backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 38 comment(s) - last by alcalde.. on Feb 2 at 2:12 AM
Human rights groups are asking the search giant to appear before Congress about its venture into China but Google says no

Recent events about Google and its business in China have caused quite a stir in the industry. While other companies such as Microsoft and Yahoo have done similar actions, Google's stance on its own philosophies have caused people to stand up and ask questions.

The Congress' Congressional Human Rights Caucus has requested that Google meet with it to discuss the ramifications of operating its business and search services in China. Google however, has refused to meet with the Caucus. No statement from either side has been given but there are other companies who have been called in as well. Human rights groups are calling Google out along with Yahoo but no progress is being made. Yahoo also, has not responded to the request for a hearing.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Interesting
By Homerboy on 1/31/06, Rating: 0
RE: Interesting
By Ivan244 on 1/31/2006 11:19:06 AM , Rating: 2
I find it absolutely delicious that an American Capitalistic company would resort to helping a Communist country censor it's people.
So Google agrees to censor the Chinese people and in return gets access to all sorts of revenue from ads etc...
Suppression of people in return for profits. Oh the irony of it all.


RE: Interesting
By Shining Arcanine on 1/31/2006 11:26:19 AM , Rating: 3
They are not helping the Chinese government to suppress the Chinese people. In China, people barely have access to Google and what access they have is filtered by the Chinese government. What Google is doing is creating another version of their search engine that people will have access to.

It is not like what Google has done took anything away from what the Chinese people already had. What they are doing is adding to what the Chinese people have.


RE: Interesting
By Shining Arcanine on 1/31/2006 11:27:04 AM , Rating: 1
By the way, before anyone replies telling me that I am wrong, I am half Chinese. End of discussion.


RE: Interesting
By feraltoad on 1/31/2006 11:30:10 AM , Rating: 2
Which is why your only half wrong.


RE: Interesting
By BigLan on 1/31/2006 11:40:08 AM , Rating: 2
No, it's because you're only half wrong.

I lived in china for a year as well, and in my book, having decent access to google is better than none at all.

I actually wonder if it is google (America) which is doing the filtering. Most multinationals will have a chinese subsidiary, which is a separate legal entity (though owned by the parent.) If that's the case, then for google (china) to do any business, it's likely that they would have to have made this deal with the chinese government, or not be allowed to do business there.


RE: Interesting
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:39:56 AM , Rating: 2
"I actually wonder if it is google (America) which is doing the filtering. Most multinationals will have a chinese subsidiary, which is a separate legal entity (though owned by the parent.) If that's the case, then for google (china) to do any business, it's likely that they would have to have made this deal with the chinese government, or not be allowed to do business there."

Cool, Ken Lay is posting here now! :-)

Whether Google does this from an American office, or incorporates an off-shore shell company to use as a legal shield, matters not one iota in the discussion of ethics. Regardless of the paper trail and legal contructs, the same Americans are sitting in America making the decision to do China's dirty work for them in exchange for cash.



RE: Interesting
By Viditor on 1/31/2006 11:42:09 AM , Rating: 2
I do a substantial amount of work in China, and what Google is doing is being completely misunderstood. Remember that they are only cutting out SPECIFICALLY what the Chinese Government asks them too. These leaves the Chinese people with a Hell of a lot more than they have had in the past...
There are still many things that you can find on the Chinese search sites that I'm sure the Government would have censored if they were aware of them...


RE: Interesting
By farker on 1/31/2006 2:13:09 PM , Rating: 1
That should be "half Wong".


RE: Interesting
By Snuffalufagus on 2/1/2006 4:18:52 AM , Rating: 2
"I am half Chinese."

One hell of an argument there :)


google isnt evil
By 8steve8 on 1/31/2006 11:49:24 AM , Rating: 2
the reality is that
china internet users have a few choices

1. a google censored google
2. a government censored google
3. no google because china blocks it entirely

so google is not pro censorship, they simply want to maintain their profits in china... and really a google censored google will appear much better , seamless, user-friendly than a govt censored google.




RE: google isnt evil
By Saril on 1/31/2006 11:55:27 AM , Rating: 3
Beyond this, any company that chooses to do business in any country, MUST adhere to the laws and regulations of said country. This has little to do with 'good ol american patriotism' and alot to do with the standard operation procedures of large multinational comporations.


RE: google isnt evil
By Jackyl on 1/31/2006 1:00:07 PM , Rating: 3
So what is China Government trying to prove with all this censoring? Are they scared their culture would change radically or people would retailiate? All it is doing, is making people leave their home of China and come to America, where there is still "some" freedom. People are arriving every day over in America from China and becoming citizens. It is 2006, not 1906 or 1956. China government needs to get a clue and wake up. Stop treating people like animals. I'm suprised the people as-a-whole hasn't organized and retailiated to overthrow their own government already.


RE: google isnt evil
By SoylentG on 1/31/06, Rating: -1
RE: google isnt evil
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:52:03 AM , Rating: 2
"Beyond this, any company that chooses to do business in any country, MUST adhere to the laws and regulations of said country. This has little to do with 'good ol american patriotism' and alot to do with the standard operation procedures of large multinational comporations."


What it is, is the standard operating procedures of large multinational corporations having little to do with good 'old American patriotism. If the laws and regulations of said country violate the basic core principles of our country (that all are equal with inalienable rights), then the corporation should not do business with said country. That's what happened with the international boycott of South Africa in the '80s, for which Nelson Mandela and others thanked folks for afterward, despite the pressures it put the citizens under.

I remember in '90 as a senior in high school needing to write an opinion on an editorial by Richard Nixon in which he argued for U.S. expansion into Chinese markets with "A billion people cannot be ignored". I opened my commentary with that line and, ignoring the teacher's love of Nixon, with the rejoinder "What he means is that one billion bottles of Coke cannot be ignored. One billion Ford and GM cars cannot be ignored." etc.

American companies have a higher calling than the pursuit of profits, and that is to the adherence of the principles that founded our nation. Sadly, many don't follow that higher calling, even during WWII, when many kept operating German subsidiaries during the war and stashing the profits in Switzerland for post-war retrieval (even when, like IBM, they knew that some of the products of their German subsidiaries were directly aiding the German war effort or the Holocaust - IBM machines were responsible for the numbers the concentration camp prisoners were tattooed with.


RE: google isnt evil
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:43:23 AM , Rating: 2
"so google is not pro censorship, they simply want to maintain their profits in china..."

BY CENSORING CONTENT. I just *love* all of these Google defenses that are nothing other than semantic games. :-) What would you think of a defense lawyer's argument during sentencing: "My client was not pro-robbery, they simply wanted the victim's watch...."

" and really a google censored google will appear much better , seamless, user-friendly than a govt censored google."


Well, I guess a good GUI pretty much ends the argument then. :-) Is that like Gorbachev's "Communism with a human face"? Maybe if he'd changed it to "Communism with a graphical interface" he'd have been able to pull it off....


A few thoughts
By sonoran on 2/1/2006 12:16:55 PM , Rating: 2
Who's to say Google can't "make a mistake" once in a while and let some of those search terms slip though occasionally? Probably won't, but...

In daily matters, the average Chinese probably has as much (or more) freedom as the average American - as long as they don't get into politics. Having travelled to Asia and Latin America, I have a hard time not laughing in their face when someone uses the phrase "Land of the Free" now - America is one of the most highly regulated places on the planet. Try advocating the overthrow of the govt (or its replacement with, say, a communist system) in America and see how much freedom you have. We should expect the Chinese to allow that when we don't? No govt on the planet would.




Who has the right to say what's best for China?
By iamright on 2/1/2006 12:59:19 PM , Rating: 2
I guess that China should be allowed to get addicted to pornography like America is. Who would deny them of that human right? The liberal minded Americans wouldn't. The only thing worse than forcing democracy on a country is the perversion of a country with liberal ideals. Permissive liberalism cloaked with human rights labels is more poisonous than communist repression.


By Decaydence on 2/1/2006 7:08:33 PM , Rating: 2
I just want to make sure I understand your post (i'm hoping English is your second language). Are you saying that too much freedom leads to pornography which is worse than a government deciding for its people what is right and wrong?

The truth of the matter is that the United States isn't nearly free enough in practice, regardless of what we claim as our philosophy. I don't know what you have been reading or hearing about, but there isn't exactly a list of social problems stemming from pornography in this country.

There is also no demonstrable advantage to the people when their government censors ideas or images; the advantage in that is only to the government and its ability to control the people. So if the assumption is that a government is more important than the people it serves or, in your scenario, controls then you are absolutely correct. Why any individual would ever believe that to be true, other than as a result of the very mind control you endorse, is beyond me; it simply isn't in the individual's best interest.

I'm hoping I missed some aspect of your post because of this language barrier that makes my reading of your comment incorrect. Otherwise, you have serious issues.


By mindless1 on 2/1/2006 9:55:18 PM , Rating: 2
Well if by "addicted to porn" you meant, "freedom of choice", then YES, they should be able to choose.

Who would deny them free access to any and every type of information and media the world has to offer and then let them choose how they spend their time. Perhaps you are just fixated on porn, and if so, is it not your problem, not whatever stereotypical America you imagine?

If anything, America is one of the more sexually repressed modern countries. You can barely even show a breast on TV in the last few years. Ever seen European tv stations?

Who is forcing anything? Deomcracy is not something forced on a person, it's the opposite, Deomcracy is what remains after there's not so much forced on a person anymore.

Iiberal ideals. maybe you watch a certain tv channel too much and your head is filled with pudding? Individuals make up a country whether it be the US or China. They're not going to bend to your stereotypical image of them and they're not going to be particularly grateful that you want to decide FOR them, anything of significance.

Finally, ponder that you had access to this 'site and the freedom enough to post your opinion. That's what it's all about. If you have such access and simultaneously hate pr0n, then by all means don't view any, but 'tis far better to have choices and only do one thing you want to than to have no choices and do one thing you don't.


By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:36:00 AM , Rating: 2
There was once a certain Catholic priest named Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, whose writings on the origin of man, a non-literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account, and evolution were at the time considered quite controversial within the Church. For a while, he was forbidden to publish any of his writings. During that time, he wrote:

"Only those who believe their faith dare to question it."

That sums up in one sentence the use of censorship in China and everywhere else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Ch...




Sigh
By warhaven on 1/31/2006 2:20:49 PM , Rating: 2
From what I have heard from Chinese locals, most Chinese are not very interested in politics, you might even say passive. You might consider this to be negative on the other hand it can also be quite positive. In China they will not debate for months influenced by public opinion formed by media looking over their shoulder. They will not pump millions into an referendum which will probably flush their hard(months/years) works down the toilet. Also The Chinese Government simply blocks pornography, which they find is unhealthy. In most western countries this will be a decades discussion with lots of filings and accusations without any significant results.

Example: If a unspecified country would block, and force companies to do so aswell, webpages containing thorough information about the words; blender, radiator, ice-cake..............would you bother........How many times have you wanted to know anything about that??

Human rights: You do something wrong or are stronly suspected of something in China.....you go to West-China to a labour camp.

You do something wrong or are strongly suspected of something in the USA you go to guantanamo bay.......or Poland as rumours go.

This ofcourse does not apply in general. It is just meant to serve to illustrate that no-one and that includes but certainly is not limited to China and the USA. Though I do believe that human rights are the least violated in Green Land.

I've seen loads of PSB's(aka police/Public Security Bureau) in China. I felt safe there though they only walk with a regular baton and a walkie-talkie.......the latter probably being the most dangerous. Hell, I saw an officer with a chromed baton with spikes standing guard in front of a bank.......you'll think twice...ehh....200 times before robbing that bank.
Do you feel safe in the country you live in??

Ofcourse there are negative aspects about the Chinese system, alot even I guess but not a lot more than with any other system. Otherwise said, there is no perfect system, each has its own trade-offs.




RE: Sigh
By NMDJuggler on 1/31/2006 6:24:42 PM , Rating: 2
Be very careful about generalizations, especially in a country so diverse as China. I would argue that visiting businessmen have little to no idea what transpires in this country, since you are visiting the developed parts of the country and seen as a valued guest. Those cute translators that preach the party line are hand picked for their political loyalty and their attractiveness. It's also very difficult to get Chinese to come out with their true opinions about politics, especially to a foreigner whom may or may not be trustworthy.

You make some good points about lack of freedoms in capitalist countries, but I assure you there are much larger problems in China. All you have to do is look at the execution rates. In the U.S. there were 54 executions in 2004, in China the official number was 3500 while many human rights groups estimate the actual number is closer to 10 times that. Correct for population, and you still have a huge descrepency. When you look at that taking into consideration the arbitrary nature of police enforcement, the picture begins to look bleak. I have several very close friends within the PRC police force. Trials are non-transparent, often don't take place, etc, etc. I'm cynical of U.S. politics, but the system in China permits things that simply couldn't happen here. Ordinary citizens don't usually end up in Gitmo (don't get me wrong, I am VERY anti-Gitmo). You also must be aware that the prosperous picture painted of south and east China does not reflect the reality of what happens in West China. Almost daily protests involving land rights and industrial pollution are routinely censored by the government press. Many of these protests result in violence and deaths. Most never make it to the western press. The Chinese ARE political, and they certainly deserve better than Google is giving them. That being said, I agree it's better than nothing.

I also fail to see how being half Chinese ends this discussion. Have you ever been to China? Outside Beijing or Shanghai? How familiar are you with its history and culture?


RE: Sigh
By dmcanally on 2/1/2006 9:05:33 AM , Rating: 2
Don't things usually work this way when the people have been enslaved for over 2000 years?

At least the chineese govermnet isn't robbing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people from their lives to build a giant wall.


RE: Sigh
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 2:12:32 AM , Rating: 2
"Example: If a unspecified country would block, and force companies to do so aswell, webpages containing thorough information about the words; blender, radiator, ice-cake..............would you bother........"

I would, and I hope others would too. If we don't fight for our rights, we lose them. Just because something doesn't affect you personally is not a reason to not oppose it if it is wrong.



"I've seen loads of PSB's(aka police/Public Security Bureau) in China. I felt safe there though they only walk with a regular baton and a walkie-talkie.......the latter probably being the most dangerous. Hell, I saw an officer with a chromed baton with spikes standing guard in front of a bank.......you'll think twice...ehh....200 times before robbing that bank.
Do you feel safe in the country you live in?? "

Ruling with an iron fist, using police power, banning and crushing dissent, etc. will certainly make a country a safer place (from citizen-on-citizen violence, not government-on-citizen). Look at Iraq post-Hussein, Russia post-Communism, Yugoslavia post-Tito, etc. And Mussolini had those trains running on time, from what I hear. But none of that comes close to justifying the abuses of human rights, or elevating dictatorships of left or right to the status of respectable political ideologies.



"Ofcourse there are negative aspects about the Chinese system, alot even I guess but not a lot more than with any other system."

Not a lot...? So, there's not much difference between political/social life in China, and that in, oh, Canada? Belgium? New Zealand?


Disappointed
By Kilim on 1/31/2006 1:10:08 PM , Rating: 1
I think most of us, well, virtually all of us, are disappointed in Google's actions. The perception was Google was something special, a company geared toward free, easy access to info. That the people using its services was more important than what some "government entity" wanted.

I do not think most people will be willing to admit to such naivety, though. People are just acting out that Google is now a company more interested in making MORE AND MORE money just like Microsoft and Yahoo.

They didn't have to do business in China, they just wanted the money, and the money was enough to go against their supposed ideals.

The fact that a puclic company concerned with dispenising as much information as possible does not want to be questioned on their decision is comical.




RE: Disappointed
By Samus on 2/1/2006 3:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
Jebus Christ your philosophy pisses me off. You must be a Bush administration supported too.

Think about it. Cencored Google, or no Google? Whats better?

God damn you people are stupid. Stop isolating yourselves in your "American bubble" and join the rest of the world in learning how things work internationally. You're the only morons that don't support Google's decision.

Stupid republicans and their outdated old values and ways. So disconnected from society its as if your running a 2400 baud modem.


RE: Disappointed
By Snuffalufagus on 2/1/2006 4:26:02 AM , Rating: 2
And you're a schmuck who can't spell, too bad Kerry lost eh?

"You're the only morons that don't support Google's decision." - I believe there are other morons out there, and not all the morons have a problem with the decision. They problem with morons like you is that you present your information as if you know everything.


RE: Disappointed
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:12:41 AM , Rating: 2
"You must be a Bush administration supported [sic] too....
Stupid republicans and their outdated old values and ways."

Well, here's one Kerry-voting, Michael Moore-loving individual who wholeheartedly disapproves of what Google is doing. I'm confused as to how you've come to believe that the Democratic party supports censorship, oppression and dictatorships and it's "outdated" to oppose a lack of human rights.

"Think about it. Cencored [sic] Google, or no Google? Whats better? "

It's better to let the Reds do their own dirty work with no help from us. And the worth of a censored Google to no Google is the same as the worth of a state-run, censored newspaper to no newspaper... not much.

"God damn you people are stupid. Stop isolating yourselves in your 'American bubble' and join the rest of the world in learning how things work internationally."

How, pray tell, is that? That companies decide that if they don't do the censoring, (or use the slave labor, or dump the chemicals in the water supply, or export arms or chemical weapons or nuclear or biological material to dictators) that someone else will do it anyway, so they might as well do it and make the cash?

"You're the only morons that don't support Google's decision."

Read above... Google is being called before a human rights committee. This means that all those who support human rights are calling into question the ethics of Google's cooperating with the suppression of information. I'm reminded of the boycott against South Africa in the '80s, a move that was largely mounted by the DEMOCRATIC party at first. I'm assuming you would argue that that was wrong, too.




More of the same garbage out of Washington
By Decaydence on 2/1/2006 1:15:20 AM , Rating: 1
I wonder if the Congressional Human Rights Caucus might have some more pressing matters than talking to Google about doing business in China. Unfortunately, tackling real issues unfolding in the world won't get quite as much free publicity for the members of the Caucus as will lambasting some poor bastard from Google. This is almost as helpful as wasting time on Major League Baseball steroid hearings or any of the other transparently useless garbage these blowhards love to pass off as an honest day's work.




By dmcanally on 2/1/2006 9:07:48 AM , Rating: 2
What... you actually expect them to put our tax dollars to good use? How dare you sir.


By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:27:33 AM , Rating: 2
Ok, which U.S.-related human rights issue would you like them to talk about this moment?

This relates to U.S. firms cooperating in policies that violate the very principles that our country was founded on, principles that were deemed "self-evident" (but not in this forum) and "inalienable".

When they're done with Google, I hope they turn their sights on U.S. companies purchasing products made with Chinese prison labor.


Oh the irony!
By mindless1 on 1/31/2006 6:58:14 PM , Rating: 2
One would think the Congress' Congressional Human Rights Caucus would be requesting a meeting with Chinese governmental officials if they have a problem with censorship.

I agree with the other posters' remarks that Google is nt helping to censor, rather delivering as much as they are allowed to. The alternative would be no google and they still don't get that content. If anything, Google will help bring even that which is banned if the citizens look hard enough (find clever methods of searching). I wonder if they just searching using Klingon terms...




RE: Oh the irony!
By alcalde on 2/2/2006 1:23:06 AM , Rating: 2
"I agree with the other posters' remarks that Google is nt helping to censor, rather delivering as much as they are allowed to."

That's a semantic word game. They are performing the censoring (blocking various searches/results) at the behest of the Chinese government. They're not choosing the content, but they are performing the deed. It's like saying that a Nazi concentration camp guard was not helping to kill prisoners, he was "permitting to live as many as he was allowed to".



Google in China
By KAPTAINKREMEN on 1/31/2006 1:10:45 PM , Rating: 1
I work for communist China. So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about. But trust me.... You don't. I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about. This is how bad info gets passed around. If you don't know about the topic....Don't make yourself sound like you do. Because some readers believe anything they hear.




RE: Google in China
By Kilim on 1/31/2006 4:01:20 PM , Rating: 2
If you are going to say others do not know what they are talking about, then please correct them with your own information.

It is not reasonable to tell a person that they do not know what they are tlaking about and then NOT give your position and what led you to that conclusion.

Or did you, and Google hunted you down and blocked it, lol.


Possible but unlikely...
By goku on 1/31/2006 7:50:02 PM , Rating: 2
It's possible but unlikely that google may at first make the china govt. pleased with them, they unblock google and let google take over china with just about everybody using google, even officials of china use google, google becomes dominant player in china to the point of dependency, google unsensors their content and says "tough shiet" to the govt. and 1 of 2 things will happen, the govt. will have to accept it and allow it to be unsensored or the govt. will sensor it but because the people are so dependant on it, there will be an uprising with communism falling and a new democracy arising...

It's possible..




"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings









botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki