Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft has submitted to the wishes of Communist Party censors in China by pulling the plug on a politically controversial blog written from there, by a New York Times Beijing bureau research assistant. The blog had recently reported on several touchy subjects, including a protest against government censorship by reporters at a spunky Beijing tabloid newspaper. Continuing censorship of media and the Internet, the trampling of private property rights in the provinces, and the deployment of hired thugs against protestors by corrupt local officials are all part of the landscape in China, as of course is rapid economic liberalization.
The counter-arguement for tolerance of Internet censorship right now, is that over time the presence of the Internet in China will nonetheless serve as a politically liberalizing force. And it's true that dedicated geeks have found ways around The Great Firewall of China, such as secure shell and virtual private network connections to proxy servers outside China.
Like Microsoft, other technology companies have been caught up in related controversies in China, including Yahoo and, arguably Cisco. Twenty-five investment groups controlling $21 billion in assets announced in November they would monitor and publicize collusion between technology companies and government censors in China. Yes, the censored blogger merely needs another platform and some help from subversive techies to get back online. Although the company argues it is merely following Chinese law, and while China is a crucial and highly competitive market, I believe Microsoft does its reputation damage by aligning itself with the forces of darkness. Some things are more important than quarterly earnings.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at January 06, 2006 04:19 PM | Email ThisI think if Microsoft wasn't doing this, some freeware or shareware junkie would. That said, I sure hope the NSA, CIA, and the rest of the intelligence alphabet soup is getting a bonanza from American companies so interworked into Chinese information technology.
Posted by: A Watchdog on January 6, 2006 05:00 PMI believe that respecting the laws and culture of another country is well and proper. Particularly for the individual visiting another country. As much as would love to visit China, I will not as long as it is totalitarian.
China needs world trade more than world needs China. I think if push came to shove China would back down a bit.
I find it very interesting that a lot of the same voice that condemned S. Africa are silent on China, Cuba, Venezuela and other communist regimes (birds of a feather?). Those governments are not legitimate, they do not rule with the consent of the governed.
When it come to human liberty there is no question on the moral ground, Micro$oft, Yahoo and Google definitely have missed out on taking a stand for human rights, and have chosen to stand with a illegitimate regime.
Posted by: JCM on January 6, 2006 08:29 PMCompanies doing business overseas must conform to local laws. That being said.
I'm quite disturbed this was done for them rather than letting them do it themselves. I think the licensing folks need to do some work.
Posted by: MSRedneck on January 6, 2006 09:27 PMI think the guy from China that rear ended be was here for that meeting!
Damn I should have sued!
From China Middle East, with a New Zealand drivers license! Ok I’m suspicious now!
I am so happy I screamed in his face!
I will keep my stock though :)
Posted by: dcat on January 6, 2006 10:17 PMHow many of us would say Microsoft should be allowed to dispaly corporate ethics if it didn't want anti-Defense of Marriage Act blogs on its servers? A fair number, I am sure. And it would be perfectly within Microsoft's rights to do so - as it is in this case.
Remember, this blogger has other options. And if he/she doesn't, that's a whole other issue. Microsoft is simply selling a product in China and is obliged only to do so under the laws of that country.
Your comment that "some things are more important than the bottom line" seems eerily similar to complaints I hear from the left-wing about Wal-Mart's benefits practices or pay.
If you don't like what Microsoft does with its money, don't give it any more of yours. If you don't want to do that, you have no complaint. It's a private organization and I think we can all agree that as long as such an entity isn't breaking the law, we shouldn't be breaking its chops.
In freedom (even if freedom means being free to support communism [if you can call China communist]),
Posted by: BMack on January 7, 2006 12:04 AMSometimes you have to do stuff that is repugnant to your values. And I believe Gates and Co have some values, though the greemback motive is too powerful to them.
This foreign stuff gets complicated.
Posted by: swatter on January 7, 2006 06:50 AMIs there any place on this continuum where MS's actions can be seen as wrong? I don't care about the capitalism - this is bending over for the Chinese.
And how many MS employees will simply drink this KoolAid because "it's good for the company"?
Posted by: steve miller on January 7, 2006 08:38 AMLet's look at this objectively for a moment. If Microsoft wants to do business in China, they have to follow China's rules. It's not Microsoft's job to fix China's problems with respect to government and freedoms. We wouldn't expect Airbus or Hyundai to meddle in our political process or defy our laws, would we?
It's ultimately up to the people of China to fix their own system. Yes, they are fighting an uphill fight, but so did we 225 years ago.
If you think about what Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo are doing to help in the fight, consider this: What would China look like without the computers and internet, filtered as it is? They are providing tools that should help in whatever revolution is forming.
I believe that by getting Chinese hooked on wealth---wealth that is created by foreign companies working in China, setting up the infrastructure, educating Chinese employees about how companies really need to work, and wealth that is made by trading with Americans---once they are hooked on this wealth, they will be willing to fight the revolution needed to sustain it. All the money flowing into and around China carries with it a message: America has this, and if you want it, you have to become like America.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on January 7, 2006 01:34 PMOff topic, but Microsoft's, Google's, and Yahoo's business practices aside... we had more freedom, firearms, and physical distance between the government and us than the Chinese do. Plus, our colonial governments officially declared succession and had the logistical resources to carry through. Their regional governments are appointed by Beijing. Any revolution that happens in China is going to have a whole heck of a lot more difficult time than ours did.
Posted by: Mike H on January 7, 2006 01:57 PMMicrosoft is a corporation--they're not an anti-PRC revolutionary organization. We can hope they would be proud when the government in Beijing collapses and part of the toolset used by the rebellion has a Microsoft imprint on it, but until that happens and the rebellion can rewrite the laws we shouldn't expect Microsoft to do it anymore than we would want a non-elected entity to set laws for the US. This doesn't even get into the issue for the folks that run Microsoft if they were to allow idealism to interfere with their bottom line--those are the grounds for a shareholder lawsuit against Bill G. and company.
There are those, particularly on the left, who are afraid that national sovereignity will be destroyed by multinational corporations declaring themselves above local laws thanks to the magic of globalization. We should be thankful that corporations are proving them wrong so we're not stuck with the rest of their anti-capitalist baggage that their anti-multinational agenda carries.
Posted by: Marc on January 8, 2006 06:22 AMOf course, angry Americans are demanding hearings to stop this spying. But will the Republicans who control the White House and Congress stop their own spying? Of course not - just look at how the White House sabotaged John McCain's effort to stop torture, even after 90 Senators voted for it.
Posted by: Evita Peron on January 8, 2006 04:33 PM1 - Someone is going to provide the service, might as well be Americans that get the business (greedy angle)
2 - It is better to give the Chinese some information than none. Crack the door open a little more (long term angle)
3 - As Maggie Thatcher said, the best way to free a people from dictatorship is the free market. Let business in and the people taste a bit of freedom they will crave for more and more and cannot be stopped. (end totalatatian rule angle)
These things take time, the best we can do is keep pushing the door open little by little until it flies open. Admittedly, reasons 2 and 3 fully support reason 1. As long as it happens I am not too concerned what the initial reason was for doing so.
Posted by: fred on January 9, 2006 08:56 AM