Search Engine Censorship

[Cosmo]

Earlier this year, BBC News (and others) reported that Google has agreed to censor its search results in China in exchange for being allowed to participate in the undoubtedly lucrative Chinese search market. Chinese users who google for terms like "democracy", "tiananmen square", "taiwan independence", and other government-defined terms will receive a heavily-censored list of results.

For example, Chinese users who google for "falung gong", a spiritual group outlawed by the Chinese government, will receive only government-approved websites and propaganda that denounce the movement. The same search performed in the US retrieves a Wikipedia page as well as the organization's website and other relevant links.

It should be noted that Google is not the only search firm in this situation. Yahoo, and other non-Chinese-based search engines, have also agreed to censor their results in exchange for market entry in China. Google's oft-quoted unofficial motto is "don't be evil". Many in the US and worldwide have criticized Google in particular, however, stating that the company's actions in China are precisely that - evil.

Personally, I find myself divided on the issue. The Internet is more than just a series of tubes; it's the best telecommunications and information tool humanity has ever invented. I believe that we're only scratching the surface of the Internet's potential, and to really make great leaps forward in telecommunications and globalization we need to be as inclusive as possible with information and ideas.

On the other hand, however, I wonder if we in the US and elsewhere have reasonable ground to stand on when we criticize China's overbearing government. Cultural relativism suggests to me that the Chinese government at least in theory has the best interests of its citizens in mind. It's easy for us in the US and elsewhere to criticize infringements on freedom of speech (and search) because we've largely not had to deal with them on the scale that Chinese citizens have, so are we making a problem where none really exists?

On the other other hand, I realize that there are at least two stakeholders in play. Is it the Chinese government that is in the wrong for having such restrictive policies and censorship plans, or is it the foreign corporation that is in the wrong for agreeing to accept and further the policies and plans of that government? Or neither?

So, what say you all? Did Google do the right thing? How about the Chinese government?

 

[Just thinking]

Both are being supportive of suppressing information:

1) The Chinese government - for obvious reasons.

2) Google and any other non-Chinese search tool companies by promoting exactly what the Chinese government wants.

If China wants to embrace the 21st century's technology and potential (information-wise) then they should take it all and not deprive their people the world that's out there. Or do they have something to fear?

 

[geni]

If China wants to embrace the 21st century's technology and potential (information-wise) then they should take it all and not deprive their people the world that's out there. Or do they have something to fear?

Aparently up to the minute information on pokemon judgeing by thier blocks on wikipedia.

 

[Cosmo]

Aparently up to the minute information on pokemon judgeing by thier blocks on wikipedia.

I believe pokemon is a japanese invention. I'm not sure what kind of audience it enjoys in China.

 

[Cosmo]

Both are being supportive of suppressing information:

1) The Chinese government - for obvious reasons.

2) Google and any other non-Chinese search tool companies by promoting exactly what the Chinese government wants.

If China wants to embrace the 21st century's technology and potential (information-wise) then they should take it all and not deprive their people the world that's out there. Or do they have something to fear?

Are you suggesting that Google has some kind of foreign social responsibility; to not participate in markets that it believes do not further values we enjoy in the US?

 

[Stir]

Seems to me we need to ask whether the Chinese people are better off with no Google or with limited (censored) Google ... and it seems obvious that improving access to information, even in a limited and biased fashion, is a good thing. Give people a taste of access and they will develop an appetite for more, and for less limits ... and they'll soon find ways to acquire the suppressed info. We can criticize the Chinese government's decisions, and question Google's motives, but should still favor getting more info to people.

 

[kmortis]

Seems to me we need to ask whether the Chinese people are better off with no Google or with limited (censored) Google ... and it seems obvious that improving access to information, even in a limited and biased fashion, is a good thing. Give people a taste of access and they will develop an appetite for more, and for less limits ... and they'll soon find ways to acquire the suppressed info. We can criticize the Chinese government's decisions, and question Google's motives, but should still favor getting more info to people.

I have to concur here. I think there's a bit of the Golden Worm in the apple going on.

 

[Piscivore]

Seems to me we need to ask whether the Chinese people are better off with no Google or with limited (censored) Google ... and it seems obvious that improving access to information, even in a limited and biased fashion, is a good thing. Give people a taste of access and they will develop an appetite for more, and for less limits ... and they'll soon find ways to acquire the suppressed info. We can criticize the Chinese government's decisions, and question Google's motives, but should still favor getting more info to people.

Thirded.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Seems to me we need to ask whether the Chinese people are better off with no Google or with limited (censored) Google ... and it seems obvious that improving access to information, even in a limited and biased fashion, is a good thing. Give people a taste of access and they will develop an appetite for more, and for less limits ... and they'll soon find ways to acquire the suppressed info. We can criticize the Chinese government's decisions, and question Google's motives, but should still favor getting more info to people.

Also Google has to think about their chinese employies, they could try to stand up, but when you get your emploies in china arrested and put in prison, it can make anyone nervous.

 

[Just thinking]

Are you suggesting that Google has some kind of foreign social responsibility; to not participate in markets that it believes do not further values we enjoy in the US?

Like any manufacturer of a product I would think that they (Google, etc.) would not want their product to be used in a manner in which it was not intended --- at least that is how I would feel. Censoring a product which is intended to inform is somewhat contradictory to its purpose. Yes, there is some censoring of information here in the US with regards to military secrets and so forth, but the exchange of ideas and opinions as it would be censored in China is certainly not one of them. Here there seems to be censorship that would limit information to National Security and potential large scale harm -- in China is would seem to be censorship that would make sure the Powers-that-Be remain so for as long as possible. In other words, for their benefit, not the people's. You would not be able to communicate to them as you could with others on this forum --- or worse yet, certain conversations might get them in political trouble. Serious trouble. How you think and what you read would be the decision of others, not your own. Letting a country/government do that to its people is not our concern -- but allowing them to pervert a product that is the result of societies that are based on the free exchange of information and ideas is in a way supporting and/or condoning such perversion.

 

[Cello Man]

I agree that search engine censorship is a vile thing, but the Chinese won't make it go away overnight. They have to want to catch up to the rest of the world, and those in charge most undoubtedly have skeletons in their closets that they'd rather not let their citizens know about.

Good topic of discussion, but shouldn't this be in Politics & Current Events?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Like any manufacturer of a product I would think that they (Google, etc.) would not want their product to be used in a manner in which it was not intended --- at least that is how I would feel. Censoring a product which is intended to inform is somewhat contradictory to its purpose. Yes, there is some censoring of information here in the US with regards to military secrets and so forth, but the exchange of ideas and opinions as it would be censored in China is certainly not one of them. Here there seems to be censorship that would limit information to National Security and potential large scale harm -- in China is would seem to be censorship that would make sure the Powers-that-Be remain so for as long as possible. In other words, for their benefit, not the people's. You would not be able to communicate to them as you could with others on this forum --- or worse yet, certain conversations might get them in political trouble. Serious trouble. How you think and what you read would be the decision of others, not your own. Letting a country/government do that to its people is not our concern -- but allowing them to pervert a product that is the result of societies that are based on the free exchange of information and ideas is in a way supporting and/or condoning such perversion.

So how should google take on the chinese?

 

[This Guy]

I think the OP touches on the broader question of to what extent should capitalist companies support (through trade) repressive regimes.

We went through this with the Soviet Union years ago. Allowing restricted trade with them, which while it did improve the accessibility of some items to the Russian people, it also allowed for the Soviet Government to improve it ability to support war, and (I believe) increased our need to spend on our military, to stay ahead of them. I foresee the same thing happening with China.

Is it good or bad? I don't know. Eventually, the Soviet Union fell apart. How much of it's "destruction" was caused directly or indirectly by trade with it's idealogical enemies?

I believe most of the "destruction" of the Soviet Union was caused by the relaxing of restrictions and the more open political climate of the last rulers of the old Union. But, I'm not well enough versed on that to state it as fact.

My gut (no, not always a good gage) says an enemy is an enemy, and anything done to support that enemy is foolish. On the other hand, China is showing a leaning toward more openness. Maybe we are seeing the beginning of the end of China's Communistic rule? Perhaps now is the time to foster more trade with them, in hopes that they will become even more open.

I'm inclined to say that most of the desire to trade with China is pure greed on the parts of the capitalist companies involved, and that no consideration to the long term effects on political/social reform or consequences are being considered. Does that mean the companies are bad? Not really IMHO. It means they are looking out for their stockholders, as they are expected to do. Does it mean we need more restrictions on trade with China to prevent China's ability to dictate things like filters on Google? Well, if we did try that, we'd likely see no Google in China.

Maybe, as some have suggested, a little Google is better than none. I don't know. But above are some thoughts perhaps worth thinking about, and discussing/debating. If nothing else, it shows how confused I am

 

[Just thinking]

So how should google take on the chinese?

Take on? What on Earth are you talking about?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think the OP touches on the broader question of to what extent should capitalist companies support (through trade) repressive regimes.

To say nothing of the capitalist countries useing them to support their goverment and loan them money.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Take on? What on Earth are you talking about?

People are advocating them confronting the chinese government, I want to see how they think that they can do that?

 

[Mojo]

Not the only censorship on there. See this from the UK version, for example.

In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page.

 

[Just thinking]

People are advocating them confronting the chinese government, I want to see how they think that they can do that?

Well, that's something I never proposed ... all they have to do is say "We won't modify our product(s)".

 

[ponderingturtle]

Well, that's something I never proposed ... all they have to do is say "We won't modify our product(s)".

And then their Chinese employees go to prison.

 

[Z]

I don't see the problem... it's not like Google doesn't practice censorship locally, too. And I'm all for their censorship here.

Try it sometime - think of the most disgusting, disturbing, awful taboo search terms you can think of, and see if there isn't a note at the bottom indicating that Google has removed some results at such-and-such request. I mean, who knew penguin lust was such a taboo subject?

... or was that nun-beating? I always get those two confused...