Print 118 comment(s) - last by Shadow Concept.. on Aug 7 at 10:45 PM

Journalists, fans, and support staff betrayed by false "open internet" pledge

A secret order to foreign-owned Chinese hotels compels them to spy on guests during the Olympic Games, according to a memo revealed Tuesday by U.S. Senator Sam Brownback.

Brownback, a republican representing Kansas, said he received a document issued by the Chinese Public Security bureau, which orders hotels to install spying equipment on their internet connections and threatens owners with “severe retaliation” – including the possibility of losing their operating licenses – should they fail to comply.

“These hotels are justifiably outraged by this order,” said Brownback at a news conference Tuesday, noting that it forces them into the “awkward position” of having to “craft pop-up messages” informing guests of their loss of privacy.

Brownback said he received a copy of the original document, translated from Chinese, from attorneys representing two different “foreign-owned” hotel chains. The companies want to remain anonymous so that they don’t face further reprisal. Several other international hotel chains confirmed the order.

An AP report said the Chinese embassy was unavailable for comment.

According to the memo, hotels were told that “all hotel rooms and offices” are considered subject to “on-site or remote technical monitoring at all times.”

With little more than a week remaining before the 2008 Summer Olympics begin in Beijing, Chinese hotel owners appear to have little choice. Despite their outrage, hotel companies are more concerned about the long-term repercussions of non-compliance – failure to obey could place an entire company’s operations in jeopardy, potentially locking them out of a lucrative, growing Chinese market.

Meanwhile, athletes and participants staying at the Olympic Village have a unique set of woes for their internet access: an IT contractor recently leaked a list of rates for DSL service charged by BOCOG (Beijing Organizing Committee of the 2008 Olympic Games), with the cheapest option being a 512/512 kilobit line available for 11,700 RMB ($1716.05 USD). 

“I just can't believe that not only do I have to deal with the Great Firewall of China, but also pay through the nose to use it!” wrote the anonymous contractor.

According to Australian newspaper The Age, the International Olympic Committee issued a formal apology Wednesday for “misleading” the world’s press about the China’s “open internet” pledge. Senior IOC member Kevan Gosper, who originally delivered the promise of “unfettered freedom to report in China,” said he was unaware of the apparently backroom negotiations with Chinese censors, which will keep a number of “sensitive sites” blocked from access.

Age reporters said they were unable to access a number of sites involving human rights discussions, Tibet, and the Falun Gong, with merely intermittent access to a larger portfolio of websites including the New York Times, BBC China, al-Jazeera, Radio Free Asia, and Taiwanese newspapers.

 BOCOG spokesman Sun Weide said that China promised journalists that they would “be able to use the internet for their work during the Olympic Games. So we have given them sufficient access to do that.”

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By FITCamaro on 7/31/2008 8:15:26 AM , Rating: 4
While every American soldier lost is tragic, and every civilian lost is tragic, American soldiers are not dying "many by the day".

China's economy is growing so quickly because they are artificially keeping the value of their currency low so that business continues to be cheap there. If they were to bring the value of their currency in line with the rest of the world's, all the jobs being moved there would stop because the total cost of doing business there would be higher than it would be locally.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Master Kenobi on 7/31/2008 8:34:43 AM , Rating: 2
It's communism, you can do whatever you want and they know it.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By WTFiSJuiCE on 7/31/2008 3:43:07 PM , Rating: 4
It's not communism, its a socialist-authoritarian gov't that was built on communist ideals just like the Soviet Union was.

If it was communism, there'd be no gov't and there would be no class divisions or oppression since everyone would be equal.

Socialism and Capitalism, according to Marx, are merely steps taken before the step to True Communism is made; so in his dead eyes, the U.S. is actually closer to Communism than China is. =\

Communism always gets a bad rap since Revolutions based on Communistic ideals succeed and then soon fall into dictatorships simply because the leaders realize the power they really have.

By Seemonkeyscanfly on 7/31/2008 5:20:29 PM , Rating: 2
Humans can never live in a pure communist or pure republican Government. For either to exist in a pure state (which would mean no military, police...) would mean all man would treat each other fair, no stealing, no cheating, no lying, no murder, you could only do the right thing for others. This is 100% against human nature. We (if good up bringing) are taught at an early age how to share and take turns. No one was born with these ideals.
In communist the government decides how to distribute wealth (not good, means a man some where controls this). In a republic the people and market place distribute the wealth...(this is good because it's hard for one man or small group to control the whole market place.)

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Ringold on 8/1/2008 12:57:50 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know why people decide to be so anal about political vocabulary. FFS, the meanings change by the decade. If you all want to be picky, then the Democrat party is an extreme right-wing conservative party, the Republican party harbors many liberals -- but not nearly as radical of liberals as the Libertarian Party does.

Liberal, in the original American sense, was an ideology in favor of free-market capitalism and a minimal state. Outside of economics ("liberalized" labor markets, etc), however, who actually uses it that way?

Ya'll remind me of Catholics. Lets all pray in Latin. Nevermind 99% of us don't know Latin. That's the way it originally was, and now we must stick to it!

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By danrien on 8/1/2008 3:26:32 PM , Rating: 2
Catholics haven't prayed in Latin since the turn of the 20th century at least.

By WTFiSJuiCE on 8/1/2008 4:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
Catholics pray? (couldn't resist >.<)

By WTFiSJuiCE on 8/1/2008 4:56:50 PM , Rating: 3
I dun really feel that i'm being anal by pointing that out, but then again if my post was anal, wouldn't it be just as anal,if not moreso, to take the time out and post what you did?

I simply pointed out that there's a difference between Socialists, Authoritarians, and Communism. People are still blurring the lines because back when Stalin took over the Communist Party, which paved his way to becoming the ruthless dictator that he was. Just because people were made to work on communal farms back then does not make it Communism, it makes it FORCED LABOR! If you have a dictatorship, then its not Communism, its a DICTATORSHIP (a.k.a. Totalitarian regime)!

So many Americans unforunately are ignorant(not idiots, just uninformed) of what Communism is because of the horrible stigmas it received after revolutions based on the Marxist ideals turned from fights for freedom into Large Dictatorships and Authoritarian gov'ts that opposed the American ideals and capitalistic way of life. Even today we hear the word Communism or Socialism and i'll guarantee at least 3 out of 10 if not more will start spewing out some McCarthy type jargon about how Communism and Socialism is = to things like Satan or Tom Cruise

Terms don't change, people use the same terms to explain the beliefs that their nations were created on, yet are now only partially true as to what their nation really is now.

Either way, I guess we'll just hafta be anal together bro. Cheers! :D

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By sxr7171 on 7/31/2008 8:37:00 AM , Rating: 1
You don't think other countries peg their currency to the dollar?

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By BansheeX on 7/31/2008 10:01:23 AM , Rating: 3
That was good when they had no infrastructure and immature markets, but now would be a good time to depeg. As the U.S. inflates the living crap out of its currency to prop up artificial non-exportable sectors, the price of everything unnecessarily goes up in that country. China has billions of potential consumers, they don't need to export actual goods to overleveraged Americans to grow their economy. Perhaps in nominal terms, but that's pointless. They would be far better off with cheaper oil and being able to afford their own products instead of shipping them all here in exchange for paper. We export practically nothing but inflation anymore, our trade deficit is enormous and is doing nothing but subsidizing our consumption for things we can't afford.

A painful recession was supposed to happen in 2000 to fix that and reallocate service jobs to manufacturing exportable products and save the dollar. That wasn't allowed to happen, the Fed blew up the housing bubble with 1% interest rates and created an even bigger seed of destruction which is again trying to be reinflated with massive bailouts. Either we let everything collapse and allow the market to reallocate or we slowly destroy the dollar with inflation. Choose.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Noya on 7/31/2008 10:09:24 AM , Rating: 3
Either we let everything collapse and allow the market to reallocate or we slowly destroy the dollar with inflation. Choose.

That sounds about right.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By FITCamaro on 7/31/2008 10:52:07 AM , Rating: 2
Sadly you're mostly right. I don't think everything will collapse though. But yes. The market needs to be allowed to fluctuate as it used to. Not continue to be propped up whenever something bad happens.

The problem is the idea that the government should step in and fix everything when something bad happens has flourished. And liberals love the idea of looking like saviors to the poor, down and out, and unwitting.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By ats on 7/31/2008 2:12:13 PM , Rating: 4
Yes the poor, down and out, and unwitting like large wall street firms and banks...

This is what people get for voting republican though, bailouts and increased debt.

Republicans now own over 90% of the US national debt. Party of fiscal responsibility, yeah right!

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By FITCamaro on 7/31/2008 2:45:42 PM , Rating: 2
Uh...the recent housing bill and previous "Economic Stimulus" packages were crafted and pushed by Democrats. Bush signed them yes, but do not act like the Republicans were behind these measures.

House vote:
A ”yes” vote is a vote to pass the bill. Voting yes were 227 Democrats and 45 Republicans. Voting no were 3 Democrats and 149 Republicans.

Senate vote:
Voting yes were 43 Democrats, 27 Republicans and two independents. Voting no were 13 Republicans.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By ats on 7/31/2008 3:07:08 PM , Rating: 2
So the bailouts in the financial industries don't count?

The Economic Stimulus package was proposed by Bush and pushed by Bush. Regardless of what you may or may not want, Bush IS the republican party atm and everything he does reflects on the republican party, just like Reagan and Bush 1 were the republican party and everything they did reflected on the republican party.

All three have the opportunity for fiscal responsibility and none availed them of that opportunity.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Alexvrb on 7/31/2008 7:00:14 PM , Rating: 3
Bush is not the republican party. That said, who is in Congress right now? How much longer are people going to let Congress off the hook and blame Bush for everything? Like the House and Senate in their entirety are blameless all these years? They're the biggest culprits, democrat and republican alike. They're all a bunch of windbags, especially the bush-finger-pointing-glass-house-living-stone-throw ing democrats we've got in there now. Like they're powerless to do anything.

That aside, even on a state government level a lot of us have problems that have nothing to do with Bush. I for one have ol' Kaine trying to increase gas taxes. I'd like to see him stripped of all his money, pay him $50K a year, and make him commute to work every day. See if he raises gas taxes then.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Ringold on 8/1/2008 1:13:49 AM , Rating: 3
So far, how many tax payer dollars have been spent "bailing out" the "financial industries"?

Woops. That's right. Zero. In fact, the Fed has made money off the Bear Stearn's sale. IndyMac also cost nothing; it was sold right off to another bank.

Yes, there is immense risk, particularly with Fannie & Freddie (which could, for bond investors, simply be renamed Freddie Pae). Don't fool yourself in to thinking Democrats are not also behind all of this. Barny Frank's plump face was all over the TV today, calling for more bailouts.

If you're going to attack the Republican's as being bailout-kings, I'd like for you to identify, with links to evidence, a few Democrat Senators on record of favoring a suspension of the implied Federal backing of Fannie & Freddie, as well as interfering with the Federal Reserve and requiring it to withdraw commercial banks access to funds.

It also appears you make the common liberal mistake of associating the Federal Reserve's acts and mistakes with those of who happens to occupy the White House at the time. The President of the United States, as you would know if you bothered to ever read the constitution, has no direct power over banks. The current problems can be traced back to a combination of forced subprime spending by banks in low-income areas by pressure groups like ACORN and lax monetary policy by Greenspan. Correctly identifying the origins of the credit crisis is, I suppose, too boring and intellectual of an exercise for liberals though. Far easier to point a finger and whine.

RE: And how is this a surprise?
By Donkey2008 on 7/31/2008 6:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
The Chinese own over a trillion dollars of U.S. debt, so they have a bigger part in prooping up the dollar than anyone. Their economy is directly tied to the buying power of the American consumer and they are the ones subsidizing the American life-style. That fact became more than obvious during the sub-prime collapse, for which Chinese investment was a major player.

We keep a severe trade imbalance and the Chinese keep our dollar afloat with large-scale investment in our treasury notes. It's a win-win scenerio (/sarcasm) until the Chinese decide to dump that debt on the market and completely devalue the dollar.

They can't of course because it would hurt them even more, but last I read it wasn't Iraqi or Iranian subs surfacing in the middle of American navy exercises or North korean missles shooting down satellites in orbit.

It puts an entirely new spin on the old adage "you keep your friends close and your enemies closer".

"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki