« links for 2006-01-24 | Main | links for 2006-01-25 »

January 24, 2006



As per Jonathan's comments,
"I think it's interesting to speculate what might have happened if Google had said no. They might have lost business, at least for now, but they also might have made life more difficult for the Chinese police state, and they would have set an example for other companies."

I don't see why life would be more difficult for the Chinese government. Before today, the Google.cn server was outside China , however the government still could control what got displayed to the end user. Now the server is inside China and the end result to the user is the same although with less latency. I have talked to a couple of Chinese friends (living in China) - they are all used to the censorship thing, its a part of life there. They are actually happy that now they can get results from Google faster on their slow dial-up connections.

Boris Anthony

Nart over at Opennetinitiative has already posted some test results.


This we've seen with the recent events... The DOJ requesting search results and Google filtering content. I've said it before and I'll say it again....the Internet in my opinion will eventually split into divide. The people who are serious...and the people who just "use" it.


Interesting from CTN: "For those armchair Sinologists uncomfortable with Google censoring content, rest assured that the company is not really welcome in China and thousands of years of history show that it can't last long here either."

Jeffrey Sands

Google has taken a strong stance that they will not disclose details of user search to U.S. government authorities. (Even where the putative objective is to combat child pornography).

Has anyone asked them if they will commit to making the same stance -- keeping users' search history secure -- to Chinese users viz-a-viz the Chinese government?


Anyone living in China knows that the government has regulations that, despite appearing ridiculous or delinked from reality, must be followed at least superficially. Most people also know that regulations that pose obstacles to everyday life are easily evaded in plain view of the local authorities.

Extended to the mass media, the urban public know the limits on public discourse and accept self-censorship by the media, even when public truth shouts clearly. As in everyday life here in China, the regulated or forbidden zone is clearly demarcated and multiple means of entry are easily obtainable by any serious consumer.

Google's approach breaks no new ground, and its actions neither extend nor enhance China-based web users knowledge of their local operating environment (including how to get around "inconvenient" regulations .) So what's the big deal?

Moreover, why would anyone expect a company that operates for profit to put principle first? Did you actually believe google's branding?

since google has sold its soul for china business, might as well let george buse data mine it, too.


china in process of developmental
See:Article Search


googode. com一口价20万RMB(含税)


Chris Langdon

Few know that Google, Microsoft and Yahoo won't allow ads IN AMERICA for websites that are critical of Communist China. They won't allow me to advertise my website, www.chinaisevil.com in the US. The mainstream media won't report this story.

Chris Langdon, [email protected]

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Global Voices

  • Global Voices Online - The world is talking. Are you listening?

  • Donate to Global Voices - Help us spread the word
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2004


My book:

Consent of the Networked
Coming January 31st, 2012, from Basic Books. To pre-order click here.
AddThis Feed Button