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."
Remember Pastor Ken Hutcherson, and how he leaned on Bill about the whole gay issue? Where the hell is he now?
Surely, if he and his band of fundies can kick up that much of a fuss about homosexuality, they can certainly flex their muscles in the defense of human liberty and dignity.
C'mon, Ken...you've still got Bill's number...and here's a cause actually worth fighting for.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
The more heinous laws may never be written down.
cuz they must be hating freedum and stuff...
C2lick her3e for our dailey s1pecial on d3mocrazy!
"Does that mean we can invade Microsoft now, cuz they must be hating freedum and stuff..."
That would be consistent with the Bush administration policies, i.e. invade Microsoft even though China is the real threat to democracy and freedom.
Vote for Pedro
...Microsoft will ban the word "monopoly"
Microsoft agreed to ban "innovation" from its international search portal to filter any potential self referential promotions that might run afoul of stricter false advertising laws in other countries.
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.
Is Microsoft saying, in effect, that if Beijing ever decides to crack down on democratic movements Microsoft will be happy to provide dictionaries and spellcheckers with the proscribed thoughtcrimes removed? Boy they really have learned a lot about lobbying since the antitrust trial.
Last I heard China was working on their own operating system to supplant those of the West, so Microsoft might be wasting their time.
-- thinkyhead software and media
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.
Can't one place be free of McDonalds, MTV, Democracy and Coca-Cola?
Apparently not. I was in the Forbidden City in Beijing a few months ago. Bearing in mind that, after The Great Wall, it would have to be the most famous historical site in the entirety of China. What do you think is smack in the middle? A Starbucks.
I wish this post was a joke, but, I am very sorry to say, it isn't.
Ah - just noticed that wikipedia article above mentions it is there too, so I wasn't just seeing things.
Okay, the most annoying part of this article is that they never bother to LINK to the new website. What is the point of talking about a new website in a news article and not linking to it?
My quess is this is what they are talking about.
Of course, I don't know how to spell "freedom" in Chinese, but if you compare these two searches:
US
China
You can get a pretty good idea of what they block. And to think, we have U.S. companies helping them to achieve this....
Can't one place be free of McDonalds, MTV, Democracy and Coca-Cola?
One of these things is not like the other.
Idiot.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
..coming from someone named "Jackie Chan Fan."
Clearly, the benefit for American citizens is cheap products. Benefit for American corporations: higher margins.
Yep, not a lot of long term thinking going on here in America. Buying everything on credit, spending money on high school football instead of advanced courses, etc. We're on the brink of getting our asses royally kicked.
That said, most Chinese I know really like America and Americans, just not our politics. As for me when I am there, I happen to like living in a god-less country, but I'm not so enamored with the totalitarian part. There isn't a perfect country to live in- when I live in China, I have simply traded one kind of stupidity for another.
In the Vietnamese Wikipedia, where I'm a sysop we actually had a discussion about how to translate the motto The free encyclopedia into Vietnamese. Many people were against translating the word "free" literally because it would throw off a lot of readers and the Vietnamese authorities and make it a target for the filtering software installed by the authorities. So we finally reached a compromised and used "open" instead of "free".
wait a second...
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Back about a decade ago, one shell executive was quoted as saying that what any corporation needs, is political stability, and a compliant, cheap workforce == and dictatorships are really good at providing that.
Capitalism does not embrace democracy. It simply tolerates it in the context of western societies. In other countries where there is no need to push for democracy, why should a company do so? The linkage between the two is pure political sugar-coating. This is part of the reason for the tension between capitalism and Free Software (and why 'Open Source' seems like a compelling compromise). Free Software is about Freedom, choice and equality -- none of which really serves the purposes of your average corporate meta-entity.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
I find some of the points on your linked article to be grossly rather misleading.
When referencing "The Constitution of Taiwan", one must realize that the name of the document should technically be "The Constitution of the Republic of China".
When that document insist that "Tibet is part of China", it meant "Tibet is part of the Republic of China."
Thus when saying the constitution of Taiwan says Tibet is part of China when the Chinese army are killing Tibetan nuns, the first reference to China and the second reference are pointing to different entities.
The referenced link makes it sound like Taiwan believe Tibet belongs to a murderous government, when in fact that very document (the "Constitution of Taiwan") deny the legatimacy of the Bejing government to whom the nun-raping Chinese Liberation Army belongs to.
Because the "Constitution of Taiwan" still think R.O.C. is the rightful ruler of mainland China, any reference in it that talks about "mainland China" also means the R.O.C. government, which in fact no longer rules the mainland.
The misleading nature of your reference makes me doubt the validity of the other information on that page (even if the numbers or the quote are true, the context might have given completely different meaning).
Remember, when the "Taiwanese" government say that anything is "Chinese" or "belongs to China", they mean their little government located in Taipei that only has effect soverignity over a few island. More often than not, it is more accurate to replace what they are saying to "Taiwanese" or "belongs to Taiwan", where Taiwan technically means the Republic of China.
Numerous American groups were and are engaged in a boycott of Chinese products and have demonstrated loudly and vociferously against the occupation of Tibet.
Numerous Taiwanese groups have done the same thing too.
If the actions of many captalist corporations of a certain nationality/ethinicity is sufficient to charactize a people, as you have done using Taiwanese companies to characterize the Taiwanese people, then I can also say the American are no better than mercenary pigs. Slashdotters should be all too famaliar with a few examples.
The majority of the Taiwanese population would be outraged to find any Taiwanese company profiting from China in the aftermath of Tiananmen Square. Realize, most Americans actually don't know how Starbucks exploit the environment and coffee workers, about the Nike sweat shopts, etc.
This response has the biase of an individual who identifies himself as being a "Republic of China" Chinese who was born and mostly raised in Taiwan. Individuals who identify with the R.O.C. are actually closer to being the minority in Taiwan, compared to the people who identify themselves as strictly "Taiwanese". The referenced link stated Eighty-five percent (85%) of the people of Taiwan are Chinese. Only fifteen percent (15%) are Taiwanese. without any reference, and probably uses some biological ancestry demographic data instead of using what the people actually identify themselves with.
Warning: Sig Fault. Dumping warp core.
You also couldn't talk about "freedom" and "democracy."
Oh wait, the joke doesn't work like that, does it?
"With rare exceptions people cannot use that picture to masturbate, therefore it is not the internet."
Keep in mind, when google pulls a stunt like this, its ok.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
So, did the people flaming microsoft today also note that Google the Wonderchild Company basically did the exact same thing a few months ago? Somehow, i don't think you'll see half the outrage over THAT incident, if only because this one involves "M$"
You need a FREE iPod Nano
All this pandering to the Beijing government for distribution rights, as low-down it may be because of the same's treatment of the people the company would like to distribute to, will only be a temporary measure. This period is "China's education" and it won't last long. Once it's over and the floodgates open, the Chinese economy will steamroll the world's.
Since it decided to open up, its people have been "getting used to" newer technologies - and how to make them for themselves. The textile industry is already ripe and just-opened - and not a month after Europe's quota on Chinese textile product imports was lifted, its market was flooded with a 200% increase of low-cost products, sparking a drop in the sales of more "local" companies. To compete, the local companies claim they have to relocate their factories to developing countries.
But here's the thing - even here the Europeans can't compete because China already has all the low-cost hands it needs, and to boot, it already has most of the machines and technology too. Its economy isn't one where everyone in a product's production chain, from raw material to store shelf, is aiming to make a 100% (or more) profit - which makes everything cheaper for them. What's more, since they're a bit 'behind' for the time being, they don't feel the 'need' to create new ideas when they can just dip into the existing market's and make them at a cheaper price. Bill Gates is only adding to this - just wait until the above hits the computer/software industry.
Unfortunately with the floodgates of trade already opening it will be soon too late to protest the Beijing Government's treatment of the Chinese people - the only to protest this is to refuse to have anything to do with its function, meaning cutting them off and not dealing with them - but already it's too late for that. The Bush administration is drooling at the aspect of billions of petrol-consuming new cars and they won't be turning back at any price. Not until the damage is (already) done, anyway. Beijing is full today of "western" businessmen wanting to sell planes, weapons and other technologies - but don't ask me what any of this has to do with "government" - the government's freinds won't want you to. But I digress.
The market eventually will "balance" itself, but before then, in the first decade (at least) after the Chinese floodgates open, we're gonna be in for a helluva ride.
No, no sig. Really.
ThePromenader
No, I don't think so. It does point out the fact that MS is lying when it says it must censor to remain within the law, because there is no such law. If it said "policy" rather than law, it would be more honest. If it listed the forbidden words in its TOS, it would be in the open. Contrast Google, which when faced with legal orders to remove links to contentious sites brings up documentation of why they are doing it, and a link to another site which does have the information linked. Though Google has I think chickened out on its Google.cn version from even trying.
China has many journalists in prison on unspecified charges for breaking such non-laws. (Anything the govt doesn't want you to write about can be declared a "state secret", and you become a spy &/or traitor.) Unfortunately the US has lost all its moral authority to argue against that, and China knows it can do so with little fear of embarrassment, let alone real pressure.