We're Staying In China, Says Microsoft

ericb tips an article at the Guardian which begins: "Hopes that Google's forthright stand on censorship in China would inspire other companies to follow suit appeared unfounded today, with the move instead threatening to widen the rift between some of the world's most powerful internet companies. Microsoft, which has considerable interests in the country, including its Bing search engine, responded directly to criticism by Google's co-founder Sergey Brin, who this week accused the company of speaking against human rights and free speech. Brin, who pressed for the closing down of Google's self-censored Chinese search engine, said yesterday: 'I'm very disappointed for them in particular. I would hope that larger companies would not put profit ahead of all else. Generally, companies should pay attention to how and where their products are used.' Microsoft rejected Brin's critique, saying it would continue to obey local laws on censorship in China."

Comments

How good of them.

[pushing-robot]

It's always nice to see companies following local laws.

Re:How good of them.

[MoellerPlesset2]

It's always nice to see companies following local laws.

Examples of immoral behavior aside, yes it is.
If a country has say, a ban on advertising cigarettes to children, then that's a perfectly sane thing to comply with.
If a country doesn't have the draconian copyright laws the US has, refusing to enforce them there is perfectly sane as well.

OTOH, assisting in silencing political speech is hardly moral. If only there was some universal minimum standard for what's okay and what's not...

Oh right.. there is: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (Which didn't exist in the 1930's, although I don't feel that excuses IBM - considering the Allies penalized the German corporations who assisted the Holocaust)
And from that declaration, it's entirely clear-cut the first two examples are fine, and the third isn't okay. While we all know that China doesn't give a damn about the UDHR, it doesn't change the fact that they've ratified it (and in fact, Nationalist China was involved in drafting it). They can't legitimately complain about 'cultural bias' or respecting their system or whatever.

It's a matter of holding them to their own words. And holding our corporations responsible to follow at least those basic rights.

Re:How good of them.

[drinkypoo]

IBM does have a long history of being the meanest nastiest competitor on the planet but I really think trying to blame them for the Holocaust is pretty unfounded.

The service contract for the concentration camp management systems was written and served out of, and paid to, IBM in Armonk, NY. Nobody is blaming them for the holocaust; the whole thing was reported to the US government pretty early on, and those in power pretended nothing was happening, then acted surprised later.

Vote with your dollars

[PNutts]

The majority of posts here (and the article) accuse Microsoft of putting "profit over all else". However, when you do so you should also participate or risk becoming a Limousine Liberal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limousine_liberal. The easiest thing to do is stop buying items "Made in China". The harder part is to research each product you buy to determine how much Chinese labor /goods / profits are in that item. Some tech items are straightforward (Lenovo laptops and Cisco providing equipment to the Great Firewall), but according to CNN it isn't easy for consumers http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/wayoflife/07/26/china.products/index.html (50% of apple juice for example).

When you take a stand against Microsoft for their business practices in regard to Chinese rights then you should apply that standard across the board and avoid the businesses and products that conflict with your beliefs. /soapbox

Re:Is Brin serious?

[khchung]

I find this absolutely hilarious coming from Brin, pretending Google is some sort of moral authority now that they've pulled out of China due to the recent incident, having sold out to the Chinese government for many years previously providing services customized according to the state to oppress its citizens and restrict their access to news and information!

No need to take him seriously, he is just doing what any manager would do -- capitalize the most PR value out of his company's actions and taking credit for it.

Just look at any company that has done anything that got into the news, their managers will come out and saying anything to generate goodwill for that action, and also gain themselves credit in one swoop.