Microsoft Censoring Blogs on MSN China 316
jdfox writes "The BBC is reporting that Microsoft is censoring blogs on MSN China. The words 'freedom', 'democracy' and 'demonstration' are reportedly among the words being blocked.
But the article also points out that Microsoft is not the first corporation to censor content when the Chinese government requests it." Slashdot covered this story a few days ago too.
Dupe...with a twist. (Score:5, Informative)
This story is a dupe....reported previously as "Microsoft Bans 'Democracy' for China's Web Users" [slashdot.org] on Saturday, June 11th.
Dupes are nothing new here, but the following is what really boggles me...
From TFS:
Um...OK...if you know it's a dupe, why is it still being re-reported?
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:2)
Well, that might be insightful, except that BOTH STORIES ARE ABOUT BLOGS. Yesterday's FA said "... have been blocked from using a range of potentially sensitive words to label personal websites they create using its free online blog service, MSN Spaces."
Maybe after it went live they noticed and rather than pull it put the disclaimer. I still fail to understand why thay can't either kill dupes, or at least remove them from the front page. But I don't understand why they don't bother to spellcheck or any number of things that make them look like idiots.
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:2)
Oh well, we'll have to catch it in MM.
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:4, Interesting)
Um...OK...if you know it's a dupe, why is it still being re-reported?
What on earth makes you believe the Slashdot editors think dupes are a bad thing?
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:2)
Well, for one thing, some of us have better things to do on Saturday than read
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dupe...with a twist. (Score:2)
If you know that it's a dupe, and you hate dupes, then why read it?
I get really tired of people complaining about dupes all the time. Yes, there are occasional dupes. Get over it! The fact is that the editors, like everyone else, are occasionally lazy or miss something. But that doesn't mean that there aren't really good reasons to revisit a story. New information from new sources is a really good reason. The fact that they acknowledge that the story has been discussed before means that there's some new twist that they want us to see. Or are you suggesting that they'd knowingly repost a story with no new info? Have they crossed the line from being lazy to having some nefarious purpose?
Dupes are like trolls - it depends on how you look at them. What's insightful to one person is a troll to another.
l33t l00ph0le? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but what of fr33d0m, d3m0cracy, and dem0nstrat1on?
Re:l33t l00ph0le? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:l33t l00ph0le? (Score:3, Insightful)
Note that these are blogs in CHINESE. However, they're well skilled at using creative euphmemism to get around automatic filters.
1n the 1mmort4l w0rds of The D00d (Score:2)
If they had any morality... (Score:5, Insightful)
But whats human rights and freedom when theres
market share and online presence at stake. Right?
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:4, Interesting)
The thing that really worries me about all this is that if the Chinese govt is in a position to make demands like this on a company as a price for doing businss in China then in the future they may be in a position to make greater demands, ones that affect folks in other countries directly.
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2)
Microsoft doesn't need to be involved in politics anywhere.
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:3, Insightful)
MS is not a moral being, the laws of the country define acceptable behaviour so
If your govt. had any morality then it would cease trading with the Chinese
but the will of the people isn't in favour of that trade barrier so
If you had any morality then you would cease trading with your govt.
try that one and you'll see how much *your* human rights are respected
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2, Funny)
nope, it's called "Democracy"
if you don't like it, go live in China !
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:3, Informative)
Think of it this way: would it be better for Microsoft to simply shut down MSN China, and for other companies to do the same with their Chinese operations, and leave the Chinese people with no voice of expression as opposed to a limited one?
This article suggests... (Score:3, Informative)
"Meanwhile, China continues to be a major source of new American immigrants, and remains a big prize for companies wishing to help it along with building a more capitalistic society." The article asks if there a way for Microsoft in particular, and global businesses in general, to avoid this sort of controversy - whether, that is, they stay agnostic regarding specific political issues, domestic and international. The answer would seem to be: "No!"
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2)
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2)
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2)
I got a bad feeling about this... (Score:2)
How long will it be until they start dictating terms to the U.S.? Like the money we give to terrorists who happily sell us more oil, I think we're funding our own doom.
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:3, Interesting)
Much as I hate Microsoft, I expect IBM will do the same once it gets its foothold in China via the Lenovo deal - assuming the issue ever comes up with IBM at all, since I don't know that they are running general content Web sites there.
The problem for Microsoft is that MSN is SUPPOSED to be an open information portal. Thus, censoring it - especially such general terms as "freedom" - would seem to be a fundamental contradiction of the MSN "mission" (other than making money for Microsoft - which IIRC it isn't doing anyway - unless you treat it as a loss-leader PR move to sell Microsoft products - which it is).
But then, any SUPPOSEDLY open information portal which censors the word "fuck" or pictures of naked babes or anything else is by definition NOT an "open information portal".
As I say elsewhere, every Web site is run by and for the people who run it - and NO ONE ELSE. Get used to it. If you don't like it, start your own, like I'm going to do. And yes, mine will be run exactly the same way.
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:5, Insightful)
Riddle me this: how is the US embargo on Cuba helping Cuban people?
Re:If they had any morality... (Score:2, Informative)
Cuba as asolated as it is, it has great health, great education, and no labor or alimentation issues. But! if they werent embarged they would have even a better life level, and even more of that so called Freedom the USA "promotes" in the world.
Congratulations! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mercenary Taiwanese Scum (Score:2)
What about... (Score:3, Informative)
What about 'linux', 'google' and 'apple'?
OB Simpsons (Score:5, Funny)
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:2)
The law doesn't forbid the terms, the Politburo does. A bunch of grey old commies who don't know that China is charging straight for the 21st century, whether they like it or not.
Re:So? (Score:2)
The CCP has allowed open capitalists to join. My Chinese teacher (who was a former truck driver in Tibet in the 60s and 70s, cool guy) explained it like this:
The CCP new guard are in a car leading the old CCP members following in another. Up ahead there is a fork with one side labeled Communism (Maoism actually) and the other labeled Capitalism. After a brief debate the new guard CCP decides to signal a turn to Communism, but turn towards Capitalism.
Re:So? (Score:2)
BTW, it sounds like your understanding of Tibetian history is flawed by propaganda, take a course perhaps?
Ever been to Tibet? Know anyone from Tibet? Know anyone who's family lived in Tibet during the 60s and 70s (up to the present day even)?
If so then you'd know that many Tibetians have a picture of the Dali (Dalai) Lama in a revered spot...and a picture of Mao next to him. Why? "Because the Lama gives me religion, and Mao gave me land."
Remember to take the Free Tibet stuff with some salt. A lot of their movement is about anti-modernism is Tibet so we can keep it "pure" as a tourist attraction. "What's that noble Tibetian peasant, you want a coke? No no, that will taint your sacred history. Only I may have a coke, just drink your yak butter tea and thank us for trying to preserve your subsistence livestyle for generations to come. Now where can I get some of your quaint prayer beads?"
Re:So? (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit. Doing or not doing trade with a dictatorship IS a moral issue. Whichever way a company goes, they are making a moral choice.
But the hypocrisy is astounding. Why the embargo on Cuba, but not on China? Why not trade with North Korea?
Re:So? (Score:2)
Simple: Because China is big and strong.
Re:So? (Score:2)
Because China is buying U.S. Treasury Notes at an astounding rate (and it is also the only thing that allows the U.S. to run up a high deficit without crashing the dollar).
The downside to this is that all China has to do is say "hey, we're going to sell these puppies at a loss for 10 cents on the dollar... so do what we tell you!"
Then watch the monkey dance.
Re:So? HAHAHAHA - how naive... (Score:3, Insightful)
you are being SO naive, it hurts. The USA trades DAILY with really nasty gummints all over the world.
Furthermore, the US gummint itself is doing really nasty things all over the world.
You drive a car? Where do you think the oil comes from? Some peace loving bunch of desert hippies?
You buy some sneakers? Who do you think made them? Some upper middle class suburbanite in a clean well lighted climate controlled office?
You buy your love a diamond ring? where do you think the diamond came from? Assembled in some pollution free factory in Middle America and dug from the earth by harmless robots?
EVERY purchase you make as a first world consumer has far reaching and devastating effects on other people and the environment. Your very lifestyle sits at the heart of an ignominious betrayal of the human spirit.
the difference is: I know this and I work to fight it as best I can - and I know that carping about China or Cuba isn't going to change things one bit. Yes they are despotic regimes, but Cuba's infant mortality rate is much better than the USA's and China's financing the federal debt so our idiot president can go pound the middle east and make the oil safe for the Chinese to buy - tool that he is.
RS
Re:So? (Score:3, Insightful)
In a statement RSF (Reporters Sans Frontiers) said: "The lack of ethics on the part of [Microsoft] is extremely worrying. Their management frequently justifies collaboration with Chinese censorship by saying that all they are doing is obeying local legislation.
"Does that mean that if the authorities asked Microsoft to provide information about Chinese cyberdissidents using its services that it would agree to do so, on the basis that it is 'legal'?
"We believe that this argument does not hold water and that these multinationals must respect certain basic ethical principles, in whatever country they are operating," it said.
Re:So? (Score:2)
Values are only values when you are willing to give something up for them.
Re:So? (Score:2)
---
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
- Thomas Jefferson, of the Declaration of Independence for the United States Of America
Yeah, blame microsoft. (Score:4, Funny)
I bet they only use linux for the good stuff, and then they switch over to a MS box when they need to do some oppressing.
Re:Yeah, blame microsoft. (Score:2)
Wow, so Microsoft is responsible for the lack of human rights in China? But China is awesome right? I mean, they use linux, how can they be bad?
Are you completely fucking stupid? MS is a player in a system, and their actions are helping to make the perpetuation and expansion of that system possible. Are they the ONLY player? Duh, no. Are they still cozying up to a totalitarian state? Yuppers.
Any business that actively provides support to that system should be vilified, whether it is Wal-Mart, Nike, or freakin' Google.
Re:Yeah, blame microsoft. (Score:2)
Anyway, my point is, its not so black and white. Its not good vs. evil. I dont like the chinese government (obviously you dont either), however, do you see any civil unrest there? any rioting or revolutions? no. Perhaps its because of the economic prosperity the totalitarian government is bringing them. Those kids working in the sweat shops, are happy to work there, because its either the sweat shops or they starve. If the chinese are unsatisfied with their government they can do something about it themselves... we shouldn't think they are unhappy just because we would be if we were in their shoes.
Re:Yeah, blame microsoft. (Score:2)
The fact is, it wasn't google, nike, or walmart in the headline, it was microsoft, and we all know why MS articles get posted here.
Yes, blame Microsoft (Score:2)
This is how China gets away with human rights abuses. If the rest of the G7 and all major corporations said that they wouldn't trade or deal with China unless they allowed freedom of speech, China would be a changed place. The problem is that companies like Microsoft don't care about human rights, and are only focused on improving share value. So why make a stand and cost the company money, when they can do whatever they want and continue to blame the Chinese government for human rights abuses.
Microsoft, the US government, and many other countries/companies around the world are tacitly supporting the Chinese regime. Any opposition to human rights abuses is all talk:
Microsoft and the US: No
China: Make me
Microsoft and the US: No
Yes, blame Microsoft (Score:2)
Serves them right.
How does the conversation go? (Score:2)
Re:How does the conversation go? (Score:2)
Profit. (Score:2)
This isn't complicated, they do it for money.
If they comply: They do business there, and make money.
If they don't: No business, no money from that market.
Re:How does the conversation go? (Score:2)
Government: We'd like you to do XYZ
Microsoft: What if we don't comply?
Government: You'll be banned from doing business in China (a 1.2bn strong market). We'll also seize all your assets in China and possibly jail your top execs here.
Microsoft: Would you also like us to censor "liberty"?
It is sad that American Companies have decided ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... that the dollar is more important than freedom or principles.
I guess it shouldn't be any surprise the Microsoft and other companies are anxious to help China maintain and strengthen it's totalitarian government, since it's the government that controls the purse strings.
It should give all of us in this country pause. Microsoft obviously has no issues with a government that has it's army fire upon students demonstrating for democracy. It's a short step from there to helping an American administration (of whichever party) do the same thing in this country. Considering how much money Microsoft was saved by the hand slap it got from Justice after being convicted of monopolistic practices, I would assume Bill Gates feels deeply indebted to the present administration.
Apparently, even Google, a company that claims it's unofficial motto is "Dont' Be Evil", doesn't feel like it has a responsibility to behave ethically.
It wasn't defense spending in the U.S. that caused the fall of Communisim in the USSR, it was blue jeans and walkmans -- simple economics. It became glaringly obvious to everyone in communist states that they were being deprived the advances that were cheap to citizens of democratic countries.
The Chinese have never been stupid or foolish. They learned from the lesson of the USSR and they are modernizing their economy in order to prevent a similar revolution. It is unfortunate that companies like Microsoft, Google, and Walmart are so quick to help them.
China is still a totalitarian government. China allows the use of slave and prison labor to produce goods which show up on American store shelves. Ever wonder why goods made in China are so inexpensive?
The American government and businesses are not just hurting the Chinese people by helping such a government; they are hurting American citizens. We are losing jobs. We are becoming a nation that produces nothing but Reality TV shows. Worse the lesson to our children is that freedom only counts until someone offers you more money.
These companies argue that by doing business with China, they are improving the lives of ordinary Chinese. How can we trust them? There have been numerous stories about the use of prison labor and child labor to produce goods bound for America. Can they really know that they are helping the average Chinese when China does not have a free press that can report how things actually are? I sincerely doubt that the workers in China are getting the same wages and benefits that American workers would get. I wonder if they are even getting enough more to substantially change their lives.
If you are going to stand for freedom, you have to do it all the time, not just when it's financially attractive.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:3, Interesting)
As it is, people in China will find ways round the censorship, but the Tiananmen Square protests pointed out to their government that they need to improve the standard of living. Enough so that their people will be as disinterested in the governance of their country as those in many western democracies.
That's why I'm disgusted that Microsoft is eagerly cooperating with their censorship.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:3, Interesting)
I recall asking my father if he would buy $.10 hamburgers from a restaurant that used slave labor. Without blinking he said, "Of course". I guess so long as it is their jackboot on someone else's face, they won't have any problems with the system.
Recall that Microsoft, as a publicly traded corporation, has a fiduciary responsibility to make as much profit as possible without doing anything illegal. You can bet your bottom dollar that if a pro-active stance regarding China decreases profits, the directors will be replaced by those who will change that policy.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2)
Of course they have, it wasn't even a choice.
Corporations are legally obliged to maximize shareholder value, given the choice between money, freedom, and democracy they legally, and one could even argue morally, must choose money. For PR reasons they try to help freedom and priciples if it's convenient and pay as much lip service as they can but that's as far as it goes. The reason the shareholders come together isn't freedom or democracy, it's money, for a the leaders of a corporation to impose values of freedom and democracy on shareholders who have only exhibited an interest in profit is unethical and bait for a lawsuit.
This isn't a troll or a left wing rant, it's just how it works, corporations due to their single minded determination can be great for the economy and they can be generous if it fulfills their self-interest. But at the end of the day if you create an entity for the express purpose of earning money you shouldn't be surprised when at the cost of things like freedom and democracy it starts doing exactly that.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2)
Precisely. The only way to relieve a corporation of that obligation is to get Congress to impose sanctions. That such sanctions are not currently in place indicates that the nation believes that engagement improves the lives of ordinary Chinese people. U.S. corporations are just the tools of that policy.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2)
I bet they'd be eager to know how to run a company and pay employees using freedom.
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2)
The lesson is more like "no use bitching about things YOU can't change."
You posting that, is it gonna change China? No. Is MS backing out of a deal going to change China? No. They will find someone else to do it instead.
Might as well get in there, get your piece of the pie, and THEN try to change them once you are well established. MS can't do that shit here, but they COULD do it in China.
Get it?
Re:It is sad that American Companies have decided (Score:2)
It might be argued that the demise of Communism in the Soviet Union was due to their internal history. All the millions of people sent to slave labor camps and the purposeful dislocation of entire ethnic groups. Plus the deliberate starvation that developed by the conversion of productive farms to collectives according to political theory. And the ruthless supression of any common sense dissent that disagreed with the current political theory. Plus the huge slaughter of World War II.
I suspect that the Soviet Union would have fallen even if they didn't have any external resistance from the West. The people themselves were simply worn out.
For the West to claim that their huge corrupt 'defense expenditures' (which primarily serves to give government funds to large corporations that are the largest campaign contributors) or clothing styles were responsible for ending the USSR is self-serving and absurd.
Would this "fool" the system? (Score:2)
I have a feeling that any success with that would be caught by M$ pretty fast!
Note: Those letters in "Dem0cr@cy" and "Freed0m" are zeros and not an "o".
Re:Would this "fool" the system? (Score:2)
They Should be Taken Out and Shot (Score:2)
Visual Studio .NET ad sponsors MS Censorship post (Score:2)
So, is it very enlightened of Microsoft to sponsor an article that implies their own misconduct, or will the ad be pulled when they figure it out?
What's a Fink to Do? (Score:2)
This is bad news for an oppressive regime. How are finks, spooks, and informers supposed to do their dirty business if they can't:
A. Praise Democracy, in order to entrap dissidents;
B. Condemn Democracy, in order to rally more finks, spooks, and informers?
-kgj
Chinese sound Nazis (Score:3, Insightful)
Again?? (Score:2)
Hypocrites (Score:3, Interesting)
Resistance is Futile (Score:3, Funny)
My comment (Score:2)
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=152425&
Re:My comment (Score:2)
If there is a connection between what you wrote and what I wrote please explain it to me.
Slashdot Politics 101 (Score:2)
Microsoft is "Capitalist", so when they obey the laws that "Socialists" put in place to censor people, they are bad.
Of course, if Microsoft refused to obey the Chinese laws, the opinion on Slashdot would be "evil capitalists, threatening the sovernty of 'Socialist' China".
Basicly, the perfect world according to the Slashdot crowd is a world where a totalitarian one world government controls all economy, media, and everything else in the world, except Apple (because all capitalism is evil, except Apple who are "totaly rad!").
It may not matter in China... (Score:2, Offtopic)
I used to not give a crap about opensource and the like, but from this moment on, Microsoft and Google are on my shit-list.
Re:It may not matter in China... (Score:2)
Why? Is there something in open source licenses that says you can't use the software to suppress human rights or free speech?
Re:It may not matter in China... (Score:2)
Ok, I'll give you that one, but there's no way for anyone to possibly know that's their actually motivation. As far as even remotely comparing our free speech to china, you're on crack.
A question of practicality. (Score:2)
Don't just shaft MS (Score:2)
And Slashdotters take their moral highground again (Score:2)
It MS's line of reasoning is to be believed... (Score:2, Insightful)
He should do it, right? After all, that's respecting the laws of a country you're operating in and that's what Microsoft believes should be done.
I don't see how it's any different. Both are proactive moves and both stand against most people's moral standards. I think Microsoft's management would see things far differently if the results were right there in front of them. They're actively aiding in suppressing human rights, as defined by their own country. For this reason, and because Microsoft is not a military or political power (give it a few years), the only morally acceptable action would be to stay out of the markey.
Re:Dupedydubdub (Score:2)
If the US Government censored people talking shit about it, this very website would have been shut down years ago.
Reminds me of the people marching with signs reading "BUSH = HITLER". The very fact they can march in public holding that sign and nothing happens to them proves that it isn't true.
Re:Dupedydubdub (Score:2, Funny)
Ah, but how do you know that they weren't dragged away and shot the moment they were off-camera? ;o)
Re:Dupedydubdub (Score:2)
Re:Dupedydubdub (Score:2)
Sure, but if it started accurately describing in detail the security systems at the white house it would be a different matter. This country has a long history of censorship in the name of civil defense. After all, "Lose lips sink ships!"
Re:Dupedydubdub (Score:3, Insightful)
Just look at what the current US administration has done in the name of the war on terror. The TSA and Homeland Security can get away with almost anything because "the people" have been convinced that it is all for their own good.
Re:so... LETS DEBATE! (Score:2)
Oh wait...welcome to earth ;)
Re:so... LETS DEBATE! (Score:2)
This reminds me of an interview I heard with a Soviet era Russian general. The interviewer asked some question about how all the Russian people were brainwashed by government propaganda. The general laughed and said "That is the difference between Americans and Russians. Our government publishes propaganda and we say 'Look, it is government propaganda.' Your government publishes propaganda and you believe it."
Re:so... LETS DEBATE! (Score:2)
>governement does that?
Because they found out that as long as they add "to combat terrorism", they can get away doing anything....
Re:so... LETS DEBATE! (Score:2)
Communism, plain and simple.
And before you mod down, I was just trying to answer what looked like a legitimate question, not add fuel to the "flamebait"-modded post.
Re:I wonder why the surprice... (Score:2)
its not a corps like that thing. its every corporation in the world type of thing.
Re:I wonder why the surprice... (Score:2)
Surely you jest. Who or what is forcing MS and Google to do business in China? Besides greed, that is?
Re:I wonder why the surprice... (Score:2)
The law.
Publically traded companies are bound by law to do everything possible to increase shareholder value.
So, yes, greed, but more than that: A legal obligation to greed.
Re:I wonder why the surprice... (Score:2)
And this, indeed, is exactly the problem.
Re:What do you expect... (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no moral compunction for companies to do anything. As can be seen with all sorts of disasters in the past wehere companies have done stuff which was damaging to people/environment/markets/[insert favourite disaster] but to their own profit. Companies are only compelled to do things against their bottom dollar by two main things:
1) People voting with their wallets (but if you don't know what bad practices they have in their closets, how do you know how to vote that way?)
2) Government regulation. ie laws, legislastion etc (But what do you do when the comapny is in bed with the legislators?)
Re:What do you expect... (Score:2)
And the converse of that is, how do they know you aren't buying their product because you don't like some particular bad practice of theirs?
Aaargh, my wallet! Zhe Invizeeble hand, it does nozink!
Re:If there was any doubt about Money being King.. (Score:2)
"The human progress of a billion people." (Score:4, Informative)
Before you start throwing stones at China consider that over the past 30yrs the Chineese Govt has dragged 600 million people above the $1/day poverty line and significantly improved the standard of living of hundreds of millions more. Not so long ago parents in the West used to say "eat your dinner, there starving in China", (well at least mine and J.Lennon's did). If we were to confiscate the income of the richest 500 people in the world we could do the same thing for another billion.
Does this mean China is a nice place to live? do the means justify the ends? (re: "enemy combatants", "confiscation from the rich", "population control"). You can argue about history, politics and philosophy all day, but one thing remains indisputable. Over the last few decades they have done more than anyone else to relive the needless suffering of 1/5th of the worlds poorest people. The worldwide reduction in the incidence of starvation since the 1960's is almost entirely due to Chineese peasants having enough to eat. Personally I don't think the Chineese give a flying-fuck about what MS thinks because they will simply pull the plug if they don't play nice.
Re:"The human progress of a billion people." (Score:2)
The main reason they succeeded at what they did was the influx of foreign capital and technology. Agriculture by peasant is a completely losing proposition, barely able to sustain itself, and completely unable to advance beyond subsistance.
This is going to sound crass and unpopular, but a couple of mega-agro-corps would have done them a lot more good.