|
|
|
June 13, 2005
It can't happen there?
Microsoft censors bloggers? Can such things be? According to reports like this, Microsoft is doing just that. And it joins Yahoo and Google in cooperating with government censorship: BEIJING - Users of Microsoft’s new China-based Internet portal were blocked Monday from using the words ”democracy”, “freedom” and “human rights” in an apparent move by the US software giant to appease Beijing.(More here.) Not only should it be condemned, but it should be recognized that when bloggers (or any other web sites) are censored in China, they're censored worldwide. I'd posted about Google and Yahoo before for collectively kowtowing to collectivism, but what the hell is going on with Bill Gates, anyway? I thought he was supposed to be against censorship. This love affair with censorship is getting to be more than a little disgusting. UPDATE (06/14/05): Wired's headline on this story reads "Microsoft Censors Chinese Blogs." Obviously, what's good for China is good for Iran. And meanwhile, the BBC's technology commentator Bill Thompson warns "vocal North American defenders of freedom of speech and the US Constitution's First Amendment" that their approach might annoy "the authorities": Some of them want to make anti-censorship software and send it to people in China, Iran and elsewhere, giving them the tools to get around government restrictions.I'm sure Iranian dissident Sina Motallebi feels appropriately chastised. What part of "free speech" does the BBC not understand? MORE: Via Glenn Reynolds, here's Rebecca McKinnon: The issue is whether Microsoft should be collaborating with the Chinese regime as it builds an increasingly sophisticated system of Internet censorship and control. (See this ONI report for lots of details on that system.) Declining to collaborate with this system is not "forcing the Chinese into a position they don't believe in." Declining to collaborate would be the only way to show that your stated belief in free speech is more than 空话: empty words. If you believe that Chinese people deserve the same respect as Americans, then please put your money where your mouth is.But as Ms. McKinnon points out, Microsoft is not the only culprit: But let's not single out Microsoft for trashing on this point. As this Open Net Initiative report and this 2004 Amnesty International report will make abundantly clear, China's filtering, censorship, and surveillance systems wouldn't be what they are today without lots of help from a number of North American technology companies. Businessman and author Ethan Gutmann wrote about Cisco's particular contribution in this 2002 article which later became a book chapter.I've previously complained about blogs being content filtered, and I'm sure the same technology can be sold by the same companies to governments which will use them to impose censorship. (Similarly, American gun manufacturers have no ultimate control over whether the firearms they sell to foreign governments will be used to shoot demonstrators.) Still, there's a difference between selling technology which is misused and actively helping a government misuse it. posted by Eric on 06.13.05 at 11:14 AM
Comments
Bill Gates, George Soros, Armand Hammer, Averell Harriman, David Rockefeller, and the rest of that crowd should form an organization: "Capitalists For Communism" Ayn Rand called it "the sanction of the victim". I dare call it treason. I have had it. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · June 14, 2005 12:11 AM You forgot Rupert Murdoch, who was also seen kissing Beijing's bum in order to get more business in China. Raging Bee · June 14, 2005 11:05 AM Yes, Rupert Murdoch. Ted Turner, too. I was being more or less tongue-in-cheek. They already have plenty of organizations of Capitalists For Communism, though not by that name, e.g., Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, etc.. I'm against all that. I'm against the One World. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · June 14, 2005 04:57 PM Ironic that one of Americas largest companies is promoting freedom in China and another is working in direct opposition. One is accused of being exploitive of workers and the other touts itself as a progressive supporter of free speech. . yatalli · June 14, 2005 05:57 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Officials at Microsoft’s Beijing offices refused to comment.
Well, at least they're following their own rules. Wouldn't want them to be wimps AND hypocrites, would we?
"What's up with Bill Gates" is that, like nearly every big company, he's suddenly realized he has something to lose, and is terrified at the prospect of ANY loss of ANY part of his accumulated wealth and power.