This may sound counterintuitive, but it's not.
The issue is that organisations that can control information want that power for a reason. That reason is always the same: it's economic. Even in the west, where control is much less pervasive. They want it, frankly, so they can steal from "the people" without them noticing.
Currently China is lying about economic things. And people don't care. The government says things are going well, and it appears things are going well. Until that changes there won't be large scale changes. But there's kinks: How many people got fired in the massive mine cuts last year (everything growing at 7% per year, then "boom!", massive protests followed by executions in a dozen cities. Protests that were big enough that suppression didn't work. Everybody knew someone who was aware of the protests). How badly the metals industry is doing. And the macro Chinese economy. How many loans, and where. People are currently largely trusting the official stats despite them being somewhat obviously falsified. There's a few high profile somewhat-loony exceptions (e.g. Kyle Bass). This can't end well ...
And once it hasn't ended well, needless to say, people notice once the cheese is actually gone. No amount of information control is going to change that. That's when information control fails. That's when people start trusting the word of a drunk sailor more than the official newspaper. That's when every organisation that matters switches to it's own internal information gathering.
That will happen. It's a matter of time. There's lots of variables in it, but how good the CCP is at controlling information is not actually one of the variables.
"Entropy may be understood as a measure of disorder within a macroscopic system. The second law of thermodynamics states that an isolated system's entropy never decreases. Such systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, the state with maximum entropy."
They aren't able to suppress information completely which is why they resort to the sort of shambolic behaviour described in the article. They lost control of it when the internet became widespread and since then they've been trying their best to firewall and block and censor, for what? Why censor anything if there is no appetite for it anyway? We can assume therefore that there is some percentage of the Chinese population that wants to know and will know despite their governments efforts.
What they're vulnerable to isn't information leakage, but a future failure to deliver the goods (in which respect they're not that much different from liberal democracies). So far 3 decades of predictions that they would fail to continue holding a lid on the public sphere, and 10 years of predictions that they would fail to deliver the goods, have all been wrong. Which is unsurprising given that those predictions were rarely based on anything more substantial than a priori and ahistorical liberal dogma.
That's quite an assumption. The CCP appears to be getting better, not worse, at controlling information. They are accumulating institutional experience and technical competence. I see no obvious reason beyond reflexive 20thC shibboleths why this direction should inevitably reverse.