Slashdot Mirror


China Says Google Pledged To Obey Censorship Demands

bonhomme_de_neige writes "China renewed Google's internet license after it pledged to obey censorship laws and stop automatically switching mainland users to its unfiltered Hong Kong site, an official said. Google promised to 'obey Chinese law' and avoid linking to material deemed a threat to national security or social stability, said Zhang Feng, director of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology's Telecoms Development Department, at a news conference." Update: 07/21 21:56 GMT by S : Changed headline to reflect that this is mainly just China trying to paint a better picture of the outcome. In a comment on the linked article, a Google representative said, "This piece suggests that Google has 'bowed' to censorship. That is not correct. We have been very clear about our committment [sic] to not censor our products for users in China. The products we have kept on Google.cn (Music, Translate, Product Search) do not require any censorship by Google. Other products, like web search, we are offering from Google.com.hk, and without censorship." If you go to google.cn, you can see the prominent link to the Hong Kong version of the site.

33 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. Tiananmen Square by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The photo of the student confronting tanks isn't a national security risk.

    So they won't have to filter that.

    1. Re:Tiananmen Square by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What part of threat to "social stability" don't you understand.

      Apparently the part where the phrase is being used as a euphemism for oppression.

    2. Re:Tiananmen Square by thijsh · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, lot's of things are claimed in the interest of "national security"... it's the most abused term since you can't possibly be against security of your nation (and yourself). But no country is really free of this abuse...
      Example: the story of a mom (ironically named Freeman) who was arrested, convicted and lost her kids in the interest of national security. She surely must have been a terrorist... right???
      The only thing different about China is the blatant censorship, most western nations try to be more subtle with their censoring... but it still happens (and guess which two words are always the reason).

    3. Re:Tiananmen Square by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Funny

      The photo of the student confronting tanks isn't a national security risk.

      So they won't have to filter that.

      Are you mad? Then everyone will know their tanks aren't student-proof! It'll be the end of China!

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    4. Re:Tiananmen Square by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A flight attendant confronted Freeman [about her fighting children], who then responded by hurling a few profanities and throwing what remained of a can of tomato juice on the floor. The incident aboard the Frontier flight ultimately led to Freeman's arrest and conviction [three months jailtime] for a federal felony defined as an act of terrorism under the Patriot Act, the controversial federal law enacted after the 2001 attacks in New York and Washington.

      That's reminiscent of what happened to Professor Gates. He gets angry about being mistreated, and suddenly he finds himself in jail.

      Apparently we no longer have free speech in the United Soviets of America. An airline should have power to remove unruly passengers, but never to arrest them.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    5. Re:Tiananmen Square by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>>Should a government have the right to censor based upon the expected reactions from the public?

      Never. The ultimate authority if the People, which is above all governments. When government seeks to censor photos or news articles, it flips that arrangement and becomes the Master while the people are demoted to children to be "cared for" and "protected." That's a reversion to pre-Enlightenment Middle Ages thinking.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:Tiananmen Square by Dhalka226 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it's the most abused term since you can't possibly be against security of your nation (and yourself). But no country is really free of this abuse...

      Huh? Of course you can.

      For starters, "your nation" is an ambiguous term. If I'm a terrorist from Belgium* living as a permanent resident or even citizen of the US, what is "[my] country?" What if I am living there with the express intent of harming the country, much as the 9/11 terrorists were?

      Even if I'm purely from the US, born and raised, that's not to say that I can't be against it. I'm pretty tired of a lot of the crap that goes on here, for example. Personally it would make me much more likely to move elsewhere than seek to destroy it or kill people, but that doesn't mean I couldn't be somebody who takes that tact.

      Maybe I'm against a standing army so I want to kill all the soldiers I see, even though I love my country itself. Maybe I even think I'm doing what's best for it. Few people would argue that committing murder as a demand for the dismantling of our military doesn't run contrary to national security.

      The US political system has gotten old, but if I go around advocating killing all of our politicians they're going to charge me as a terrorist acting against national security -- and I would deserve it.

      All of these are just examples of the multitude of hard-to-argue-against ways I can be "against security of [my] nation (and [myself])." There are plenty more, in addition to all sorts of rather insane possibilities and ones that are much more debatable. I could make a good case, I think, for the Tienanmen Square photos being against national security, for example. It could cause severe unrest, it could cause violence, it could cause the (attempted) overthrow of the government. As a US citizen who does not support what they did, does not support their covering up what they did and does not support that sort of censorship in general that would be a great thing, but I am also compelled to admit that from the perspective of the Chinese government, rebellion goes against national security.

      The term is absolutely abused, and with 9/11 in our rear-view mirrors it may just be the most overused excuse today -- but that doesn't mean it is never valid explanation. It may or may not also be a valid reason for whatever happened.

      * Yeah yeah. I'm intentionally not picking some Middle Eastern country.

  2. Not true by Lomegor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although China did say that Google is censoring its web search, it's just not true. If you go to google.cn you can see that there is an image which takes you to Google Hong Kong. Even if you RTFA all through the comments you can see the answer from a Google PR person answering to his issue saying that they are NOT censoring web search, and that the only products which remain in China are those that can exist without censorship. This is just the Chinese government trying to make it appear as if they won. That is NOT true. Again, you can't search on google.cn and google.com.hk is not censored

    1. Re:Not true by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess it just shows how effective the Chinese government propaganda machine is. Hopefully the Chinese themselves aren't as stupid as all the /.ers who are buying it.

      The only thing that has ended is automatic redirects, but that doesn't do anything for the Google haters, so they will say that Google has completely caved without bothering to find out what's really going on. Here's a hint haters: Xinhua is the LAST PLACE you ever want to look to find out what's really going on.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    2. Re:Not true by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Funny

      China renewed Google's internet license after it pledged to obey censorship laws and stop automatically switching mainland users to its unfiltered Hong Kong site,

      it's just not true. If you go to google.cn you can see that there is an image which [if clicked] takes you to Google Hong Kong.

      Fixed your post for you. Now, what part of "automatically" is confusing you? Do you need me to break out the <blink> tag? I'll do it. I'll do it, man. I'm a troll on the edge.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Not true by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

      r maybe he did read the story and is basing it on that and the summary is wrong?

      I mean, really,you are admitting you are ignorant of the article and still correcting someone else bevasue you think they are ignorant.

      Do you see the flaw there?

      I haven't read it either, but I'm not correcting people. I have seen far to many summaries and headline be completely wrong. Sometime they have been so fictitious you can't even call them wrong.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. Oh my! by SimonInOz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's hope China does no evil.

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"
  4. RTFA and it's comments by Nzimmer911 · · Score: 5, Informative

    They didn't bow at all. In Google's own words in the article's comment section: This piece suggests that Google has "bowed" to censorship. That is not correct. We have been very clear about our committment to not censor our products for users in China. The products we have kept on Google.cn (Music, Translate, Product Search) do not require any censorship by Google. Other products, like web search, we are offering from Google.com.hk, and without censorship Lucinda Barlow, Head of Public Affairs, Google AU/NZ - July 21, 2010, 2:43PM

    1. Re:RTFA and it's comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Major news outlets have some pretty specific standards, unlike ./ which will basically post any BS summary even if it has sh*t to do with The Fine Article. Major news outlets (AP) report only information that is passed to them through specific channels which are vetted and carefully positioned to avoid public censure. Although this results in a lot of mind-control and bias, and the news is by no means 'true', it is much, much more reliable as a 'one stop' news source than Slashdot (let's face it, people don't RTFA and just start spouting off at the mouth based on the headlines, in the same exact way that people do when they read a headline from a major news source). So, that's why NBC won't report on Google 'bowing to censorship demands' because that's a misleading headline. TFA doesn't indicate that unequivocally (in fact in the specifics it seems Google has done a pretty good job of keeping their integrity here), and NBC only reports misleading headlines and false news stories if directed to do so by a global security authority.

      Having said that, all news has its place and its best to form an opinion based on a range of sources, and in my opinion Slashdot's strength is not in the accuracy of the reporting or headlines, but in the fact that it brings relevant links and information to a discerning reader who can then draw his own conclusions. As someone once said of the internet, it makes smart people smarter, and dumb people dumber.

  5. That's what China says by mmmmbeer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally, I don't trust one word of what comes from China's propagandists. Does anyone know of any press release from Google about this?

  6. Re:do evil by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So much for do no evil.

    To be fair, when I search for the (WARNING, graphic images) taboo words on the HK site they take me to from Google.cn, I find the "social stability" threatening images linked to by Google.

    If bowing to China is making the user take a single additional click from the google.cn landing page and bringing them right to unfiltered internet searches, that's some pretty lame bowing. I guess if both parties are happy and the Chinese people can very easily get to unfiltered search then I'm happy. Or does Google's Hong Kong search work differently inside China? If it works the same way as I see, I don't know how you could consider that evil. I perceive that Google has succeeded in granting the people of greater China with unfiltered search if they can tolerate an additional mouse click. This is assuming the Great Firewall of China or some government monitoring agency isn't watching these Google.cn -> Google.hk transactions.

    How is attempting to bring unfiltered search to the people of China evil?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  7. Not quite the case: Google HK still uncensored by michuk · · Score: 5, Informative

    As The Wired already explained a couple of days ago ( http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/google-china-fiction/ ) what Google and Chinese government agreed on is pure fiction. Google doesn't redirect Chinese users to the Honk Kong search engine automatically, but there is a button to easily switch and google.hk is left uncensored in China, meaning that the Chinese can still search Google without filtering. The article linked by Slashdot as the source presents the Chinese official version of the story which obviously hides the above fact.

    --
    Polish your GNU/Linux! http://polishlinux.org
    1. Re:Not quite the case: Google HK still uncensored by icebraining · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's not the point - the point is the censoring is done by China, not Google.

      Besides, yes, it's *much* better to have a blocked page than for the results to have simply disappear: at least people *know* they are being censored.

  8. Re:do evil by bhagwad · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do you even know what's happened? Just visit the google.cn page will ya? The whole thing's a bit button that takes you to an uncensored site.
    Bowing to censorship my ass! If that's bowing to censorship, then more of us need to do the same!

  9. Hmmm let's see... by boneclinkz · · Score: 2, Funny

    O-p-p-r-e-s-s-i-v-e G-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-n-t

    [Google Search]

    "Your search - Oppressive Government - did not match any documents."

    "Did you mean Outstanding Government?"

  10. Reverse Filter for the rest of the world please by RichMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So if google is filtering "material deemed a threat to national security or social stability" from within China. Can we on the outside set it up so we can only browse the material that would be filtered within China. I think it would be educational to browse a volume of material that was "deemed a threat to national security or social stability" of China, it might also be a source of much amusement.

  11. Re:do evil by Anonymusing · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just visit the google.cn page will ya? The whole thing's a bit button that takes you to an uncensored site.

    Seriously. It's not even hidden: it says "google.com.hk" in enormous letters right on it. The only other links go to the music, translation, and product links.

    But, this is Slashdot, where it is rare to RTFA or, heaven forbid, try to experience the thing.

    Aside: it's kind of funny to read the various headlines about this. Some say that China "approved" the Google request; others say China "compromised"; others say the two "make nice" with each other; others call it a "miracle"; still others say Google blew it. A crazy range of opinion there.

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  12. Re:Publicity stunt? by Anonymusing · · Score: 2, Informative
    So in essence all that posturing about defending human rights, freedom of expression and standing against censorship was a marketing ploy to try to mask their acceptance and embracing of totalitarian practices, all in order to worship the all mighty dollar (or euro, yen, or any other currency).

    Read the article. Then actually visit google.cn. Google managed to find a loophole in it all: they still offer uncensored searching (via their site in Hong Kong) and there is no site search capability on their China-based site. It comes down to a remarkably silly technicality that, somehow, China decided to approve.

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  13. All hail Google! by __aailob1448 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just kidding. Google did the right thing. I wholeheartedly applaud the googlers for their courage and deftness in turning the google hacking crisis into an opportunity.

      Bravo to you sirs! Bravo indeed!

    Clap Clap Clap

  14. Article title = fail by kikito · · Score: 2, Funny

    Come on guys. At least read the whole thing, and not just the title, before publishing. And I mean the comments too.

  15. Re:Easier to just say... by molnarcs · · Score: 2, Informative
    Well, we'll only see some negative PR on slashdot because people don't usually read the linked articles. This is old news, it was up on BBC Online over a week ago. The only difference is that instead of the neutral "China Renews Google's License" they went for the more sensationalist "Google Bows to China" headline. Which is, by the way, not only sensationalist, but misleading as well. In other words, they still don't censor content for Chinese users, the only concession Google made was to redirect users to a "landing" site instead of redirecting them automatically to google.hk.

    In other words, this is a dupe.

  16. Re:do evil by molnarcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree completely. This is a clever albeit transparent trick on the part of Google to let Chinese save face. Make no mistake, China didn't want Google to leave completely, that would've been an international PR disaster (apart from the job loss and other collateral damages). Naturally, Google didn't want to go either, loosing all the business opportunities in China. Most importantly, those services that they don't have to filter anyway, like music, product search, etc. So Google pretended to do something and yield to the Chinese government's demands, and China gladly accepted this opportunity to get out of this impasse (their license to operate in China covers everything, not only search). There's a reason I use pretended - I mean what Google did is very very close to nothing, just check out http://www.google.cn/ - and click anywhere on the screen. This "concession" is a joke, and it was a dangerous gamble on Google's part, since depending on how you look at it, this can be seen as China loosing face (actually bowing to Google's demands) instead the other way around. It also shows the kind of bargaining power Google has. For what exactly did China gain? Well, see for yourself, just goo ahead and visit google.cn and search for something :))

  17. Re:Didn't they do this once already? by SensiMillia · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, from Beijing:

    surfing to http://google.cn/ will show you something that looks like google's homepage, only, it's just an image of the homepage. Clicking on it will lead you to google.com.hk. (the version in simplified Chinese characters)
    What changed a couple of weeks back is that they do not redirect you automatically, you just end up on this landing page.

    Interesting to note: passing a query directly to google.cn (from the search box in firefox), will just execute the query on google.com.hk

  18. Re:Didn't they do this once already? by icebraining · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google.cn is *not* censored! It's just a link to the uncensored HK version!

    http://www.google.cn/

    The only thing they "caved in" is they changed an automatic redirect to a full page link! How is that evil in any way? "Oh no, people must click once to be redirected! The horror, the horror!"

  19. Re:Wow, big surprise by icebraining · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are NOT censoring. *All* the search are still done in the UNCENSORED HK version. All they did was turn a automatic redirect into a full page link, effectively a loophole to comply with the letter of the law but not with the intent of the Chinese government.

  20. Re:do evil by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It also shows the kind of bargaining power Google has.

    I have to agree. China has huge numbers of people and manufacturing might. Google can process and utilize amounts of data that are unfathomable to a typical person. China is a couple decades late to the power struggle. It's all about data now.

  21. Re:do evil by poity · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm reading Slashdot from China at the moment.
    That link causes an immediate connection reset from the ISP (Chrome: Error 101 (net::ERR_CONNECTION_RESET): Unknown error.)
    This happens every time something forbidden is accessed, and the entire domain will be inaccessible from this IP address for about 10 minutes

    Google may not be censoring itself but when the censorship happens at the ISP level there's nothing they can do.

    --
    your thin skin doesn't make me a troll