Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: more on Yahoo agrees to Chinese censorship
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 16:12:22 -0400
------ Forwarded Message From: "Dana Blankenhorn" <danablankenhorn () mindspring com> Reply-To: "Dana Blankenhorn" <danablankenhorn () mindspring com> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 15:04:58 -0400 To: <farber () cis upenn edu> Subject: Re: Yahoo agrees to Chinese censorship The article totally ignores the success of International Data Corp., acting as though Yahoo is operating in a vacuum. IDC is privately-held, it publishes computer magazines and engages in market research. IDC has been heavily involved in China for several years. IDC dominates the huge, growing market for Chinese computer magazines. China is a huge profit-center for IDC and (this is most important) IDC obeys the Chinese law. (Because it has done this, IDC is in the best position of any of its rivals to dominate the U.S. computer media once that industry makes a comeback.) Yahoo is not doing this blindly. Obedience to local law is the price of market entry. Market entry can be enormously profitable at a time when profits elsewhere are very hard to come by. Personally I disagree with Yahoo, and IDC. Personally I find China's ability to combine censorship, oppression and capitalism as frightening as Al Qaeda. But let's not be blind to realities here. And it seems that the Post's coverage is willfully blind to them. China means profits. Participating in the Chinese "opportunity" means colluding with the Tienanmien murderers. It's a price capitalism willingly plays. That's the reality. Dana Blankenhorn http://www.a-clue.com @Have Modem, Will Travel dana () a-clue com Ph: 404-373-7634 fax: 404-378-0794 -----Original Message----- From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> To: ip <ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com> Date: Monday, August 19, 2002 2:35 PM Subject: IP: Yahoo agrees to Chinese censorship
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34015-2002Aug18.html washingtonpost.com Yahoo's China Concession Monday, August 19, 2002; Page A12 TWO YEARS ago, when cyberprophets were riding high, a group of anti-Nazi activists in France had the temerity to sue Yahoo. The suit complained that French Web surfers could buy Nazi paraphernalia on Yahoo's Web site and
that
this violated the anti-Nazi laws that were supposed to bind French
citizens.
From its Silicon Valley headquarters, Yahoo let out a high-tech guffaw.
The
Internet is borderless; national regulation can't apply; if it did, Web companies would suddenly have to respect the law of every country whose citizens might browse their Web sites. "It is very difficult to do business if you have to wake up every day and say, okay, whose laws do I follow?" said Heather Killen, Yahoo's senior vice president of international operations. Things have changed out there in the valley. The aspiration to a borderless Internet has fizzled along with technology stock prices. Commercial Web sites are eagerly recreating real-space national boundaries in cyberspace, so that they run Japanese ads for people who log on in Japan and German
ones
for Germans. National regulators are tightening control, asserting their right to tax e-commerce sites in their countries and the right to "wiretap" e-mail with suspected criminal connections. For the most part, this is
good:
There's no reason why societies that choose to ban child pornography in
real
space should decide that the same material in cyberspace is fine, or why bricks-and-mortar stores should pay sales taxes while clicks-and-mortar stores escape them. But this principle can sometimes go too far. It's
ironic
that the latest company to cross the line is none other than Yahoo. Yahoo has recently signed a voluntary pledge to purge its Chinese Web site of material that China's communist dictatorship might deem subversive.
Yahoo
promises to avoid "producing, posting or disseminating pernicious information that may jeopardize state security and disrupt social stability." It pledges to monitor information posted by users on its site and to "remove the harmful information promptly." It even undertakes to avoid offering links to sites whose content might not be "healthy." In sum, Yahoo is promising to become part of the regime's strategy: Allow the Internet to spread so that China reaps its commercial potential, but
prevent
it from nurturing free expression. Yahoo says that it is obliged to follow local law and that the voluntary pledge does not add much to what Chinese law requires anyway. It points out that the French suit targeted Yahoo's American Web site, which is different from China's policy of squeezing Chinese-based Internet operations. But
both
cases involve countries trying to enforce domestic law, and it's strange that Yahoo cooperates more eagerly with China's dictators than it does with a European democracy. If the firm actually does the things the pledge implies, it may become complicit in the oppression of Chinese whose crime
is
to have a political idea or to espouse an unpopular religion. Internet cafes in China already are required to report clients' visits to subversive sites, and Chinese who have copied material from these sites
have
been hit with long prison sentences. Does Yahoo, a firm whose cheeky name evokes the wacky freedom of the Internet, really want to be a part of this? For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
------ End of Forwarded Message For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- IP: more on Yahoo agrees to Chinese censorship Dave Farber (Aug 19)