Microsoft Bans 'Democracy' for China's Web Users

Doc Ruby writes "As reported, paradoxically, on MSN, 'Microsoft's new Chinese internet portal has banned the words 'democracy' and 'freedom' from parts of its website in an apparent effort to avoid offending Beijing's political censors.' MSN China says it must comply with local laws, but there is no Chinese law against the use of these words."

Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[TripMaster Monkey (862126)]

Remember Pastor Ken Hutcherson [slashdot.org], and how he leaned on Bill about the whole gay issue? Where the hell is he now?
Surely, if he and his band of fundies can kick up that much of a fuss about homosexuality, they can certainly flex their muscles in the defense of human liberty and dignity.
C'mon, Ken...you've still got Bill's number...and here's a cause actually worth fighting for.

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

The pastor leaned on MS to back down on defending its employees' human liberty and dignity, in the name of religion. Now the poster to whom you responded wants the pastor to earn back some respect by leaning on MS to actually defend human liberty and dignity. That's not very confusing. Unless you're hellbent on using religion, whether Christianity or Communism, against liberty and dignity.

Re:of religion and self-censorship

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

There's lots of people criticizing Israel in the US. And lots of people criticizing the Palestinian government. The American corporate media doesn't cover it much, because it's *their* game, that they're playing with the Bush government. All the American media corporations have stakes in the global weapons business, and their relationships with the Pentagon, which gives out the money. They like the game, because they get to control the people who pay the bills for their profits.

This is certainly not unique

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[MyLongNickName (822545)]

What a stupid response. Yeah... Bill gives away billions for a tax break. That's like putting a dollar in a change machine that only gives you back 40 cents... and doing it over and over.

I know this might come as a shock... but Bill might actually be a human being. Doesn't mean you have to love Microsoft. Obly that Bill Gates actually has a humanitarian streak in him.

But ofcourse, it is much easier to make a smart ass remark when faced with evidence contrary to one's beliefs.

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[Brandybuck (704397)]

The unfortunate truth is that neither fanatics nor capitalists care much about the concepts "human liberty" and "dignity".

This has nothing to do with IBM or Microsoft. Both are publicly traded corporations. They are not human beings with the ability to be moral. To expect the end result of a collection of managers and paper shufflers to be concern for human liberty and dignity stretches the imagination. If Congress cannot do it, even though they're supposed to, how the heck can an artificial corporate entity ever possibly hope to?

A private corporation might be able to, only because it has one or two actual leaders at the top. But public corporations do not. They might have figureheads like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs, but the inertia created by several layers of management prevent them from doing much more than giving speeches and approving of the quarterly report. And even if they did try to step in and take hands-on control, they're still employees able to be fired by the board of directors. And the board of directors can get replaced. The entire company can get sold. Ultimately no one is accountable at a public corporation.

Do you really expect every moral employee at Microsoft to quit their jobs over this? To you really expect every Microsoft stockholder to dump their shares over this? Do you know how many millions of shareholders there actually are? Have YOU checked that your pension or retirement fund doesn't have any Microsoft stock in it? And if it does, are you willing to dump all of it today?

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

That inhuman disregard for human rights is exactly what Marx was talking about when he predicted that capitalism would eventually oppress people so badly that they would take back the "means of production" from the exploiting owners. Marx lived before instantaneous global mass media, before his countrymen developed practicable theories of mass psychology, and their hybrid: advertising/propaganda. So his predictions of capitalism's demise depended on the dynamics of his time, which capitalism has trumped. Th

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[value_added (719364)]

This has nothing to do with IBM or Microsoft. Both are publicly traded corporations. They are not ...

What they are or are not is entirely a construct, and a very modern one at that. Arguing in the abstract may be appropriate when writing a term paper for a Dead German Philosophers 101 class, or when drinking espressos and smoking Gauloise at a cafe, but it has little place in the real world where Life has a tendency to intervene and bitch slap you when you get out of line or otherwise behave in a manner that's not in the common good.

Is it such a challenge to consider that corporations are made up of people, and hence share a collective social responsibility?

If it is, may I suggest watching The Discovery Channel or Animal Planet.

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[Anonymous Luddite (808273)]

Censoring a website is small potatoes compared to anything the Third Reich did.

>> Anyone remember IBM and the Third Reich?

Not old enough to remember, but I've read about IBM and Ford and General Electric and more. "Wall street and the rise of Hitler" by Anthony Sutton is an interesting read if you can find a copy...

Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him?

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

The Communist mafia government is doing a lot more than censoring a website. And their technocrats will continue to exploit tech companies like Microsoft more for population control, just as the Nazis did IBM, then create their own homegrown versions they can control better, without even the possibiity that discussions like this one could interfere.

FWIW, I note that Bush's grandfather, Prescott, sold Nazi war bonds illegally, funding bullets and bombs killing American soldiers, until shut down by the US government under the "Trading With the Enemy" laws. And I further note that Prescott's financial parnership [guardian.co.uk] with the Nazis extended back into the early 1930s, as Bush backed Fritz Thyssen, who in turn backed Hitler in his early rise to power. This kind of corporate backing of nominal "enemies" is nothing new, and a greater threat today than ever.

Re:Microsoft & Chinese Bigotry

[ThePromenader (878501)]

All this pandering to the Beijing government for distribution rights, as low-down it may be because of the same's treatment of the people the company would like to distribute to, will only be a temporary measure. This period is "China's education" and it won't last long. Once it's over and the floodgates open, the Chinese economy will steamroll the world's.

Since it decided to open up, its people have been "getting used to" newer technologies - and how to make them for themselves. The textile industry is already ripe and just-opened - and not a month after Europe's quota on Chinese textile product imports was lifted, its market was flooded with a 200% increase of low-cost products, sparking a drop in the sales of more "local" companies. To compete, the local companies claim they have to relocate their factories to developing countries.

But here's the thing - even here the Europeans can't compete because China already has all the low-cost hands it needs, and to boot, it already has most of the machines and technology too. Its economy isn't one where everyone in a product's production chain, from raw material to store shelf, is aiming to make a 100% (or more) profit - which makes everything cheaper for them. What's more, since they're a bit 'behind' for the time being, they don't feel the 'need' to create new ideas when they can just dip into the existing market's and make them at a cheaper price. Bill Gates is only adding to this - just wait until the above hits the computer/software industry.

Unfortunately with the floodgates of trade already opening it will be soon too late to protest the Beijing Government's treatment of the Chinese people - the only to protest this is to refuse to have anything to do with its function, meaning cutting them off and not dealing with them - but already it's too late for that. The Bush administration is drooling at the aspect of billions of petrol-consuming new cars and they won't be turning back at any price. Not until the damage is (already) done, anyway. Beijing is full today of "western" businessmen wanting to sell planes, weapons and other technologies - but don't ask me what any of this has to do with "government" - the government's freinds won't want you to. But I digress.

The market eventually will "balance" itself, but before then, in the first decade (at least) after the Chinese floodgates open, we're gonna be in for a helluva ride.

Re:Have Linus and Stallman asked Red Flag develope

[1u3hr (530656)]

The story is naive.

No, I don't think so. It does point out the fact that MS is lying when it says it must censor to remain within the law, because there is no such law. If it said "policy" rather than law, it would be more honest. If it listed the forbidden words in its TOS, it would be in the open. Contrast Google, which when faced with legal orders to remove links to contentious sites brings up documentation of why they are doing it, and a link to another site which does have the information linked. Though Google has I think chickened out on its Google.cn version from even trying.

China has many journalists in prison on unspecified charges for breaking such non-laws. (Anything the govt doesn't want you to write about can be declared a "state secret", and you become a spy &/or traitor.) Unfortunately the US has lost all its moral authority to argue against that, and China knows it can do so with little fear of embarrassment, let alone real pressure.

In Communist China...

[XanC (644172)]

...there is no Chinese law against the use of the use of these words.

The more heinous laws may never be written down.

Re:In Communist China...

[CrazyDuke (529195)]

Most people think of censorship as the government putting it's foot down and outright banning words or topics. Actually direct government intervention is not necessary.

All the government has to do is:
-pass regulations penalizing media outlets
-refuse to inform the outlets when releasing news items
-ignore questions and refuse to call on certain reporters during press conferences, if not outright banning certain people
-use other media outlets to turn one into a scape goat
-sabotage reporting for that outlet with false evidence from "anonymous" sources
-start accusations that the reporting is reclessly endangering others and threaten to prosecute
-"accidently" shoot at and imprison field reporters
-consistantly confiscate all of above reporter's recordings and notes as "evidence"
-question the patriotism and loyalty
-etc

...of media that "doesn't play ball." Any capitalist corporation will bow under such pressure because their primary driver is not integrity and values, but profits. If you are in the business of reporting news, patially or exclusively, you don't make any money if you don't have news to report or if your consumers think it's all lies.

Re:In Communist China...

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

No one is as fervently "anticommunist" as the mafia. The same way mafia "families" are "antimafia", when it comes to murdering their competing mafia families. Because they're the competition. That's why the mafia has been so connected to American anticommunism work. And so much blowback, like Kennedy's assassination, Iran/Contra cocaine dealing, etc. All these ideologies are just propaganda for the tyrants to convince the people to work for their own oppression.

So... Does that mean we can invade Microsoft now?

[by Anonymous Coward]

cuz they must be hating freedum and stuff...

Re:So... Does that mean we can invade Microsoft no

[geekee (591277)]

"Does that mean we can invade Microsoft now, cuz they must be hating freedum and stuff..."

That would be consistent with the Bush administration policies, i.e. invade Microsoft even though China is the real threat to democracy and freedom.

Re:So... Does that mean we can invade Microsoft no

[TubeSteak (669689)]

In Soviet Russia, Freedom and Democracy ban Political Censors.

wait a second...

Seen on a chinese website...

[guyfromindia (812078)]

C2lick her3e for our dailey s1pecial on d3mocrazy!

Next thing you know...

[bryan8m (863211)]

...Microsoft will ban the word "monopoly"

Re:Next thing you know...

[lilmouse (310335)]

Oh, that words's already been patented - you're not allowed to use it!

--LWM

In other news...

[ravenspear (756059)]

Microsoft agreed to ban "innovation" from its international search portal to filter any potential self referential promotions that might run afoul of stricter false advertising laws in other countries.

No law?

[guardiangod (880192)]

MSN China says it must comply with local laws, but there is no Chinese law against the use of the use of these words."

Law? You don't need law to enforce the will of the party in China.

PS. Before this is mark flamebait- I am a chinese.

Re:No law?

[node 3 (115640)]

Law? You don't need law to enforce the will of the party in China.

It's like that in the US now, too.

Re:No law?

[guardiangod (880192)]

Normally law does apply to citizens, provided that you know your local policemen well enough that they actually goes through the trouble (1. not exactly a bad thing, they just do thier work faster if you give them a cigerette 2. most of them don't take large amount money bribe nowaday- the central government is really harsh on this kind of thing these days). However when you get to political (against the party) or economic (smuggling for exp.), the government draws the line.

Speaking truth to power?

[Slur (61510)]

Is Microsoft saying, in effect, that if Beijing ever decides to crack down on democratic movements Microsoft will be happy to provide dictionaries and spellcheckers with the proscribed thoughtcrimes removed? Boy they really have learned a lot about lobbying since the antitrust trial.

Last I heard China was working on their own operating system to supplant those of the West, so Microsoft might be wasting their time.

RedHat

[Moderator (189749)]

As I recall, RedHat was criticized a few years ago for removing the Taiwanese flag from their distribution to appease potential customers in mainland China. Let's face it, China is a huge market to get into; if a company that refused to ship an MP3 library with their distribution can be seduced by the Chinese market's potential, what good is a little democracy or freedom going to do to prevent Microsoft from acting in the same manner? It's all about money.

Re:RedHat

[CrazyDuke (529195)]

You just reminded me of something. I take it most of you that follow American politics even a little know about all the whining over 10 of Bush's judicial appointments? Well, after years (and particularly so in the past several months), of shrill complaints by the GOP that the Democrats where delaying and obstructing the "up or down" votes of these nominies, they finally got their way.

This is where it gets good: During the discussion over one of the nominies a few days ago, just before the vote, the Republicans demanded the debate be shut down and the vote put off. And, the Democrats agreed. What had been so important for them to put a halt to what they had wanted for so many years?

Well, it was announced that 2 communist Chinese businessmen had arrived in the captal building. And, yes, in a show of bipartisan support, both the Republicans and the Democrats stopped the important work of running the nation to both go and meet the businessmen. Not even a vote on a motion taken, just simulatious agreement.

Re:RedHat

[DNS-and-BIND (461968)]

Communist businessmen? Contradiction in terms, like military intelligence, or journalistic ethics.

Re:Mercenary Taiwanese Scum

[Pan Sola (829778)]

I find some of the points on your linked article to be grossly rather misleading.

When referencing "The Constitution of Taiwan", one must realize that the name of the document should technically be "The Constitution of the Republic of China".

When that document insist that "Tibet is part of China", it meant "Tibet is part of the Republic of China."

Thus when saying the constitution of Taiwan says Tibet is part of China when the Chinese army are killing Tibetan nuns, the first reference to China and the second reference are pointing to different entities.

The referenced link makes it sound like Taiwan believe Tibet belongs to a murderous government, when in fact that very document (the "Constitution of Taiwan") deny the legatimacy of the Bejing government to whom the nun-raping Chinese Liberation Army belongs to.

Because the "Constitution of Taiwan" still think R.O.C. is the rightful ruler of mainland China, any reference in it that talks about "mainland China" also means the R.O.C. government, which in fact no longer rules the mainland.

The misleading nature of your reference makes me doubt the validity of the other information on that page (even if the numbers or the quote are true, the context might have given completely different meaning).

Remember, when the "Taiwanese" government say that anything is "Chinese" or "belongs to China", they mean their little government located in Taipei that only has effect soverignity over a few island. More often than not, it is more accurate to replace what they are saying to "Taiwanese" or "belongs to Taiwan", where Taiwan technically means the Republic of China.

Numerous American groups were and are engaged in a boycott of Chinese products and have demonstrated loudly and vociferously against the occupation of Tibet.

Numerous Taiwanese groups have done the same thing too.

If the actions of many captalist corporations of a certain nationality/ethinicity is sufficient to charactize a people, as you have done using Taiwanese companies to characterize the Taiwanese people, then I can also say the American are no better than mercenary pigs. Slashdotters should be all too famaliar with a few examples.

The majority of the Taiwanese population would be outraged to find any Taiwanese company profiting from China in the aftermath of Tiananmen Square. Realize, most Americans actually don't know how Starbucks exploit the environment and coffee workers, about the Nike sweat shopts, etc.

This response has the biase of an individual who identifies himself as being a "Republic of China" Chinese who was born and mostly raised in Taiwan. Individuals who identify with the R.O.C. are actually closer to being the minority in Taiwan, compared to the people who identify themselves as strictly "Taiwanese". The referenced link stated Eighty-five percent (85%) of the people of Taiwan are Chinese. Only fifteen percent (15%) are Taiwanese. without any reference, and probably uses some biological ancestry demographic data instead of using what the people actually identify themselves with.

We shouldnt be doing buisness with the Chinese

[Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745)]

They want our money but not our beleifs. That's their right. But what are we getting from them in return?

How does it benefit OUR citizens? As you can see... China's priorities clearly have nothing to do with our beleifs, our products or our labor force. China only wants our dollar, and corperate America just wants slave labor?

Why do we allow this to continue? What is the real benefits of allowing our US based corperations, to exploit the world and devalue our country?

Ironic..

[by Anonymous Coward]

..coming from someone named "Jackie Chan Fan."

Clearly, the benefit for American citizens is cheap products. Benefit for American corporations: higher margins.

Yep, not a lot of long term thinking going on here in America. Buying everything on credit, spending money on high school football instead of advanced courses, etc. We're on the brink of getting our asses royally kicked.

That said, most Chinese I know really like America and Americans, just not our politics. As for me when I am there, I happen to like living in a god-less country, but I'm not so enamored with the totalitarian part. There isn't a perfect country to live in- when I live in China, I have simply traded one kind of stupidity for another.

link to the website?

[Doppler00 (534739)]

Okay, the most annoying part of this article is that they never bother to LINK to the new website. What is the point of talking about a new website in a news article and not linking to it?

My quess is this [msn.com.cn] is what they are talking about.

Of course, I don't know how to spell "freedom" in Chinese, but if you compare these two searches:

US [msn.com]
China [3721.com]

You can get a pretty good idea of what they block. And to think, we have U.S. companies helping them to achieve this....

Reminds me of...

[D H NG (779318)]

In the Vietnamese Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], where I'm a sysop we actually had a discussion about how to translate the motto The free encyclopedia into Vietnamese. Many people were against translating the word "free" literally because it would throw off a lot of readers and the Vietnamese authorities and make it a target for the filtering software installed by the authorities. So we finally reached a compromised and used "open" instead of "free".

Well, hell

[rscrawford (311046)]

That's an awfully un-American action for such a large American company. If we're so committed to spreading democracy throughout the world, then it seems that every individual and corporation ought to act like we really do believe in the values that we profess. Otherwise, they're just words, and we really do prove who we are by our deeds.

And because I'm a left-wing radical like Justice Rehnquist, I can't help but wonder how long before the same thing happens here?

Yeah and here is the actuall Dialog....

[tetrahedrassface (675645)]

Microsoft: we like money...

China: we like money....

Microsoft: pay me....

China: we can get it for free...

Microsoft: WE can ensure your communist rule by limiting freedom.

China: wha? freedom? There is no freedom... only work!

Microsoft: Let us show you the way..

China: Deal!

D

Microsoft isn't to blame for China's problems

[astrashe (7452)]

I know this is pretty cynical, but Microsoft can't change China. I think it's unreasonable to expect them to burn all their bridges there in a futile attempt to change things that they can't.

As a nation, we (the US) have decided to look the other way about whatever problems China might have, in exchange for money. A huge proportion of the stuff at Wal-Mart is made in China. We swallow our principles and take the cheap prices.

Why should MS be better than anyone else?

China is really big and really powerful. They're so big and powerful they can tell MS to shove it. And they can tell the US to shove it. If or when China changes, it will be because Chinese people do it. No one is going to push them into doing anything they don't want to do.

corporations vs democracy

[darkonc (47285)]

How many times have you seen a corporation that was actually democratic? To create such a beast requires a conscious effort to bend the rules. Generally, a corporation is a paragon of dictatorships. The people at the top give the orders, and the people below them follow those orders -- or else. Where's the inherent democracy and freedom in that?

Back about a decade ago, one shell executive was quoted as saying that what any corporation needs, is political stability, and a compliant, cheap workforce == and dictatorships are really good at providing that.

Capitalism does not embrace democracy. It simply tolerates it in the context of western societies. In other countries where there is no need to push for democracy, why should a company do so? The linkage between the two is pure political sugar-coating. This is part of the reason for the tension between capitalism and Free Software (and why 'Open Source' seems like a compelling compromise). Free Software is about Freedom, choice and equality -- none of which really serves the purposes of your average corporate meta-entity.

In Soviet Russia...

[Metostopholes (592245)]

You also couldn't talk about "freedom" and "democracy."

Oh wait, the joke doesn't work like that, does it?

Google

[minus_273 (174041)]

Keep in mind, when google pulls a stunt like this, its ok.

Microsoft teh Google

[Mulletproof (513805)]

So, did the people flaming microsoft today also note that Google the Wonderchild Company basically did the exact same thing a few months ago? Somehow, i don't think you'll see half the outrage over THAT incident, if only because this one involves "M$"

I find it funny...

[edunbar93 (141167)]

Isn't it odd that a gung-ho American company that's all for free market capitalism can so very easily make itself look like a soul-crushing, freedom-hating, communist-friendly entity by just removing a couple of words from all its websites?

Kind of says something about the state of affairs in America these days.

China: a corporate dream

[curious.corn (167387)]

I have this horrible feeling; I'm sorry if it sounds xenophobic or racist, over here in Italy there's an ongoing campaign to blame chinese imports for our faltering economy and I don't want to sould like I'm supporting it. China's economic relevance is growing at great pace, huge amounts of investements pour into this country and nascent market. Corporate executives visit China and literally break into tears at the discipline and chockedness of the workforce. In the early '900 Italy's capitalists experimented with going without a liberal government; they chose fascism. A totalitarian regime that while touting a better form of socialism essentially used brute force and liberty suppression to coerce the population and stamp out dissent in favour of the priviledged. Today, I read about China, about our investors moving their operations in China, about these condescending corporations; I can't get this idea out of my head, that the CCP and investors from all around the world are trying the same trick. "What if there is a more efficient system, a social organization more attuned to corporate operations instead of this old, kludgy and costly democracy?" I hear them asking. Corporations have gone supernational for many years, during the Cold War they had a political restraint on how much they could go without breaking ties and embrace the "enemy". Today there's no such thing; the world is a giant supermarket where these amoral entities can choose what best suits their business plans and are now voting with their feet. It's depressing to see a billion human beings made to bear part in a global experiment without benefiting from it, and to fear that sooner or later we'll be told to live by the same rules...

Re:So some creative misspelling...

[The Nine (320384)]

No. The Chinese language does have an 'l' sound (Shaolin monks?). You're thinking of the Japanese, whose language does not.

Re:Democracy is Eurocentric idea.

[compm375 (847701)]

No, that would involve freedom.

Re:Democracy is Eurocentric idea.

[kentmartin (244833)]

Can't one place be free of McDonalds, MTV, Democracy and Coca-Cola?

Apparently not. I was in the Forbidden City [wikipedia.org] in Beijing a few months ago. Bearing in mind that, after The Great Wall, it would have to be the most famous historical site in the entirety of China. What do you think is smack in the middle? A Starbucks.

I wish this post was a joke, but, I am very sorry to say, it isn't.

Ah - just noticed that wikipedia article above mentions it is there too, so I wasn't just seeing things.

Re:Democracy is Eurocentric idea.

[BandwidthHog (257320)]

Can't one place be free of McDonalds, MTV, Democracy and Coca-Cola?

One of these things is not like the other.

Idiot.

Freedom is a Universal Right

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

The European idea of democracy is that it is a *universal* right of people. It's not some product to be sold, it's a right to be defended by one's government. Or the people suffer, and revolt, though not always obviously. It's not some racist idea that nationalities and cultures are so different that our fundamental humanity is not the same, including rights to freedom. Even the Chinese mafia government recognizes this dynamic, as it's used the impulse to freedom in all its propaganda, way back to its revol

Re:1, 2, 3, 4

[BandwidthHog (257320)]

You must be new here. Eventually they'll tan the hide and hold a drum circle.

Re:MSNBC?

[a whoabot (706122)]

It's just part of the ongoing propaganda to make the Chinese government look corrupt in a way above and beyond Western governments in the eyes of people reading about this. With a proper, though perhaps dehabilitatingly sad perspective, you can see that corruption is everywhere: not just with those people whom most of us really know nothing about.

Re:Just a sneaky way to censor...

[poopdeville (841677)]

Interesting... minutes after visiting that page I got this e-mail from "[e-mail]":

Dear Sir(s) or Madame(s)

It has recently come to our attention that someone in your household or corporation has recently visited http://www.korea-dpr.com/ [korea-dpr.com]. Due to this minor infraction, your constitutional rights have been suspended. Moreover, your children will be deported to Guantanamo Bay for interrogation and re-education.

I am not speaking for the agency when I say that I think you are a disgusting excuse for a human being. Your lack of respect for our fundamental freedoms is appalling and you deserve everything you'll get. Thousands of American boys have died protecting your freedom from despots like Saddam Hussein, and you just throw it away. You make me sick.