China Wants US-Owned Hotels to Censor Internet 279
jp_papin writes "The Chinese government is demanding that US-owned hotels there filter Internet service during the upcoming Olympic Games in Beijing, US Senator Sam Brownback has alleged. The Chinese government is requiring US-owned hotels to install Internet filters to 'monitor and restrict information coming in and out of China,' Brownback said Thursday. 'This is an insult to the spirit of the games and an affront to American businesses,' he said. 'I call on China to immediately rescind this demand.' US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said he wasn't aware of those specific requests from the Chinese government, but Brownback said he got the information on Internet filtering from 'two different reliable but confidential sources.' The State Department is apparently continuing dialog with China about freedom of expression."
"Reliable but confidential" sources? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Reliable but confidential" sources? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese Law (Score:5, Insightful)
Do these US senators expect Chinese hotels in the US to follow US law? If so, then why the shock?
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:5, Interesting)
Hell, a lot of hotels in the U.S. aren't even owned by U.S. companies, their owned by the Japanese. That's true, at least, of every single hotel in Hawaii.
Of course we expect these hotels to operate in accordance with U.S. law. Of course, the thing is that the Japanese tend to always seek excellenece in their endeavors -- and, in their view, excellence includes strict compliance with the law.
OTOH, many hotels owned by American companies and individuals don't operate in accordance with U.S. law -- cleanliness standards that aren't up to state and federal health codes, employing undocumented workers as housekeeping staff.
So uhh...what is it they're screaming and handwaving about again?
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Politics & International competitions never have, are not and never will be separate.
Come on bush just grow the balls that Starkozy & even Brown have got and dont turn up to the opening ceremony.
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Tibet pre China (Score:2, Flamebait)
If they'd have had oil, they'd have been declared an axis of evil by now.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Oh yeah? What color is my tie?
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:4, Informative)
THEME 16: COMMUNICATIONS
AND MEDIA SERVICES
Concept & Communication
The Beijing communications strategy is based on
a desire to provide greater opportunities for more
people to share the excitement of the Olympic
Games.
It was confirmed to the Commission that there
will be no restrictions on media reporting and
movement of journalists up to and including
the Olympic Games.
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect most/all of the US TV news stations have reasons not to upset the Chinese government. The newsp
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:3, Interesting)
To be honest they should just wait until the games begin, then censor everyone themselves. Which they already can and do.
We'll censor our athletes, cause we
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless these hotels are buying direct connections to a provider outside of China (and why would they?), they are already behind the Chinese Great Firewall and subject to its filtering.
Conversely, for China to honor its agreement about allowing unfettered Internet access during the Olympics, they will need to open up the wall for these hotels.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unless these hotels are buying direct connections to a provider outside of China (and why would they?)
I dunno, maybe so that their guests who requested unfiltered access to the Internet could get it while they're in China for the Games?
I could easily see media companies getting together and being willing to pay a premium to a willing hotel so that their reporters could have unfettered access to the Internet during their stay. I could also see how China might get wind of this and decide they don't like it.
Re:China wants hotels in China to follow Chinese L (Score:4, Insightful)
Bad Reasoning (Score:4, Insightful)
"We expect foreign businesses to follow our rules. Therefore we can't criticize anyone else's rules."
I hope the flaw is apparent. We ALWAYS have the right to complain about nasty rules -- including our own nasty rules! That's right, if we force foreign businesses to do awful things then we SHOULD be criticized for it. Likewise, we have the right and duty to call out other countries when they pull this stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OTOH I think the big surprise here is that the Chinese government doesn't filter the internet themselves at the ISP level. Why do they even need to ask for the hotel's cooperation on this? I was under the impression that the Great Firewall is implemented at the ISP level? Interesting... if this is not the case t
Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil? (Score:2, Insightful)
Next you're going to tell me that American citizens have their right to bear arms violated when they're in Europe.
Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil? (Score:5, Insightful)
(I'd be much less depressed if I were going for a funny mod...)
Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil? (Score:5, Insightful)
As for me, I'm against censorship. If China does it then I am against it. If the USA, where I live, does it then I am against it. Injustice by my government, in this case 'NSA operated rooms at the telecoms' does not deny me the right or obligation to speak out against injustice anywhere else. So, I denounce this move by China. Not because they are the 'other team', but because censorship is wrong, period. I also denounce those little NSA rooms at telecoms in the USA, because censorship is wrong.
I'm motivated by justice, not geo political team sport. How about you?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As I said, it's depressing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil? (Score:4, Informative)
That said, Brownback's criticism is very mild, basically saying we should hold hearings, and he voted yea [senate.gov] on the deeply flawed Senate FISA bill that grants the telecoms immunity for their illegal spying on American citizens.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonetheless I recall local newspapers (Italy) covering the visit of the Dalai Lama, with local sponsors retiring at the last minute because they were pressured in doing so by the chinese. Making me decide that there are no 2008 olympic games for what I am concerned.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Next you're going to tell me that American citizens have their right to bear arms violated when they're in Europe.
You know, a guy called Timothy McVeigh spent three months complaining about that very issue across Usenet. See the thread 'No rights in the UK' on De
Re:Following Chinese laws on Chinese soil? (Score:4, Informative)
The second paragraph was a direct response to the first poster making an ironic reference to Americans expecting the right to keep and bear arms to extend to other countries. The great talk.politics.guns roadshow was anything but a singular experience. There must have been at least ten thousand people reading that particular thread.
There we were discussing the Archers and the Montana militia pops up to tell us we are living in a dictatorship [google.com] (the actual McVeigh posts were removed from the Deja Feed but you can see the flavor of the 'argument'). Then one of them goes off and murders 200 people.
The Internet is not like the regular news. In an Internet of a billion people you are going to meet a lot of kooks. But you are also going to find that there are a lot of people who have a direct connection to pretty much every major event. McVeigh spent his time between Wako and OKC building his bomb and spewing hate posts onto the Internet. He was not the most prominent gun nut, but he was pretty prominent.
The connection here that you appear to be deliberately avoiding is that it is not actually that rare for Americans to have somewhat peculiar notions about foreign countries. Such as the idea that a 'US hotel' operating in China does not have to follow Chinese law and that this is somehow a political affront to the United States as if every Hilton and Marriott in the world was a kind of US Embassy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
skeptical (Score:5, Insightful)
And the Chinese have never really worried about foreigners with VPNs. Its the locals that need to be kept in control.
I think this senator got his information from the same reliable sources that found proof for Iraqi WMDs.
Re:skeptical (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, since the filtering is happening at lower levels, the elite can get unfiltered connections straight from the telecoms without rousing suspicion for demanding filer removal.
Re: (Score:2)
If the opposite were true I'd not be surprised either.
Re: (Score:2)
Hotel internet access in china has been censored and _logged_ for a long time already. It's been the law and requirement there. It's not just because it's the Olympics.
I know this because the company I work for does internet access for hotels. Some countries (Singapore, China, Italy) logging is mandatory, seems in other countries logging is illegal (Taiwan?). So we try to comply to each country'
Re:skeptical (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Its probably not the VPN use per se. After all, China has lots of Western business people in it every day, and many of them will use a VPN to connect to their corporate offices. Most likely someone saw her browsing unapproved websites and mentioned it to someone who had the authority to do something about it.
seriously... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:seriously... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is perhaps true, but seems unlikely frankly. Blacklists in western countries tend to be for hate speech or child pornography, which I find reasonable (though some may not). They are not comparable in scale or subject matter to those in China.
The Pirate Bay cannot be accessed through the largest Danish ISP. When the Swedish filter was leaked, it was shown that the sites there almost never contains actual children in sexual situations - there's some clothed child modeling, there's some regular porn, and there's some lolicon. Oh, and http://www.koreabonsai.com/ [koreabonsai.com]
While preventing race riots is an admirable goal, looking at the deeper causes of this conflict is in order. Tibet has been flooded by Han in the last decade as part of a pacification project by the central government. That has understandably lead to widespread resentment there. We'll probably never know the true story because no journalists are allowed to report from that area, I wonder why?
But James Miles was there, could report, and he had a permit. Apparently, openness is increasing!
'Westerners' are not some monolithic block to be denounced as ox ghosts and snake demons, and your treatment of the subject doesn't do it justice.
But we treat China that way. How can we say that Myanmar is China's problem?
Hell, a lot o
Re: (Score:2)
The Pirate Bay cannot be accessed through the largest Danish ISP...there's some clothed child modeling, there's some regular porn, and there's some lolicon. Oh, and http://www.koreabonsai.com/ [koreabonsai.com] [koreabonsai.com]
And how does this compare in scale and scope with widespread filtering of everyday communications and news media, and arrest of prominent bloggers like Hu Jia? People spend time in prison for political statements in China and are sometimes killed - that is not the case in Sweden.
Banning reproduction of copyright works and exploitation of children is not the same as political repression. If you had used detention without trial, unaccountable politicians and widespread surveillance in the west as examples yo
IOC is not US or "any other freedom loving person" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wish we were as intolerant of the multinational corporations as the Chineese. But then again, Sony and BP and the like all run the US's goivernment anyway, so it's not surprising.
But I wish we, the people still had control of our government. I'd sutre like to see more factories here.
Re: (Score:2)
While I'm all for greater regulation of corporations (especially with regard to environmental practices and shady finances), can you tell me what sort of government regulation (short of outright nationalization) would have prevented the loss of manufacturing jobs to other countries? The third world has such a huge comparative advantage over the US in terms of manufacturing costs that it would require truly draconian measures to stop the export of manufacturing.
Re:seriously... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure. You could remove all tax breaks from any company building plants elsewhere. You can lay tarriffs. You can pass laws preventing non-citizens from owning all or part of any US business. You can use the "bully pulpit" to name and try and shame owners of companies that move factories overseas.
There is even more that could be done, given the will.
Of course, to do this you would have to have not sold the US government to business interests in the first place, and you would have to tear down the US's national religion (worship of money).
Re:seriously... (Score:4, Informative)
What would be cool is (Score:2)
If they had some kind of translator to take a message and encode it in a Chinese version of rhyming slang [cockneyrhy...lang.co.uk], how nifty would that be?
Particularly if the product could appear pro-Communist. I guess pictograms would render such a project "non-trivial".
Loyal to the Group of 17 [urth.net] would be so proud of the Chinese government.
Re:What would be cool is (Score:5, Informative)
For home access in larger cities like Shanghai, adsl is the way to go, and you purchase time, and you get a static IP. Also traceable to you.
I was in China for a couple of weeks immediately following the recent Tibet fracas (which is quite perplexing if you listen to all 3 sides of the discussion).
Based on my personal observation, The "Great Firewall" isn't so much a firewall (which in my eyes connotes address/port blocking) but it's more the corporate content filter. Too many keywords and your transmission gets squelched.
Example: The first day I tried to use myspace.com and I couldn't get a single word to load. The next day, Myspace would load, I could log in, but when I selected the option to update my personal Blog, I got half a page of unrendered HTML code. I didn't even bother after that.
On the other hand. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It smells like hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy doesn't smell anywhere near as good as napalm. Say, that gives me an idea...
Re: (Score:2)
Their country (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't like it, then leave.
If you want somebody to blame, then direct it to the International Olympic Committee. Each country took a vote and China was selected.
Like or not....
Re:Their country (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not pull out our athletes until... (Score:5, Interesting)
Fuck that Censorshit!
I'll take good old US Style Blanket Surveillance any-day!
Thanks AT&T! For keeping us safe by spying on us for the Bush Gang -- even if it is completely unlawful to do so!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This story wouldn't have come up at all if China wasn't hosting the Olympics. Pulling American athletes out of the games isn't going to harm China, and will make the US look petty.
Many nations boycotted the Moscow Olympics in 1980. This had absolutely no effect on the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan. It's better to find another way to protest against China that would actually cause some sort of harm.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you hate Krustry the clown?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Taking away one Olympics from these athletes for political reasons would be highly unfair to them.
Happening already. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless it's privately onwed (and I don't know if it is or not) it's not an American company, it's an international company. If a single foreigner owns a single share of stock, it's a multinational corporation and has no right to call itself an "American" company.
When in Rome... (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't like it? Then don't do business there.
While I don't like censorship in the least, I also don't like US hegemony either -- either by the government or the businesses. China -- its people and its government -- need to work out their own issues with regards to privacy and censorship and freedom of access to information.
Oh well -- China has the US by its financial balls, so all I see coming out of this is a bunch of whining on the US part with little to no real action.
And of course, the question of what form any possible "action" would take, anyway? Pulling out of the Olympics? That's not fair to all those athletes who devoted a good portion of their lives preparing for this event.
Gotta love geo-politics.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
One could easily swap "China" and "US" in the above statement, and it would still be true. If the American economy collapses, then China will lose their biggest customer. Consider it a form of mutually-assured financial destruction.
Great firewall of China (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But, I'm not a hotelier.
Let's work on freedom of expression here (Score:3, Insightful)
The Original Press Release (Score:3, Informative)
Seems a fair enough position for a politician to take, given that he sits on one or more subcomittees that are involved with international/human rights types of issues.
On the other hand, he is a Republican.
And he's from Kansas.
If you're not prepared to fill in your own joke, the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on him should give you some ideas.
Re:The Original Press Release (Score:5, Informative)
That being said..
one of his children is adopted from China. he puts his money where his mouth is sometimes, and I respect him for that sometimes.
But
Just look at his voting record. He's voted to force the installation of the same software China wants to use. It seems extremely hypocritical and headline grabbing move to me, instead of something true.
We are no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave, and that's the way it is and we like it apparently, because no one will make any effort. We like being the land of the monitored and home of the scared. It's not a big deal, and it's to stop the terrorists.
China's doing it because they're mean. We're doing it to protect you, so we're ok. That's the politicians logic for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Newsflash! (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't like it? Your options are:
1. Don't do business there.
2. Ask them to change their laws. Good luck with that.
3. The Iraq thing. Good luck with that too.
A hotel is not an embassy; Chinese law applies within its walls.
Satelite dish (Score:2)
Looking forward to the day that public spectrum wireless technologies can be propogated for 10's or 100's of miles. Then China's boarders will have Internet leaking in from every corner. They're facing a losing, not to mention, stupid and expensive battle. Only a question of time.. tick, tock, tick, tock.
And trying ot hack other countries? That is seriously stupid. Wait till the Russians and Israilies get wind of that, j00'll be be
welcome to the multi-valued world (Score:5, Insightful)
If you start a hotel in China, you know that you're in China, and that chinese laws and customs apply to you. You may not like them, for whatever reason. You may think they are inhuman and evil, but they are the law of the land.
If you don't like it, there's a simple solution: Don't do business there!.
But no, our corporate masters want to have it both ways. None of the large international corporations would want to leave the huge chinese market to the competitors.
I don't support the chinese government in their position on censorship, oppression or the liberal application of the death penalty, but I do support them on their strong stand towards international corporations and anyone else messing with their internal politics. I think right now China is the only government not falling over backwards when some RIAA or Microsoft comes calling, and instead reminding them just who owns the land and the tanks.
Re: (Score:2)
And in related news.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I do realize that this will get a lot of "hell yeah!" reactions though
What about the censorship right here in the US? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes it seems the real reason the politicians criticize china is to cover up the fact that they allow censorship right here, and are representatives of the corporations that carry out this censorship. Politicians in the US take campaign donations from corporations, essentially the corporations elect them and they represent the corporations interest. Whoever has the best funding has the best chance of winning so corporations can control elections through who they give donations to. Add to that most of the US media is controlled by a few large corporate conglomerates who basically can filter and conspire to propogandise the ignorant and gullible public. People are not really the ones making the decisions anymore, the process is controlled by corporations and special interests, the american people are brainwashed into thinking they have a choice, when they really do not. You have a media which basically controls most of their information, and can tell them who to vote for, by excluding or including information you can control the available information they have to work with and thus their decision making. The way you make people think they have a choice is by giving them options, but controlling those options. A politicians campaign can easily be destroyed if their funding is withdrawn and the corporation and establishment can weed out those it does not like (like Kucinich, Paul, etc). The media simply ignores them or gives them a fraction of the attention of other preferred candidates.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this only a big deal now? (Score:5, Insightful)
The "westerners" only hotels in China are censored. It is a little less lax then normal Chinese hotels (for example you can watch BBC). But there is censorship and even other rules, for example the only chinese allowed on the hotels premises when I was there had to be working in the hotel.
The censorship is more directed at the population though rather then to external sources.
Lastly it is their country, even if like me you don't agree with this. If you don't like, then don't go to the country.
Wow, this is hypocritical! (Score:5, Informative)
I have but one question... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
âoeThe Connection Has Been Resetâ (Score:4, Informative)
Whats the point of the Olympics anyways? (Score:3, Insightful)
- Tradition? Seems to me the original spirit of the games has long been lost. It's all about advertising, ratings, and the almighty dollar bill. $10 hot dog, anyone?
- Bragging rights? Aren't there 'World organizations' for this stuff already? Don't the best of the best already compete against each other?
- Excitement? Watching some muscle-head lob a 15 pound aerodynamic (sortof) rock downrange just doesn't have the same pizazz as watching CNN-cam on the front end of a Sat-Killer [news.com]. Ditto on the ice thing with rocks and brooms (not the vulcanized rock [wikipedia.org], the other one [wikipedia.org]).
- Nationalism? If they were proud of their country, why do some come to the USA to get professionally paid [wikipedia.org] only to be shipped back home to wear a different uniform for a few weeks? Seems hypocritical.
- Achievement? Oh joy of joys, yet another feel good story about how a gymnast with a hangnail toughed it out. Compare that to the tanks [sinodefence.com] 'guarding' parking lot, I'm uninspired.
- Pride? My valuable medals [google.com]. 'Nuff said.
The Media Should Boycott the Olympics (Score:3, Interesting)
How about a nice boycott (Score:3, Insightful)
It would be nice to see some countries put their money where their mouth is (including the US) and boycott the China Olympics.
Not just over this Internet censorship thing; I'm more interested in the fundamental human rights issues than I am in whether they censor the Internet for visiting foreigners. As a basic fundamental principal and statement of support for human rights, events of worldwide importance and recognition should not be held in countries run by oppressive governments.
I assume there's also some sort of preferred trading status between China and the US; that should go too. Why the hell do we need to be flooded with 80 billion tons of poorly made crap? (OK, I just made that statistic up.)
Unfortunately, as so many other posters has said, the US no longer stands for principles and freedom. We stand for profit.
Sounds bogus (Score:3, Informative)
This news sounds bogus to me, exactly because the Chinese government is already doing the censoring:
While I dislike China's censorship, I think this type of news looks bogus, attempts to get media attention, and has the exact purpose of exaggerating the situation.
Re: (Score:2)
"We?" Who is "we"? The US government is wholly owned by the "money making ventures".
What is your point? (Score:2)
Hotels bend over for China to rent rooms, and Slashdot criticizes China and the hotels and says "don't do business there".
What exactly is this difference that you're demanding an explanation for?