Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Businesses Google The Internet

Yahoo, Google 'Irresponsible' In China 41

Posted by timothy from the who's-at-fault dept.
sava writes "Reporters Without Borders is reporting of 'irresponsibility' of major U.S. located Internet search engine firms Yahoo! and Google 'in bowing directly and indirectly to Chinese government demands for censorship and called for a code of conduct to be imposed.' Maybe there should be a free alternative to these search engines? Or would China ban access to it also?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Yahoo, Google 'Irresponsible' In China More

Yahoo, Google 'Irresponsible' In China

Comments Filter:
  • Maybe China should get its own search engine. People who bich about free shit peeve me off.

    • Re:Maybe what? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Lshmael ( 603746 )
      There are already multiple Chinese search engines. However, localization will neither solve the problem of Chinese governmental censorship nor of American search engines' complicity in this totalitarian behavior.

  • why wouldn't they ban access to it? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @09:49AM (#9821146) Homepage Journal
    that's the whole point isn't it?

    why would they decide if it needs to be censored based on it being free or not?

    • They don't decide based on free as in beer, but free as in free to say that China has done wrong is something they oppose.
      It's a political move on their part, now my understanding is that the article is mentioning that if ALL search engines refused to accomodate China, they'd either have to make their own search engine, or change their restrictions, to get some form of searching done.

      I think China would rather block searching... After all, they KILLED people for expressing their political views over 20 ye
      • yes i'd be more worried about how factions inside usa can affect google like companies(scientologists & other bs scam artists with enough followers who would like to keep the public uninformed so they can thrive). at least that's something they could fight.

    • Re:why wouldn't they ban access to it? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Lshmael ( 603746 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @07:30PM (#9826605) Homepage
      Question 10 in the interview with Wikipedia's founder [slashdot.org] sheds some light on this:
      The block in China only lasted for a couple of days, until some administrators in the Chinese-language wikipedia appealed the ban. My thinking on that is two-fold. First, it's a huge embarassment for the censors if they block Wikipedia, because we are none of the things that they claim to want to censor. Censoring Wikipedia is an admission that it is unbiased factual information itself that frightens you. We are not political propaganda, we are not online gambling, we are not pr0n. We are an encyclopedia. Second, I consider it a moral imperative for our overall mission that we will not bend our principles of freedom, of the freedom of speech, of a commitment to inclusiveness and neutrality, to meet any possible demands of any government anywhere. We are a _free_ encyclopedia, with all that entails.
      If only Google and Yahoo! would take such a stand...

  • Cost! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nuxx ( 10153 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @09:50AM (#9821157) Homepage
    Okay, and who is going to pay for the hardware, bandwidth, and infrastructure to run a 'Free' (or 'free) search engine?

    • Re:Cost! (Score:3, Informative)

      by j-turkey ( 187775 )
      Okay, and who is going to pay for the hardware, bandwidth, and infrastructure to run a 'Free' (or 'free) search engine?

      Maybe these guys [dmoz.org] will. Oh wait -- they already do.

      • Technically that's not a searching engine, though. It's a directory, and as they mention, a human-edited one.

  • Dmoz (Score:2)

    by pr0c ( 604875 )
    dmoz comes to mind, http://dmoz.org. I don't know if that qualifies for 'free' but its certainly more free than yahoo/google.

  • You think they'd ban it?! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by monkeyserver.com ( 311067 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:02AM (#9821265) Homepage Journal
    That's the whole point my friend, if you want your search engine to be available to the couple billion ppl in china then you are going to have to censor it. You can take the high road if you want, but china will just block your site. I doubt google liked the idea....

    Remember Accounting has the final say...
    • In fact, Google's Chinese edition does _not_ appear to be censored. Google has apparently acquired an already censored Chinese search site, which seems to, for example, ignore pro-Taiwan sites that Google_CN does list.

      You can certainly make a criticism of Google here, but I'd also throw in a criticism of Reporters Sans Frontieres for pushing a "Google Censorship!" headline that's more dramatic than accurate. (RSF is far less responsible than the medical organization on which it bases its name.)

  • It's a byproduct of capitalism (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SimianOverlord ( 727643 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:03AM (#9821277) Homepage Journal
    Capitalist companies behave as they do because their primary motivation is not ethics, but money. What is the huge surprise here? It is obvious to anyone who has given the matter any thought that search engines and their organisation and display of content are a potent tool of control. Google, despite being a notoriously private company, seems to be laisse faire about other peoples privacy, where it relates to commercial opportunity. I've never seen them as the "white knight" others have, but I use their service because it is currently the best. The interesting question is not, should they accede to censorship demands, but how would we know if they did?

  • Maybe there should be a free alternative to these search engines?

    Okay, Brainiac. Now, all you have to do is figure out 1) what difference it would make since yes, if the Chinese government doesn't like it and can't control it, they'll ban it and 2) the logistics of creating a free search engine to compete with Google which is dedicated specifically to search.

    Here's a thought: maybe the answer to every problem isn't "oo! oo! Make a "free" version of it! Oo! oo!

    If you could install a "free" version of the Chinese government, that would be great. But, until then, I don't see, exactly, what good creating another "subversive" site for them to block would do. If Google didn't bow, it would be blocked. They're not in the search engine business for idyllic world views, they're in it to make money. If you don't like that, don't use them. THEN you can go create your little "free" engine to pit idealism against capitalism.

    Crikey... I like idealistic dreams as much as the next guy, but get real. Google wants to make money, not conform to your bizarre ideas of a perfect world.

    • Furthermore, even if comparable "free" search engine software emerges, there's more to Google than software -- things like, oh, bandwidth and a gigantic server farm? How do you propose to do that for free?

      Or would China ban access to it also?

      Gee, ya think? I'd figured Jiang Zemin would be down with anything Richard Stallman endorses, that being the nature of Communism and all.

  • Google's business... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by erinacht ( 592019 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:25AM (#9821473) Homepage
    Google's business is selling advertisements. We get the fringe benefit of having the search engine, but their perfectly transparent business model is selling those advertisements.

    With that in our mind, it's easy to see why Google would do anything asked of it and co-operate with chinese government demands to filter content. They offer their services to users, they collect their revenue from Advertisers.

    Presumably even limited as it is, Google is still the best in China.

    What I'd like to know is can I also access that filtered content?

    I bet it's a lot better for kids than normal google is...

    • Re:Google's business... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Proteus ( 1926 )
      Google's business is selling advertisements. We get the fringe benefit of having the search engine, but their perfectly transparent business model is selling those advertisements.
      Actually, Google does quite a bit more than sell ads, they sell technology. The brunt of their revenue comes from licensing their search method and "backdoor" access to their database -- i.e. through API licensing and network appliances.

  • What about Cisco? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TrebleJunkie ( 208060 ) <ezahurakNO@SPAMatlanticbb.net> on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:25AM (#9821476) Homepage Journal
    Hell what about Cisco? A few years back, didn't they take a large chunk of money from the Chinese to create the system by which China censors a large part of the internet from the Chinese People?

    If you want to call someone "irresponsible," start there.

  • I have some mod points but couldn't pass this up.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Exocet ( 3998 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:30AM (#9821515) Homepage Journal
    This is a ridiculous article. At the very least, it's a poor headline.

    So, after reading the article (!), I have concluded:

    - RSF says Yahoo is bad because they filter search results - in order to get their foot in the door of a 1 billion-person country.

    - RSF says Google COULD go bad because they just recently partnered with a company that does currently filter results.

    - RSF says, IMO grudgingly, Google is NOT CURRENTLY being bad - they display all results and do not filter.

    - RSF notes Google has been banned in the past (for a week) for not filtering results.

    RSF, heed this wake-up call: first of all, one billion people represent a shitload of money. Companies exist to make money. Google has, LUCKY FOR YOU, made money and NOT been Evil China's Favorite Search Engine.

    Second of all, Google's past actions mean nothing? Perhaps they'll use their stake in Baidu to force them to not filter? That seems just as likely a conclusion, based on the past, as assuming that by acquiring a stake in another company means that they themselves will suddenly change tack and start filtering their results. Which you admit they haven't done.

    I normally respect organisations like RSF but jesus harold christ they're really grasping at straws here. I wish all companies operated as ethically as Google does. Which is not to say Google is perfect or a paragon of virtue - merely that they appear to be better than their competitors.

  • Business decisions (Score:4, Funny)

    by raider_red ( 156642 ) on Wednesday July 28, 2004 @10:37AM (#9821586) Journal
    I'm shocked! You mean that all business decisions aren't driven by democratic ideals, and might actually have something to do with opening new markets to make money? How can we let this happen?

  • Maybe there should be a free alternative to these search engines?

    There's a bit more to it than writing software. You can't just do an rpm -i google.rpm

  • For crying out loud, China is a communist dictatorship. What do you expect them to do? OK. Stupid question. This is slashdot.
    • Perhaps refuse to put profit over human rights? We silly Slashdotters. If there were any justice in the world, it would be illegal for U.S.-owned companies to work with these regimes. Perhaps someday, the executives of Cisco, Yahoo, and the like will be brought to justice at The Hague for their role in repressing human rights.
      • Perhaps someday, the executives of Cisco, Yahoo, and the like will be brought to justice at The Hague for their role in repressing human rights.

        Well, we could start by getting China off the UN "Commission on Human Rights". Of course, we could also start by getting Sudan, Cuba, Mauritania or Zimbabwe off the same disgraceful body.

    • Shhhhh! This is an ancient Chineese secret!
  • Or has Google gotten a [personneltoday.com] lot [www.enn.ie] of bad [internetnews.com] press [com.com] lately....
    It's even more interesting considering this [com.com] was recently started...

    --tinfoil hat size: 7 3/8
  • 1. There are not a billion Chinese on the Internet! Most Chinese that are on the net are from Hong Kong! China is trying to crack down on Hong Kong's freedom and has been threatening business people and doing things like having a Chinese Naval show of force in Hong Kong harbor. There are other Chinese people on the Internet but it's nowhere near a billion!

    2. Any site that doesn't play ball with China will have their IP address blocked by the government firewalls. Lest we forget who the real bad guys are!

Slashdot Top Deals

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Close