, a lawyer from Shaanxi (alias), told reporters that the core of this trading chain is the commodification of internal political information within the CCP. He stated, “In a situation where official information is highly confidential, the CCP’s information has been cleverly packaged and sold, making it a phenomenon unique to this year. Greedy officials being investigated were originally part of the internal operation of the CCP’s power system, but now public officials, account operators, and fee-based group managers are all profiting from it. The ridiculous CCP anti-corruption campaign has created an information market.”
The article cited an example where on April 24, a Douyin account released news of Tu Yan, former party secretary and chairman of the Guizhou Provincial Women’s Federation, in the form of cartoons and text. On the 29th, the Guizhou Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection announced Tu Yan’s investigation. Some accounts even produced short videos of officials’ photos and resumes, accompanied by suggestive background music. Although the content did not explicitly state that the officials were under investigation, netizens familiar with these expressions understood the implications.
“Ban Yue Tan” stated in the article that the police currently find it difficult to deal with internet users who only publish officials’ resumes. Investigators mentioned that publishing public resumes is not considered spreading rumors and is also hard to directly classify as leaking state secrets, therefore the police currently lack a legal basis for initiating investigations or imposing administrative penalties.
Internet commentator Yao Li expressed to reporters that the CCP has long monopolized the release of information regarding official cases, with official notifications often limited to phrases like “alleged serious violations of discipline and law,” leaving the public unaware of the full details of the cases. She said, “The people need information, they need the truth. This kind of information trading is the result of the CCP restricting free speech. Previously, they denied rumors about certain individuals stepping down, and now they admit there are moles – aren’t they just contradicting themselves? And still have the nerve to speak.”
Regarding self-media fabricating rumors of officials being investigated and exaggerating the amount of corruption, the CCP police also face difficulties in determining a verdict. The article noted that investigating officers stated that the police do not possess the specific facts of the cases involving officials being investigated, making it difficult to ascertain whether the online content is false information.