Slashdot Mirror


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."

5 of 430 comments (clear)

  1. In Communist China... by XanC · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...there is no Chinese law against the use of the use of these words.

    The more heinous laws may never be written down.

    1. Re:In Communist China... by CrazyDuke · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
  2. No law? by guardiangod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. RedHat by Moderator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    The World is Yours.
  4. Re:Where's Pastor Ken when you *need* him? by Brandybuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!