Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Defends Itself On China Allegations
Vitaly Friedman writes "Yahoo defends its policies in China as doing more good than harm, even as multiple dissidents have been jailed based on Yahoo Mail evidence. From the article: 'Yahoo continues to defend itself against charges that its Chinese operations have been responsible for the jailing of multiple dissidents. Multiple reports have surfaced which tie Yahoo Mail to various Chinese court cases that have ended in imprisonment for writers with politically unpopular opinions.'"
"Yahoo defends its policies in China as doing more good than harm, even as multiple dissidents have been jailed based on Yahoo Mail evidence."
Only a Yahoo would believe such a claim. In related news, has anyone read Gulliver's Travels? I take it the people who chose the name for the company didn't.
Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
IBM wil defend their actions in WWII.
MS will then defend their actions in China, Iran, North Korea, etc.
...remind me of a certain brave man confronted with similar unfounded accusations:
MINSTREL: [singing] Brave Sir Robin ran away,
ROBIN: No!
MINSTREL: Bravely ran away, away.
ROBIN: I didn't!
MINSTREL: When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled.
ROBIN: No!
MINSTREL: Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
ROBIN: I didn't!
MINSTREL: And gallantly, he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet,
ROBIN: I never did!
MINSTREL: He beat a very brave retreat,
ROBIN: All lies!
MINSTREL: Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin.
ROBIN: I never!
In other news, in Jailand, a nation with a rate of imprisonment of people who later turned out to be innocent which recently topped 45%, a police spokesman commented that as the rate was below 50%, the police force was still doing more harm than good.
Q: Doesn't 'Yahoo' mean Chinese Whore?
A: It does now!
If it wasn't Yahoo!, then who?
Oh You POS
I say let China do what China is going to do and lets concentrate on making things better in America first - then we can work on improving China's (online) rights.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Greed is Good(TM)
Jeez - why do people expect these for-profit companies to be driven by the same idealistic, personal visions they have for the internet?
The internet is a technology - it's goal is not to undermine communism or authoritarian governments or to impose US ideals/values upon other countries. So why are so many people 'shocked' that companies like Yahoo! actually abide by the laws in the countries they do business in?
Look at wikipedia - just how successful do you think they'll be in China now that they're officially blocked??? Exact same thing would happen to Yahoo!
the facts speak for themseleves, they can justify the end result a million ways but at the end of the day the facts still remain
So clearly, Yahoo is also powerless to change there own business practices.
I mean, that totally makes sense, right?
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
This article is just fanning the flames trying to get into the tired arguement of evil China versus the wonderful and free internet. Been there, done that...
Give it a rest dudes. Please.
:wq
We are all just people.
This is just a reflection of the current US mindset. Yahoo, while harming a couple individuals, is spreading the "freedom" out to many. This is just like our own government monitors watching their own people and their daily activities. It may cause harm to many innocents while taking down a terrorist or two.
Though the nation was founded by those who think this is WRONG to harm innocents in the process of justice, those in charge don't mind. (the sheep do not matter....)
Read your quote again. Yahoo is saying that they cannot change Chinese policy. It is ridiculous that we expect a company to force the Chinese government to change. This is the dominion of national governments and the UN, not private industry.
:wq
One Yahoo guy says whatg Yahoo always says about this, then Ars Technica asks its readers to discuss. This is news?
sulli
RTFJ.
Yahoo and Google are totally lame for selling out. They should be boycotted.
"I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
Guess which country is a solid #1 for prisoners per capita?
a p
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_pri_per_c
you can't defend the indefensible
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
What the NSA is doing in this country and what the Chinese are doing are only a few steps removed from being the same thing.
Ahhh, the old "greater good" fallacy. What a load. The only "good" coming out of this is Yahoo's bottom line. Which is far more valuable than the lives of a couple of lousy dissidents, evidently. Well, if they're doing this in China, I wonder what they're doing to the Americans. Oh, yeah. Pretty much the same thing. With even less evidence of any crime. We should start seeing some arrests in the near future, but "national security" interests will prevent us from ever finding out.
What?
Every time I hear "Change the system from within," I think of tapeworms. How about you?
Faith: n. -- That human impulse that drives them to steal appliances when the power goes out
The article's opening argument is specious. The choice is between Yahoo! or any other email provider, both of whom must follow the same local laws. So it is absolutely irrelevant whether it is Yahoo! or somebody else. The dissidents would have been jailed either way. Plus, it ignores the fact that Yahoo! is more than just email.
About the best you can say is, "Shame on you, Yahoo!, for letting it be you." But, if you're going to do that, you better shame all of us for buying Chinese products. We're just as complicit.
I agree with Yahoo!, Google, and the rest on this one. As long as the United States has a policy of trying to liberate China through the open market, Yahoo!, Google, and the rest are just doing their part. What's more, they're bringing in a greater amount of information into China, faster, in a way that's very easy to access. Sure, much of it will be censored, but the more information, the faster it comes in, and the easier it is to access, the more difficult censorship and control becomes. China's ability to censor is neither perfect nor infinite and the more often it is hit, the more often it will fail.
Why do Google and Yahoo provide this information anyhow? Because if they don't, they fear getting blocked from China allowing its public to access their sites. If they both provide this information, then neither side loses traffic. Which both are pretty much neck and neck Google vs. Yahoo except for the glitch in that one spot, they are in fact closer than ever. If one does not give in to China's request and ther other does, bye bye traffic from China.
-- Brought to you by Carl's JR
The point is they didn't have to.
In the cases sited, Yahoo gave the Government information without due legal process. Yes, even in Hong Kong there is a separation of Judiciary and Legislature.
The point is that Yahoo did not do this because it had to, other HK and Western companies reguarly follow proper due process.
Yahoo clearly did this to suck up to a government which will be handing out contracts and concessions - essentially it grassed its customers for cash. They should be f*****g shot b***stards. Collaborators - Scum. Judases.
It's a strange coicidence that the author of this post's last name is Friedman... When it comes to social and moral responsibilities of business, I tend to agree with Milton Friedman:
s /issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html
http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarian
It sounds to me like people here are claiming that Google and Yahoo have more of a responsibility to put pressure on foreign governments than to their stockholders. On the contrary, it would be extremely irresponsible to of them to risk loosing the business of China.
Matt Huwiler
Adobe type libraries!
You just invoked Godwin's Law... discussion is over ;)
Once again, you can gratouitously shit on China because it is a repressive authoritarian regime, and say stupid things like "no information is better than censored information," or "foreign companies have a duty to flout the law in authoritarian countries," or any of the other drivel so often posted under this topic.
Things are not as they appear at first glance; if you live in a glass house, don't cast stones.
-----
"Don't make me come down there!" ----- God.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Yahoo can go to hell for all I care. The only good thing about yahoo is that there are alternatives to yahoo that don't have a record of imprisioning people yet. I have never been one for boycotts, but this is a classic exception. We should boycott because this is way beyond contracting to sweat shops, and there are so many easy and good alternatives. I wonder if yahoo would be so causal about it if people defended the victims by firebonbing yahoo headquarters. Maybe there's a legal difference, but I doubt anyone except yahoo would see a moral difference.
What will Yahoo do when in sometime the US government asks them to give them access to people's e-mails for "national security" reasons? If their China policy shows, they will gladly hand over all the information (just like the bloody telecoms) to operate under the nation's "laws." They don't have -- and I doubt ever will have -- any corporate responsibility or regard for their users.
I say switch to Google, they are only slightly better.
In an opinion piece on 19 Feb 2006, Kristoff of the New York Times all but called for a boycott on Yahoo. He thought that Google got a bum rap, Cisco and Microsoft were sleazy (but nothing like Yahoo), and that Yahoo was a national disgrace.
6 0815F63B5A0C7A8DDDAB0894DE404482&n=Top%2FOpinion%2 FEditorials%20and%20Op-Ed%2FOp-Ed%2FColumnists%2FN icholas%20D%20Kristof
Kristoff: "...nobody should touch Yahoo until it provides financially for the families of the three men it helped lock up and establishes annual fellowships in their names to bring Web journalists to America on study programs."
I think Kristoff's suggestion sounds doable.
Pay only link: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F
The website that coordinates the Yahoo boycott follows:
http://www.booyahoo.com/
Booyahoo has a link which details some of the alternatives to Yahoo services (hotmail, etc.) Some Slashdot users may want to help flesh it out.
Wikipedia lists some of the Yahoo owned sites and services (to avoid?):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo!
Digg mentions a video interview with Yahoo!'s CEO, Terry Semel. One of the topics was mentioned on these China allegations.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Glass houses? Oh, I see where you're going with this: Don't count your chickens before they hatch. If life deals you lemons, make lemonade. Cut off your nose to spite your face. Haste makes waste. Birds of a feather flock together. He who laughs last, laughs loudest. Revenge is a dish best served cold. Beggars can't be choosers. Rome wasn't built in a day. It takes a thief to catch a thief. One swallow doesn't make a summer. Too many cooks spoil the broth. History repeats itself. If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well. Abetting China's repression brings bad PR. ...of course, you may prefer this list:
-) Love the motherland, do not harm it
-) Serve, don't disserve the people
-) Uphold science, don't be ignorant and unenlightened
-) Work hard, don't be lazy
-) Be united and help each other, don't benefit at the expense of others
-) Be honest, not profit-mongering
-) Be disciplined and law-abiding, not chaotic and lawless
-) Know plain living and hard struggle, do not wallow in luxuries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Do's_and_Don'ts
Yahoo made money. To them, that's all that matters. The taxes on their profits help fund your schools, your hospitals, your roads, your military.
The profit chain doesn't just stop with Yahoo. Ultimately, the suppression of the Chinese people benefits Americans, and most other western countries. Not just through Yahoo, but through the collusion of countless other multinational companies with the Chinese oligarchs.
Our societies profit from the oppression of other nations. They did it during the colonial era, and they are doing it right now. The method has changed, some might say it's less severe now, but the result is the same.
People lose their freedom, so we live in opulence. And for most people in the west, it's a price they are more than happy to accept. Compassion is a rare commodity in the face of profit.
May the Maths Be with you!
In the Shi Tao case, it was the Hong Kong division of Yahoo that provided the incriminating information.
This wasn't a case of complying with Chinese law, but of Yahoo trying to get onto the side of the Chinese government.
If we disagree we have two choices. We can not operate in that jurisdiction, or we can try to change the laws. The problem with the later is that there is often the danger that we are asking laws to be changed to increase our personal profit, not to help the larger community. Althogh there is nothing wrong with this, The US was founded on such self serving principles, it hardly is ethical to expect a ticker tape parade.
The problems with firms ignoring reasonable laws of the land, no matter how unfair, is clear. In the US many feel the immigration laws are unfair, yet when firms ignore those laws and bring in undocumented workers, costs are incurred on the larger society that would otherwise often be imposed on the firms. Likewise, when firms refuse to pay taxes, the penalty is put on future generations that must pay off the debt.
Now, I, like most in the US, know very little about China. I know we forced our way in with a gunboat. I know we are all keen on selling the masses our stuff. And I know we desperately need thier money to finance a housing boom and a war in Iraq. But I don't know how Yahoo ignoring the Unjust laws will make anything any better. If the bus companies had ignored the segration laws, would MLK ever have marched on Selma? Maybe not. The best thing to do is to work with the laws and let the negative consequences appear. The laws will adjust. THe only problem is that every few generation everyone forgets about past experiene, and in a fit of greed tries to bring back the broken laws in hopes of getting rich quick, which some do, but at a great expense to society.
So, If we are going to operate in China we must do so with our laws, just like we expect those to operate in the US according to our laws. And before anyone gets on the high horse, just check how many objects you own that are from china, and think about how much oppression you are funding. Or how much you bought from Wal*Mart, and think about the number of illigal immigrants that were smuggled in to clean up that store. We are all culpible, and crying that someone else is not all high and mighty is simply counterproductive.
I am not saying we should not fight unjust laws. I am simply saying we should be realistic. And if we do want to fight the unjust laws, we do it outselves, and not complain that someons else is not.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
In a 2006 report titled "Still no reaction from Yahoo! after fourth case of collaboration with chinese police uncovered", Reporters without Borders pleaded, "Reporters Without Borders called on Yahoo! to withdraw its Internet servers from China as a fourth case was revealed of the company's collaboration with Chinese police that led to the jailing of a cyberdissident."
Keeping the servers in the United States of America (USA) would ensure that any Chinese policeman (a.k.a. thug) seeking e-information must first submit his request through American diplomatic channels. Of course, once the Chinese thug's request reaches the Americans, the Americans will just flush the request down the toilet.
Note that although both Google and Microsoft have censored their search engines in China, both Google and Microsoft continue to keep their servers in the United States of America. Yet, Yahoo continues to keep their servers (serving the Chinese market) in China. Yahoo has thus far refused to move its servers to the USA.
Yahoo should just shut down their Chinese operations. Their behavior there is simply outrageous. There are greater goods in life than maximizing profits. Another comment here gets it right. To those who say companies are simply following local laws, where do you draw the line in dealing with totalitarian regimes? Is it OK to sell them instruments of torture? Certainly facilitating the jailing of democratic activists crosses the line.
If Yahoo has to choose between 1. not having physical operations in China, and 2. helping the Chinese state jail dissidents, 1 is the only moral choice. 2, as they have and continue to do, is despicable. Furthermore, there's no real proof that they had to help the Chinese government nab those people; it seems they did it more to curry favour than anything.
Yahoo is not just a faceless corporation who must do the bidding of governments whenever told. It's made up of actual people who have to decide whether they'll take actions that destroy the lives of others or not. Yahoo's management has shown a willingness -- even eagerness -- to do the wrong thing over and over again.
One day, you might find yourself saying some things that make *you* unpopular with one or more governments. You should be careful you don't make those comments with a Yahoo mail or IM account.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Some respondents have suggested that many countries are hiding a certain amount of prisoners; while I'm sure that's true, the US is still astonishingly ahead of the pack; and they're hiding their share of prisoners as well, particularly in off-shore gulags like Guantanamo.
A telling statistic is the US's portion of citizens who have been victims of a crime: 21%, which while high, only puts them at 15th of 21 reporting countries. That means they have a middle-of-the-pack crime rate but the world's highest jail rate. That suggests many or most US prisoners aren't captive for crimes against people, but for offending the wishes of the state: using unapproved drugs (560 offences per 100,000), breaking obscure statutes and regulations, not assisting police when they try to hang charges on you (e.g. Martha Stewart), avoiding taxes, owning a weapon, being a suspected terrorist, etc. In other words, political crimes. Just get rid of the stupid War on Drugs, and you cut your prison population in half.
He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
Two wrongs don't make it right.
Otherwise, we'd have to let every rapist, murderer and pedophile out of prison because other people have done that, too! Worse, we haven't even caught & punished all of them!
The only other choice is shutdown their operations in China, which would be a non-event given that yahoo isn't terribly popular in China. China's internet will operate fine without google/yahoo/msn, the Chinese government has successfully set up replacement websites such as baidu.com which is a clone of google
American has been the worldwide leader of incarceration for a good 20 years or so. Russia surged past us for a couple of years once, I think. But we've been the world leader in that category since the drug war began.
We are the least free nation in the world. Even the people out of prison are spied on. And good luck throwing a protest or a party. The cops WILL come.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
It took me all night to get it configured properly, but I have now begun using fetchyahoo to bring all of my yahoo mail messages over to gmail. Yeah, the google guys might censor searches, but I don't think they've contributed to the persecution of Chineese commentators, yet.
Using the same rationalitions.
Tech Public Policy stuff