My response to Scoble

In justifying Microsoft's filtering of politically sensitive Chinese words on MSN spaces, Microsoft's uber-blogger Robert Scoble writes: "I have ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS forcing the Chinese into a position they don't believe in."  He continues:

I've been to China (as an employee of Winnov about seven years ago). I met with Government officials there. I met with students. I met with professors. They explained their anti-free-speech stance to me and I understand it. I don't agree with it, and I will be happy to explain to anyone the benefits of giving your citizens the right to speak freely, but it's not my place to make their laws. It certainly is not my right to force their hand with business power.

I lived in China for nine years straight as a journalist, and if you add up other times I've lived there it comes to nearly 12. I don't know what students and professors Scoble met with, and what context he met them in. But to state that Chinese students and professors have an "anti-free-speech stance" is the biggest pile of horseshit about China I've come across in quite some time. And believe me, there are a great many such piles out there these days.

In my experience, most Chinese, like all other human beings I've ever met, would very much like to have freedom of speech. This goes for students, professors, workers, farmers, retirees, religious practitioners, and even many government officials. Many said so to me in on-the-record interviews. Many more told me so privately, in trusted confidence over beers (or something stronger) among friends. 

What they don't want is to lose their jobs and educational opportunities by pushing too hard at the restrictions their government has placed on their ability to speak. They work within the bounds of the possible, and since people in China can say a lot more now than they were allowed to say 20 years ago, most take the long-term view.

It's very true, most Chinese hate it when foreigners lecture them about how they should change. They hate being patronized. Many view the common American attitude of "we're here to save you and make you free" as condescending and hypocritical. They'd rather continue living under their extremely imperfect political situation in hopes that eventually it will change, and that this change will be accomplished by Chinese people in a Chinese way. Only then will they have ownership both of the change and of the result. Otherwise, the change will be considered foreign-imposed, and the Chinese violently detest foreign-imposed anything. Even ones who privately and quietly detest their government.

I agree with Scoble: no outsiders, including Microsoft, can force China to change. But nobody's asking Microsoft to force China to do anything. The issue is whether Microsoft should be collaborating with the Chinese regime as it builds an increasingly sophisticated system of Internet censorship and control. (See this ONI report for lots of details on that system.)  Declining to collaborate with this system is not "forcing the Chinese into a position they don't believe in."  Declining to collaborate would be the only way to show that your stated belief in free speech is more than 空话: empty words. If you believe that Chinese people deserve the same respect as Americans, then please put your money where your mouth is.

But let's not single out Microsoft for trashing on this point. As this Open Net Initiative report and this 2004 Amnesty International report will make abundantly clear, China's filtering, censorship, and surveillance systems wouldn't be what they are today without lots of help from a number of North American technology companies.  Businessman and author Ethan Gutmann wrote about Cisco's particular contribution in this 2002 article which later became a book chapter.

In the name of free enterprise, Americans so far have acquiesced in U.S. companies' collaboration in the building and reinforcement of the Great Chinese Firewall. The Global Internet Freedom Act is being revived again in congress; but while the Act would allocate money to develop censorship-busting technologies, it makes zero mention of the U.S. companies whose technologies and software services are helping to strengthen this very censorship.

Scoble says it's better to be doing business in China than not, implying that this engagement is better for China and its freedoms in the long run. Don't get me wrong, I believe strongly in economic engagement with China. But nobody said Microsoft shouldn't be doing business there. It's a question of how you do business and in what manner.

I can tell you one more thing about the Chinese. They hear what you say, then they watch how you do business. From there, it's pretty easy to figure out what your real values are.

Comments

[Curt]

Amen.

[Hans Suter]

Maybe Scoble wants to tell us that he isn't free to blog ?
;-)

[Albert Tanutama]

hi Rebecca, I commented in scoble's blogs that there's a fine line between limiting and restricting. Microsoft has created a software that promotes freedom of speech, but they are required to limit the software according to the local culture. I consider it as a sign of respect to the local culture. However, if microsoft created a software, specifically, to restrict the freedom of speech in order to get a business, that I will consider as not putting the money where your mouth is.

[Craig]

Microsoft word is an export, and every dollar China spends on Microsoft products is money that flows into our economy.

Furthermore, Microsoft provides a product, they are not defenders of democracy. It's not like they're providing arms. Besides, isn't it preferable to make China depend on an American corporation, instead of encourage them to be self-sufficient and develop useful products on their own? As long as China is dependent on us for basic technology, they will not be a threat.

[Katherine]

I think you mean "respect for the local government," Albert. I think the whole point of Rebecca's post is that the local government's aims are not necessarily those of the individuals who make up the local culture.

More generally, one can justify all sorts of things as "respect for local culture," from racial and religious discrimination to stoning of homosexuals. That doesn't make those things right. If you're willing to sacrifice your stated values in the interests of business, then you have just demonstrated to the world that business is your only value.

[Tad]

At the same time you say "But to state that Chinese students and professors have an "anti-free-speech stance" is the biggest pile of horseshit about China I've come across in quite some time." you also says "In my experience, most Chinese, like all other human beings I've ever met, would very much like to have freedom of speech." and "What they don't want is to lose their jobs and educational opportunities by pushing too hard at the restrictions their government has placed on their ability to speak". Well , you just said the anti-free-speech stance is a "pile of horseshit" but you just confirms what you said down on the post ... If they like to have freedom of speech is because they don't have , and if they don't want to lose their jobs and educational opportunities by pushing the restrictions their government has placed they have an ANTI-FREE-SPEECH STANCE ...

[Robert Scoble]

Hans: I'm free to blog whatever I like. The fact that I link to those who disagree with me proves that.

[isaac]

I think Robert is free enough on blogging, but maybe not so free on thinking of the whole thing. As a Chinese blogger, I'd say how painful we are to do blogging under the shadow of "self-policing" that Robert may never feel.

Even just from technical view, Robert may understand how evil to tell a word is "illegal" or "legal". Is there any word a natural born criminal?

In this case, MS is definitely a conspiracy to "anti-free-speech" and even far more than gov like to see. So suspicious that it's a flattering behavior for some other goals?

About those "professors" and "students" Robert talked with before. I don't think they were talking to you from heart inside. People there are accustomed to tell foreigners how great my country is and try to hide any real feelings. And most importantly, the academic atmosphere in China is too "unified" today to be referenced.

[Opine6]

Craig,you are mistaken. China will knock off Microsoft's software and mass produce it. Microsoft will be lucky if they recoup their initial development cost.

American manufacturers who have been foolish enough to move their operations to China have had to contend with China setting up a factory down the road from them, producing the same product, before they've barely opened their doors.

The Chinese Government doesn't subscribe to the notion of "intellectual property". Just ask the music industry.

Other than that, I hope the Chinese will have Internet free speech someday, like we have (for now).

[digitalbrownshirt]

"Microsoft has created a software that promotes freedom of speech, but they are required to limit the software according to the local culture. I consider it as a sign of respect to the local culture."

Albert, the problem with this is that the local culture is whatever the communist party says it is. People don't generally hire government officials to keep them silent because they want to shut up but some possessing demon won't let them.

Also, nice picture Rebecca! I'm usually against the torture of a female invading my space, but think I could come around to it.