Slashdot Mirror
Google's New Approach For China Is To Serve From Hong Kong
abs0lutz3ro writes with a major update to the Google/China situation we've been discussing so much lately:
"Google has stopped censoring simplified Chinese search results on google.cn by redirecting users to google.com.hk, which Google maintains is entirely legal. From the official blog: 'We want as many people in the world as possible to have access to our services, including users in mainland China, yet the Chinese government has been crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement. We believe this new approach of providing uncensored search in simplified Chinese from Google.com.hk is a sensible solution to the challenges we've faced—it's entirely legal and will meaningfully increase access to information for people in China. We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are well aware that it could at any time block access to our services. We will therefore be carefully monitoring access issues, and have created this new web page, which we will update regularly each day, so that everyone can see which Google services are available in China.' Seems like google.cn got served (from google.com.hk)."
Same country, different laws regarding censorship.
Anytime google says, "china", it's going to be front page news on slashdot.
Think of it like a game of chess, where you spend a long time making opening moves, a careful dance of threats and counter-threats. Then, one player sees an opportunity, and move after move occurs, piece after piece taken in rapid succession.
Personally I believe we're just watching a dance that has long ago been choreographed to its conclusion.
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
This whole censorship thing is mainly a marketing ploy. Google is making a gamble that this will help them gain market share in China.
Don't get me wrong I'm in favor of what Google is doing and I hope this leads to the end of censorship in China. But from a business persepctive, Google is threatening to pull out because it's not making much headway in gaining marketshare, while Baidu consistently have 60% marketshare. They are earning only about 1.5% of their profit from China. This recent strategy to threaten to drop censorship not only differentiate Google's search engine product from others in China, but also generates alot of news over there and over here. As much I would like to believe that a company is putting ethics above profit, the reality is giving uncensored search access to China is the last of Google's concerns (esp. since they still offer censored search to numerous other countries). But since Google's goals and my hopes coincide, go Google!
Last time I checked, Hong Kong was was transfered to full Chinese control about 13 years ago. So is this some sort of symbolic stunt done for some obscure reason, or is it actually supposed to accomplish something? Saying you're going to defy Chinese control by moving your HQ from Beijing to Hong Kong is like saying you're going to get out from under U.S. control by moving from New York to Chicago.
More like moving to Guam, Northern Marianas, or maybe, Puerto Rico or USVI given the 'non-State' status of those.
Just like chess, one player (China) will eventually decide it's had enough and just flip the board over, declaring victory.
Hong Kong is part of China, it has different regulations however as a result of being handed over by the UK. I believe the phrase is "one country, two systems". In all fairness its not a bad idea; if China were this flexible over Tibet they would be getting a lot of International Brownie points
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Because of Hong Kong's former status of a British colony, it has always enjoyed a separate set of rules, apart from "mainland" China. The censorship laws are generally less intrusive and citizens there have much more free reign over their affairs. My interpretation of this is that Google is REALLY pissing China off intentionally by doing this - exploiting the schism between Hong Kong and mainland China, forcing issues to the forefront which the Chinese like to ignore (like why does Hong Kong get less centralized control than other parts of China). This could be quite a large issue in China and Hong Kong should China decide to dictate terms to the more autonomous Hong Kong.
How is Google's "Don't Be Evil" mantra going to be viewed if they end up causing the censorship of all of Hong Kong's internet access? Ouch.
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
The real question is... did Google consult the local Hong Kong officials before doing this? If they planned it correctly, this could turn into a big, hot (interesting) mess. If they did this on a whim, one phone call to a "local official" will have them pull the plug on Google before anything comes of the situation.
If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
Google is not responsible for China's response.
If a robber points a gun at a child and tells you to hand over all your money, and you refuse, and the child gets shot, you are NOT responsible for the child's death. That would be ridiculous, and would essentially give criminals legal force. The robber alone is responsible.
Pragmatically, this might cause trouble for Hong Kong, but morally, Google's in the right here.
I bet not.
A small minority of people that want to find uncensored material (porn, politics, history, in that order) will use Google.
People who want to find the usual search engine stuff will use whatever is most popular and/or gives them the results they find most useful. Which may very well be Baidu, Yahoo, Bing or Google.
This type of logic is inane. If a spouse says "Don't make me hit you," and then proceeds to beat their spouse for not having dinner ready the person doing the beating is at fault. China is responsible for China's actions pure and simple. What Google has does in perfectly LEGAL within the current legal structure of China, if they don't like their own laws....
I love this play by Google, China is forced into one of two things: Either A, admit the people of Hong Kong are a significantly different culture than the rest of the country (in that they can handle uncensored access to information but the rest of China cannot). Or B, trying to enforce the mainland censorship laws on a large, prosperous group of Chinese people who are have been without this kind of interference from the mainland for a long, long time.
They'll be reluctant to do B because it's entirely possible that Hong Kong is politically powerful enough to actually do something to change the status quo. Of course, if they do A, then they are saying Hong Kong's success is partially explained by their more open culture, which they absolutely cannot have since it implies that the mainland culture is inferior. And they did it in such a way that they are obeying the letter of the law in China, telling the Chinese people the reason for the move, and just plain rubbing China's face in the duplicity of it all.
China has to be a lot more low-profile when they oppress the people of Hong Kong, so that the global community doesn't suddenly start to care again and call shenanigans.
Or do what, exactly? Implement an embargo? Impose sanctions? Go to war?
China is pretty embedded in the world at this point, unlike where it was a mere 13 years ago when they got Hong Kong back from the Brits. How much manufacturing and raw materials come out from China? How much foreign currency and debt do they control?
At least with questions about Taiwan there's a de facto stalemate. Google is putting its employees in China at risk (remember, they "treated" opium addiction with a bullet to the head) and forcing the issue. And, because of how powerful China is right now on the global stage, I can't see a bunch of UN and NATO finger wagging is going to swing their actions towards those of freedom and human rights.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Economic sanctions against China? Are we talking about the country called "Peoples republic of China"?
A country that export tons off stuff towards USA and Europe? The country that owns billions in US treasury bonds?
No, there will be no economic sanctions.
Chiang Kai-Shek's only virtue was that he wasn't Mao. Past that, neither he nor the Kuomintang were exemplars of good governance, which is why Mao was able to overrun China in the first place. The only reason the KMT (and, by association, Taiwan) hasn't revoked its claim to the mainland is because doing so would be interpreted by the PRC as a declaration of independence. Past that, the KMT is about as likely to retake the mainland as the Tories are to retake the US.
Unless the Chinese government declares them a terrorist organization for subverting the government.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
I suspect that the Chinese response will be to silently block all traffic to Google, and then stop mentioning Google anymore in the news. Completely drop the subject. Because they've been backed into a corner where they can't actually make themselves look good anymore, it will be best (from the government perspective) to drop the topic completely and move on to a different subject. Maybe there will be a lot of stories in the Chinese newspaper about how evil Taiwan is, just to get people distracted.
Qxe4
I would say yes, it is acceptable. Consider the full consequences, not just the immediate:
1) You don't give him the money. A child dies, but leaving behind a lot of evidence and likely causing the criminal to go to jail (or at least get really psychologically shaken up and maybe change his ways)
2) You do give him the money. No one dies, but the criminal gets a few hundred dollars and gets away. Encouraged by his success, he goes out and does it again, and so do his friends. Even more people will give the criminals money, and one or more children will die along the way.
It's like blackmail, going along only makes sense in the short term.
Another interpretation could be that this move to hong kong allows the Chinese government to save face. They've been very public about their issues with google's operation in mainland China, while google is far from the biggest player in the market.
The idea of the censorship is not just to totally block access to certain information. Reminding people where the line is drawn (no matter how vaguely) by public shows of power is just as important. Chinese censorship, afaik, is more concerned with the broadcasting side of communication than with the receiving end. It's hard to prevent people from looking for information (see ToR / proxies etc).
It's easier to go after the source ('dissidents') and scare people into not spreading information. Going after google in the state newspaper and on tv etc. is also a way of communicating to the chinese people that 'our rules are still in place'.
Moving to Hong Kong might allow google to continue their service to China, while at the same time the Chinese government can say that it 'won' the discussion and reach its goal of reminding it's public (the Chinese population) about its position on freedom of information / opinion.
If it works out that way it's a pretty smart business move from google, allowing for a way out of the zero-sum game they were in.
WTF? Um no. We do not all agree on that at all.
And the threat of not honoring those bonds?
Economic sanctions and reduce the national debt in one act.
No, what China will probably end up doing is blocking access to Google's Hong Kong site from mainland China. But blocking access to a site operated legally "within China" might be more controversial in China than making a foreign company leave if they refuse to play by the government's rules. It's a gambit: Google is forcing the Chinese government to decide exactly how stubborn they're willing to be.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
It's also a brilliant strategic move by Google. They are still planning to compete in the Chinese market, and their competitive advantage will be that their search results are uncensored.
That's a tricky argument. Suppose you found a child lying bleeding heavily on the sidewalk, possibly an accident, or not, who knows. The child says, "Please sir/madam, call 911." And you refuse. The child dies.
Legally, you might be in the clear, but morally it's probably the wrong thing to do.
In my opinion, there's a large grey area depending on the circumstances. If the robber demands your life savings and you refuse (because there's no guarantee it'll actually save the child's life), that would probably be somewhat understandable. On the other hand, if the robber was asking for $1 to buy a candy bar (criminals aren't always the most sane bunch), then not handing over the dollar (even though you still don't know if it'll protect the child) would make you look like a monster. You have to show at least a little bit of responsibility/respect for the well-being of other people.
Again, it all depends on the scope. It's hard to say where Google falls in this case, if they provoke the Chinese government into instituting more censorship in Hong Kong.