Google had to censor the results for China and China alone, or China would have blocked Google all-together

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/view/

Scroll to the bottom of the page and click on “6. The Struggle to Control Information”.

@ Slava : thanks !

China is not a democracy. China already blogs half of the Internet. If the people in China want information, they can damn well move elsewhere.

Google says “Hmm, either we censor results on the CHINA (read not USA, not Canada, not any other country) Google webpage, we can still have a business with the Chinese people, or we don’t do what the China government wants and completely be blocked from the Chinese people (thus robbing them MORE of information)… Your logic is flawed and this is a fight that does not envolve you.

If you were in China, you can bet your ass that you wouldn’t be able to access your own damn website.

http://www.google.com/help/customize.html#safe

I believe your statement also calls for the end of SafeSearch.

You find it condescending to talk about the Chinese as an indoctrinated people… well. That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to have it. The Chinese do not have the right to have an opinion, unless it is parallel with the governement’s opinion. There you have your answer.

@ Marc, indeed you cannot compare these two countries, I was just making a statement about the censorship. I’m fully aware of the fact that Germany asked Google to filter out sources that spread hate. I don’t agree, but I do understand. That too is a very difficult matter. I’m aware of the efforts Germany has done to show the world that the times have changed and that the hate is just coming from a minority.

I was just pointing out that it would be rather pointless to block out ALL Nazi related content, instead of only the sources of hate. You can still do a search for Hitler or Holocaust. The point is that in China a part of its history is being removed in its totality. As if that revolution never happened. Under no circumstances was I trying to downgrade Germany’s efforts. Just to be clear.

But let me remark one thing: China has not a democratic elected government whereas Germany is a democratic country with a honourable record for the past 50 years amongst the democratic nations in the world.

Both countries are difficult to compare. China is not a free country, let´s say it: it´s a dictatorship. One party rules the country, there is no free press. You cannot say your opinion freely.

Our past means for us germans a great burden and we have a certain obligation for pursued people. That was one of the reasons why german authories asked google to block neo-nazi pages.

True. As mentioned before, results on any non-sensitive topic are displayed faster.But that information was available already on sites like MSN and Yahoo. Google doesn’t add any extra value to that. It’s not that Google has ‘the’ information, it’s not that Google is the only source of information. What I care about is the fact Google gave in to the requests and did so in ways that needed for Google to change it’s core mission statement and review an entire policy. That is very remarkable to say the least, and I’m just worried that it might set a trend amongst other governments around the world. A Google.cn with censored results isn’t a Google anymore, it’s a soft extract of random less useful information, just as the MSN and Yahoo versions in China. What’s the use of having an engine that doesn’t know Tibet?

As for wikipedia, I agree that it might not always be 100% accurate, but the self-regulation will prevent lies to live long. Since anbody can contribute or edit, that also means all the opions have a fair chance to survive, and in the end, only the right one will be left over.

Give me one example of blatant lies that are written, where nobody can change them and where they are left online without a big fuzz about them being provoked.

“How do you really know that random site you have found on Google.com is any less biased or censored then the random site you find on Google.cn?”

You don’t anymore. That’s my entire point. You felt protected by that mission statement. You believed it, at least I did. Until now.

“Yahoo, remember, was forced to turn over a dissident to the Chinese gov’t. He had used Yahoo mail. Google made sure its servers for Gmail and blogs were not within Chinese borders to control.”

Indeed, for now Google was out of China, thus so were the users of Google products such as GMail, but they made their move into that market so that their other products would become (more) available too. As Ken Roth stated in the interview with Brin on CNN Money (link in my article):

“I’m sure Google justifies this by saying it’s just a couple of search words that people can’t get to, but it’s very difficult for Google to do what they just did and avoid the slippery slope. The next thing they’ll do is ask them to tell them who is searching for “Taiwan” or “independence” or “human rights.” And then it’s going to find itself in the position of turning over the names of dissidents or simply of inquisitive individuals, for imprisonment.”

So, since Google gave in on this one, it’s very easy for the Chinese government to take it a step further and have it their way, or Google is denied access to the market. Google too might face the next step, a ban on GMail.com, forcing Google to create a Google.cn on Chinese territory, to then be subject to the same requests Yahoo has found itself to. One freedom (the one to make money on the Chinese market) in exchange for another (giving in to requests from the Chinese government.)

To quote further from Ken Roth:

“The key in my view is that every company faces the same dilemma — how do you maintain your principles while benefiting from the enormous Chinese market. And the answer is only going to come through safety in numbers. And it’s going to require all of the search engines to get together and say “None of us will do this.” And China needs search engines. If it can pick them off one at a time, it wins. If it faces all of the search engines at once banding together, the search engines win.”

Google had its chance to withstand. They didn’t. Now they’ll follow the path that has been set. Unfortunately.

Like I said before, for results that don’t really matter, the Chinese could already access plenty of engines. Google just wants a piece of that cake, in my opinion. You can’t blame them, all you can do is be disappointed.

I think of it this way: Google’s policy certainly is disappointing, but might it be the best result they could get, both for themselves and for the people of China?

In the end, I think the question isn’t about Google, but about whether one believes in the power of free trade in China or not. The rationale behind allowing trade with China is that excluding them will do no one any good, and including them we allow our companies to benefit, and we slowly but surely influence their society.

Google had some interesting caveats to the agreement–for example, making sure it was never in a position as Yahoo was to turn over someone to the gov’t for subversion, or anything else. Yahoo, remember, was forced to turn over a dissident to the Chinese gov’t. He had used Yahoo mail. Google made sure its servers for Gmail and blogs were not within Chinese borders to control.

The case is actually a lot more nuanced than it looks immediately. Google certainly made a practical decision in allowing the Chinese government to censor its results. But it was very careful that it did not give everything away. If results are censored, I am told, it will say so clearly. Google had a choice as to whether the Chinese gov’t would censor Google itself, or only a small percentage of search results. They chose the latter–and that is the price of free trade in the short run.

In the long run, I don’t think any of us can judge the effects–moral or otherwise.