Google Agrees to Censor Results in China 862
neutralino writes "The Associated Press is reporting that Google has agreed to censor results in China. According to the article, 'Google officials characterized the censorship concessions in China as an excruciating decision for a company that adopted "don't be evil" as a motto. But management believes it's a worthwhile sacrifice.'"
Don't^H^H^H^H^H (Score:5, Funny)
Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:5, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite true, but you can buy a whole hell of alot more stuff to enrich your life with money. For example, time. Each of us has a limited amount of time on this earth, some more than others. If you dont need to trade your time for money (working) then you can spend more of your time with LIFE.
To ignore that money is really the currency of t
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:4, Funny)
There's also the award-winning photography.
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Insightful)
And that makes it okay? "Shareholders" and society in general need to grow a conscience and learn there is more to success than money. That there's more to LIFE than money.
What if that money that they made was spent on curing Malaria in Africa, or some similar beneficial endeavour? Wouldn't that lighten this already-grey area slightly? Is openly-labelled censorship better or worse than disease? It's subjective.
My point is that it's easy to say there's more to life than money, but when money has such a
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, ideals often conflict with reality.
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:5, Insightful)
Google has a far stronger weapon than any gun... the ability to make easy the free exchange of ideas and knowledge.
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Insightful)
Not any more, they're not. They're a hard-core capitalistic oligarchy. But they understand that by continuing to mouth Communist rhetoric, their enemies stay all outraged and irrational, attacking the rhetoric while ignoring most of what the Chinese government is actually up to.
Lots of people are falling for the ruse.
OTOH, here and there you can read dispassionate analyses of what's actually going on over there. It's hardly communism any more; it's a rather different sort of au
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:5, Insightful)
Would you be so willing to understand?
Re:Not as evil as the summery leads you to believe (Score:3, Interesting)
"can only choose to provide a censored search engine or not provide one at all"
The moral would walk away, especially if your moto is do no evil. If evil is the only option, do you do it?
Backwards (Score:5, Insightful)
The Notice Is There (Score:4, Informative)
"Ju dangdi falü fagui he zhengce, bufen sousuo jieguo weiyu xianshi."
"According to local laws, regulations and policies, part of the search results is not being shown."
Bold Statement (Score:3, Insightful)
Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have no problem with selling China cars or airplanes or other stuff like that. But to actively collaborate with the regime in stifling dissent is just too much. After this, I don't think anyone should have any faith at all in their claim that they will stick up to the US Government's fishing expedition.
Google is dead. Someone new will take their place. Someone who doesn't kowtow to dictators.
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:3, Insightful)
For starters, China isn't a communist state. It hasn't been in over 30 years. It's a Capitalist Dictatorship (aka Facism).
And... how exactly is Google dead? I fail to see any resonable cause for such a statement.
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:4, Insightful)
The academic community, who coined it....
Or the political leaders who use it to describe themselves on a regular basis....
The definitions are radically different. *shrug*
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's still "Communist" as in Communist Party controlled. How "communist" the "Communists" are is debateable.
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually it's a bit more complicated than that...China (and Japan I believe) bought the US debt, at around 1 trillion dollars. So considering how now the US owes China a significant sum, it will be interest
Re:Why should Google help the CCP? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, they have stated that they will tell users when search results have been removed in order to comply with a chinese government request so the people searching can clearly see that its the fault of the government that their search results arent as good as they could be, not google.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Interesting)
Well that's exactly what Google's doing. Google normally offers uncensored, clean information from which people can learn. But the Chinese government says that Google must poison the learning through censorship, in order to dumb down their citizens so they won't know how badly they're being treated by the gov't.
I am ashamed of Google and any other American entity that encourages China's oppressive style of government.
You are missing one key thing. (Score:4, Informative)
To use your own analogy this would be like Poland Spring putting lead in their water, and then putting a bit notice on every bottle that said "To comply with Chinese law we have put lead in this water."
If you know the water is posion you can choose to drink elsewhere if you wish.
Re:You are missing one key thing. (Score:5, Interesting)
And how long until the Chinese government will require Google to remove the 'censored to comply with local laws' notification? it's not like that would be a difficult step to take once they see that Google would prefer to play by their rules rather than leave.
Google just placed itself in the perfect position between the Chinese carrot and stick. Let's see how it plays out (unless that info will get censored too) At least, they have MS and Y! to keep them company.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Interesting)
Try saying something like that in China about the Chinese government... then let us know how much giggling you do when you're thrown in jail for upwards to a decade (as its commonly the case).
Re:Bold Statement (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, the whole world sucks except for America!
Or you could be moderately intelligent and undersand the point he's making. EVERY civilized country reduces freedom, rather than simply being unable to enforce granting all, for the sake of whatever the fuck you define 'civility'. If you like what civility is in your country, stay there. If you don't, vote or leave. But don't, for a moment, think that any country allows the ultimate ideal in freedoms. Millions upon millions of people on this planet prefer the style of freedoms and restrictions granted by their government over Americas, and its retarded to actually place one's personal beliefs as the measure of what the right balance is. Its reverse phychology dude
Re:Bold Statement (Score:3, Interesting)
"But don't, for a moment, think that any country allows the ultimate ideal in freedoms"
"Millions upon millions of people on this planet prefer the style of freedoms and restrictions granted by their government over Americas"
Many people do leave their countries. They overwhelmingly come to the US. They even come from countries that take pride in their ability to snub the US form of government and the people who live here. In addition they find many of their countrymen already
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Insightful)
You keep telling yourself that [smh.com.au]. Here's what Reverend Desmond Tutu had to say:
The US spin machine even has a nifty term for what they're doing: Internment Without Trial. Wtf? They just slapped a happy-happy name on "guilty until proven innocent" and you guys bought it. Loyal sheep are already parroting the US government's implication that innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to certain people.
Ok, admittedly she's British. Do you think most Americans would say any different? What worries me most is that it seems US citizens are less informed of what goes on in Guantanamo than people from the UK and Europe and Australia. Aren't you frightened by that?
As I said, remove the beam from thine own eye. You guys are acting pretty scary these days and it's even scarier when you don't realise it. The fact that I'm already receiving negative moderation for even daring to say that the US is less than perfect should be all the evidence you need that something is very wrong in the US right now.
Very, very, very wrong.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:5, Funny)
Tiananmen+Square (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&q=tiananmen+S quare++&btnG=%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&meta= [google.cn]
Re:Tiananmen+Square (Score:5, Interesting)
You don't tell you how many results have been removed or where those results would fit in the "normal" search results. Personally I think some message that appears for every deleted search result would be less evil than the very subtle, almost un-noticable, message that they have now.
Compare (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.google.cn/search?hl=zh-CN&q=tiananmen+
The bulk of the English results refer to the massacre. Not oe of google.cn's hits refers to this. Nor is there a reference to the vast omission.
And they say this is not censorship.
Re:Tiananmen+Square (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.google.cn/search?q=tiananmen+Square++m
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd trip over myself to do business in China. Are you kidding me? Also, you lamers don't realize that Google in China would do more to erode the government's power than not? It's better for the young Chinese that Google be there, censorship or no. In fact, I'd be surprised if Google didn't code in easy hacks around the censorship criteria, and play dumb when the Chinese object. It'll take months/years for the old guard to catch on, and it'll endear Google amongst the young revolution-minded Chinese... university students, et al. Mindshare, cultural affinity, etc...
This holier than thou stance smacks of arrogance, frankly. There's something smart. A group doesn't do what you want it to, so you stop speaking to them until they do, right? lol. It's worked with Cuba, right?
I'm trying to teach myself Mandarin now. Are you kidding me? China is like the gold rush all over again. But then again, you'd know that, Wyatt.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Laws are not automatically ethical just because Google's involved.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:3, Insightful)
When a country sponsors terrorism, we boycott them. When a country massacres certain races in their country, we try to stop them. Why, when a country rules by oppression, fear, and many other completely un-Democratic ideals should we make an exception?
Money talks, my friend. Google's got dollar signs in their eyes just like MS and Yahoo, and China's gonna be a huge marke
Re:Bold Statement (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Re:Bold Statement (Score:2)
Exactly what Chinese law would that be? Much of what the Chinese government does is extra-legal and arguably in violation of the Chinese Constitution, which protects freedom of speech and other rights.
Re:Bold Statement (Score:3, Interesting)
They could continue as they have, using US-based servers outside of China's control. Then they might be blocked from China. They don't want that, but they DO have a choice. The choice is between money and being moral. Like most businesses, they chose money. It's sad that being moral isn't even considered a possibility. Murdoch dumped BBC news from his TV broadcasts in China for exactly the same reason. It's easy to talk
re: "I don't believe this violates... (Score:3, Insightful)
What if the law is evil?
Re:Bold Statement (Score:3, Interesting)
If Google was operating in Kaplakastan, and it was legal there to chop off the hands of an employee that was 5 minutes late, would that be OK too?
If American oil companies went over Nigeria to extract oil, feeding money to the government and corrupt officials, while taking land from the native people, would that be OK too? Just following local rules...
We don't *have* to be OK with this. We can stand up and say "Google, this doesn't follow your company mot
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
And so it begins... (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean the suits decided.
I think the next year will see whether Google is true to the original DNA of the company, or whether they will become the next Microsoft, with all that implies.
Do no evil . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Do no evil . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Do no evil(*)
(*) Void where prohibited
Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:5, Insightful)
an excruciating decision for a company that adopted "don't be evil" as a motto. But management believes it's a worthwhile sacrifice.
That statement is bullshit. The 'worthwhile sacrifice' mentioned is clearly meant to work against the clear contravention of the 'do no evil' motto. However what is being sacrificed? The ethics of Google. What is being gained by the sacrifice? Access to China == profit. So they're sacrificing ethics for profit - that isn't exactly original for a corporation.
More from the article: "We firmly believe, with our culture of innovation, Google can make meaningful and positive contributions to the already impressive pace of development in China," said Andrew McLaughlin, Google's senior policy counsel.
Again, bullshit. Google is an informaiton company. Their entire existence is justified by making access to and use of information easier. If they censor that information based on the petty politics of nationalists (or any other political concern) then they are not serving their purpose. They are in fact reinforcing the policies of censorship and repression in China. If everyone, every company goes along with these policies then what motivation is there to change them?
Here's a real sacrifice: lose profits from lack of presence in China and be ethical and further the cause of free speech. That's a sacrifice, something you'd like, for something better. Not the other way around. Really the way these PR droids use language makes me want to have them lobotomised... and PR school doesn't count.
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:2)
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:2)
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:5, Insightful)
- Be present in China, albeit in mutilated form. The censorship would be declared, not secret. As such, Google's chinese services would not claim to comprehensively represent Google's services. - Not operate in China at all.
China doesn't need Google very much; they already have Yahoo, MSN, et al. As such, Google declining to operate in China would do almost nothing to further the cause of free speech because it would not damage the opponents of free speech in the slightest.
Because Google lacks the potential to "further" the cause of free speech in this altercation, their failure to advance that cause in China is not sufficient to warrant the claim of evilness.
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:4, Insightful)
Every little bit of effort has the potential to further free speech. The biggest name right now in the industry saying no to China might incite others to do the same and that means something. Someone has to have the balls to be the leader, and google is obviously not it. But that isn't a big deal to me. No matter how big a person(or corp) talks, not everyone is cut out to really take the sacrifices necessarry to stand by their values.
PS> I've been up for 20 hours now, spelling and grammar are no longer important matters.
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:5, Insightful)
Sacrificing the profits of China on principle has to be backed by the majority of the shareholders. Additionally, they don't want to enrich Microsoft and don't want their stock price to tank.
Of course, they have quite a few PHDs to feed.
In terms of net evil, of the options available, this is the least evil option. To remove themselves entirely from the Chinese market (the Great Firewall is effective and Google would likely not do well working around it) would be no better.
Make no mistake. Leaving the Chinese people high and dry would not be more effective or less evil. Especially when substituting a willing Microsoft or Yahoo. Ignoring a bad situation is evil. Making the best of it isn't.
Google may cooperate with the Chinese government. However, they won't be able to "purify" the search engine completely. There will be holes in the cache as well. They have so much data that there is no solution to solving this problem. Does making "imperfect" censorship available to the Chinese people sound worse than making a "perfect" set of firewall rules?
As for "reinforcing the censorship policies of petty nationalists"...how does removing yourself from the picture help? What should they do? Develop a crypto query network? Distributed it via clandestine means? Help me here.
Either using Google's "censored" content and tools will send countless Chinese to jail, or they will be able to continue to provide what they do now. In China, right now, Google is a wealth of information with everything you need nestled in the nooks and crannies. While it will be censored within the limitations of the Chinese government and technical possibility, it can still serve some purpose in spreading censored information.
Maybe all this means is that the honchos at Google have some humility. Perhaps they realize that this is the best they can do for the Chinese people. Perhaps they have coupled "Do no evil!" with "Do what you can."?
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:2)
Not to mention the sacrifice of Americans who will divest their Google stock now because they want nothing more to do with the company's profits. Will be interesting to see Google's valuation over the next few days as news of the sellout propogates.
I for one am glad I do not own any Google stock, nor do I wish to in the future at this point, I don't care how big and mighty their cute little colors become.
Re:Don't be evil down the gurgler (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine if they had decided to allow the
Less hysterically (Score:5, Insightful)
Liberalisation of China is probably going to be something that happens in a creeping fashion. A position based entirely on principal (ie Google refusing outright) might actually be worse in practice because it would actually mean more isolation for the Chinese people, not less. Whatever blocks are placed it isn't going to be 100% effective.
If Google put's up a "Some results have been omited due to local legal requirements" message like they do with some other blocks all the better, at least the people will know they are being filtered and why.
Wrong, double wrong, and wrong once more (Score:4, Insightful)
If you disagree, please explain how Google refusing to participate with China would help a Chinese dissadent. Remember, China's filters have holes, and there will be even more of them if they have to watch every darned google search.
Worthwhile?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Worthwhile?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Worthwhile?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Worthwhile?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, just in case you think radioislam.net is some sort of fanatical extremist islamic sight, the first paragraph I read on the site is this:
"No hate. No violence
Races? Only one Human race
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
Freedom of Speech - Use it or lose it!"
A lot of their stuff is very anti-Bush and anti-Israel, but I see nothing that would constitute any sort of hate crime or anything like that. Certainly they are not selling Nazi memorabilia as you are suggesting.
Now, do you think censoring this site is OK? If so, why? And if it is "good" for France and German to censor sites like this, why is it bad for China to censor sites it feels are just as negative for its own society? Do you even know the sites that China bans? Maybe China is banning the exact same sites! No one has published a list yet!
There is a double standard. If you think it is OK for Google to obey censorship laws, then it should be OK. If you think it is wrong for Google to obey censorship laws, then it is wrong. But if you are asking Google to determine which is "good" censorship, and which is "bad" censorship, then isn't it reasonable that you and Google would have different opinions on what is good or bad censorship?
New Google motto (Score:2)
Nothing says they have to do business there. It seems, after some soul searching, they are putting profits ahead of 'do no evil'. If that were truly the motto, then they might tell China to insert it where the sun don't shine, and forgo that market.
In touch with the people (Score:3, Funny)
Re:In touch with the people (Score:3, Insightful)
Totalitarianism-Lite penis measuring contest (Score:4, Insightful)
I am sick and tired of the West sucking up to China. It seems China gets the best end of the bargain - they get the benefits of capitalism and trade with the west - but they get a free pass on democracy, and the West even helps them with their dictatorship and censorship needs.
So, I guess totalitarianism is bad, as long as a small, weak country is doing it. But "China very big" so, we have to do what China says.
Motherfuckers. Screw Google and all the other apologists.
Not Just China (Score:4, Insightful)
a) any country with a useful resource and a friendly-to-us government (see: Saudi Arabia)
b) any country that would be kind of a pain to invade with no clear benefit (see: most totalitarian countries)
c) any country that would be a total bitch to invade (see: N. Korea) despite possible security benefits for us and our allies/helpers.
I am speaking of US policy hear, but generally, governments in the west follow these policies. I hate that people think that China gets a blind eye. The human rights and legal situations in China are probably the most talked about and scrutinized in the west of any non-democratic country (besides Iraq). But what the hell do you expect countries to do?
There's a goodly amount of international pressure on China as-is, and while I wouldn't be against ramping that up, I think an invasion there would be pretty much 130% Grade-A insane.
While this has been a bit off-topic, it does apply. Google has to deal with the country the way it is (as our national governments do), and the other choice is to let some other non-blocked IP become China's Google. The real test of their principles will be whether they use their market share there, once gained, to try to stand up for greater freedom of information. 'Standing up' to the government on this issue now would provide nothing besides a little bit of good PR here in the west, no substantive gain for the Chinese people.
"cheap" consumer goods (Score:4)
Compare today's $7 widget to the $10 widget you bought in 1996. The newer widget weighs half as much, is made from inferior materials, and won't last nearly as long. You're not saving $3, you're being ripped off.
With the exception of consumer electonics, most of the retail goods have gotten significantly more expensive in the past 10 - 20 years... when you hold quality constant.
Re:Totalitarianism-Lite penis measuring contest (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't agree. China is getting the jobs, and growing prosperity. American jobs are declining - and Americans are sending themselves broke of the illusion of Wal-Mart dreams. not only that, but you get crappy products. of course, China can make good products, but the popular stuff in the
Keep some things in mind... (Score:2)
It's not like Google doesn't have some of the sm
To state the obvious (Score:2, Insightful)
It also calls into question their motivations for resisting the Bush administrations requests. (reminds me of the old joke: Man asks a woman to have sex with him, she says forget it. He says "how about for a hundred thousand dollars". She consents, so he says "how about for ten dollars". She says "what kind
They're selling the Chinese people down the river. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not too distant future... (Score:5, Insightful)
New motto:
Do no evil unless governments compel you to if you want to stay in the market.
maybe.. (Score:2)
Are these the sacrifices Larry was talking about? (Score:2)
The pro-democracy dilemma (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a question that every pro-democracy person, company, and government has to make when it comes to anti-democratic countries like China.
The answer, as with much of life, varies with the individual circumstances.
Censor for China = Bad! Censor for France = Good! (Score:4, Insightful)
Here is some more information:
http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2005-01-15-n5
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/050117-090
http://sethf.com/anticensorware/general/google-ce
So the question is, why are people so offended when Google censors for China, but think the same behavior is fine for Europe?
How is this evil? (Score:5, Insightful)
Some might argue that Google could have simply held their ground and China would have eventually caved. I doubt this. There are plenty of search engines out there, and although they might not be quite as good as Google, they're not bad or anything. If popular demand for Google is big enough to make China give up their censoring, then China's censorship laws can't be that strict if something as trivial as Google versus Yahoo is willing to make them cave.
Google chose between the lesser of two evils (Score:5, Interesting)
It is easy to talk about sticking to principles and refusing censorship from the comfort of a (relatively) uncensored computer. But have you ever considered what life would be like for those without Google? When _every_ single search engine out there, including Yahoo, MSN or others, are all filtered? All this means is that the most effective information resource out there is gone and we have to rely on substandard competitors that cave in far more easily to any pressure (e.g. DOJ request for info). Finding _any_ information becomes harder. What good has it done anyone?
It is easy to paint every decision as black and white, good or evil. But life really isn't that simple. Google had to choose between bad and evil and they came up with a solution that was better than any of their competitors. At least they tell you that something is filtered out. At least a smart and curious person still can go out and find out what it was that was filtered. The alternatives (international or chinese) do not even do that.
Among my workmates, information is well shared. Everyone knows what happened in the square. Heck, a couple of them were there. They knew about the benzene spill in Harbin long before it came out in news. Don't worry. Information of this sort gets around fairly well through various means. Censoring it from Google really won't hide anything. All blocking Google means is that when we hit obscure technical problems, we can no longer find solutions quickly. When we want to learn about the latest technology, we must scan through pages and pages of listings to find a decent resource. Oh yes, we'll also make Overture rich cause sooner or later, we will click through one of their sponsored links.
Compare / Contrast (Score:5, Interesting)
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke, English statesman and political philosopher (1729-1797
It's a start (Score:3, Insightful)
The notice might as well be "If you lived in a free country you would be seeing all sorts of neat stuff right now".
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Pot, kettle... (Score:3, Insightful)
Different cultures have different standards. I don't believe China's way is the best, but I'm not sure. And neither are you.
Do you really think Google has to fight against opression? Why don't you start? Go and break the DMCA ina really visible way, and face the consequences. I mean, we all know it's an unjust law, right? So why are you abiding by it?
Re:Not Google's task to oppose regime (Score:3, Interesting)
They already tried. [wikipedia.org]
Personally, I feel pessimistic enough right now to say that China will never become a democracy, no matter what anyone does. New technology has the capacity to enable both mass industrialisation and mass oppression. The Chinese communist party is showing other governments the new way to roll back liberties across the globe.
I'd really like to be wrong, but so far, nothing has given me enough hope to be optimistic. It's been almost 17 years since Tiananmen an