Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Google's China Syndrome

By Kelly Hearn, AlterNet. Posted February 15, 2006.


Why are some of America's biggest technology companies helping Beijing crack down on Chinese cyberdissidents?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Kelly Hearn

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Are Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and Cisco playing Smithers to China's Emperor Burns? In recent weeks, major technology players have been accused of helping China police its internet. Yahoo helped China convict cyberdissidents by handing over email records. Google has gotten the lash for filtering sites disliked by Beijing, as have Microsoft and Cisco for pulling the plug on a dissident blogger and selling traceable hardware to Chinese companies.

Washington Sinophobes are in a knot. Today, a House human rights subcommittee begins asking for answers. Committee members, including Republican Rep. Chris Smith, a harsh China critic, say the companies are selling out fundamental rights. "This is not benign or neutral," Smith told AP. "They have an obligation not to be promoting dictatorship."

As cyberdissidents with rising profiles blog at repressive regimes, experts say nations, including China, United Arab Emirates, Burma, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia, are understandably ramping up efforts to analyze traffic, filter content and nab troublemakers, in some cases with the help of American filtering software and, in the case of China, the cooperation of the American tech sector.

Though they point to obvious problems, experts say that for the sophisticated user, or the user who gets help from sophisticated software, the internet is still highly anonymous. But it's not easy, as the filtering war with China illustrates.

The China lesson

Nart Villeneuve of the University of Toronto told Washington lawmakers on Feb. 6 that the outlook in China is uncertain and U.S. companies aren't helping: "China is certainly seeking to maintain its strict information control, and companies that enable and conform to Chinese censorship policies are further confining the spaces in which China's citizens can express themselves online."

Beijing's enemies include gearheads who build ways for dissident surfers to slip through to the Middle Kingdom's walls to get their message out and access sites with forbidden themes such as Tibet, Falun Gong, "human rights" and "social justice."

One thorn in the regime's side is twentysomething anti-filtering activist Bennett Hazelton. Founder of Peacefire.org, Hazelton has developed software to help Chinese users connect to computers located outside their country, where they can then access sites normally filtered by Chinese authorities. He says the internet holds much promise to defeat repression and open access to information, but "it will not happen by itself."

Another group aiding dissidents is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whose software known as The Onion Router, or TOR, has proven useful at sidestepping firewalls. Some Chinese have developed tools: Falun Gong members, whose websites are a target of Chinese filtering, have developed UltraSurf, which reportedly lets Chinese users access Internet Explorer without being detected. And the U.S. government-backed Voice of America is working on a version of TOR, according to Hazelton, and hosts some circumventor sites.

As global connectivity rises and as cyberdissidents of all stripes, especially bloggers, cause problems for repressive states, the need for anonymity grows. Ethan Zuckerman, a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society, stresses the need for bloggers to ensure their anonymity and has recently authored a guide to help. The Committee to Protect Bloggers is also on the case.


Digg!

Kelly Hearn is a former UPI staff writer who divides his time between the United States and South America. A correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor, his work has appeared in The Nation, The American Prospect and other publications. He is a regular contributor to AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Is there a Google alternative?
Posted by: seltzer on Feb 15, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would love to boycott Google for betraying its mission to "do no evil." Unfortunately, there just isn't anything nearly as useful as the monster search engine. Yahoo is also colluding with the Chinese authorities. It's depressing as hell to see these companies that wave the flag of free information to all now help to prop up authoritarian and repressive regimes like China's. Can anyone suggest a way that we can go on using the Internet and still send Google and similar firms a strong message that we don't approve of their censoring ways?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» scroogle.org Posted by: peritonlogon
Parallel
Posted by: patvic1405 on Feb 15, 2006 7:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watch closely - this is how it will happen here very soon as our American dictatorship closes the noose tighter around our scrawny little necks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rover
Posted by: Roverton on Feb 15, 2006 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if it isn't used on us already. How would we know?

Are there any whistleblowers in large American corporations? Now would be a good time to speak.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Today, China; tomorrow...us
Posted by: monkeywrench on Feb 15, 2006 11:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What? You think that corporations give a crap about human rights? You are obviously not a good, card-carrying lassez-faire capitalist! Everybody knows that in our society the only thing that matters is that measure of success closest to Godliness, profit. Who cares if a few million people have their human-given rights trampled upon, as long as our omniscient, omnipotent corporate overseers can expand their universe? Who cares if we're next, as long as those cheap products, helped along by worldwide information and economic control, keep falling off the shelves at WalMart? Who cares, as long as we can still get our stories about Jen and Brad, Tom and Katie, Paris, ad nauseum? Who cares that our own "news" is peppered with lies and propaganda? Who cares if too many of us are too comfortable, too entertained, and too bloated for our own good?

Why SHOULD we care? This is the only question that matters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Today, China; tomorrow...us Posted by: underledge
Alarmist?
Posted by: peritonlogon on Feb 15, 2006 2:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The case of Yahoo! really bothers me. But the case of Google not so much.

Goggle's success is based on their possitive image which they have achieved by providing a top notch product and being unintrusive and generally not being out to screw over and otherwise bother their clients. This has always seemed to me to be a means to an end... ie. providing a good service and treating your customers well creates monetary success and is, other things aside, good. The fact that other people have associated them with activism is convient for Google but it doesn't mean that Google is out to be an activist.

I personally believe in free speach and freedom of information, but I don't see why a company ought to be held responsible for imposing my values on another sovereign country.

That being said, the case for boycoting Google seems like a good idea to me, even though I will be on the sidelines.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what to do
Posted by: ddd on Feb 15, 2006 10:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that it is difficult to make a change. However, it might be possible to organize a large boycott of their search engines for a few days or week. The problem would be organizing a unified response.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Truth about Google and China
Posted by: asdfjkl; on Feb 16, 2006 11:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most people can't read between the lines on this issue. The truth is much more simple. The U.S. government wants control of the internet. That means they need to get control and leverage over big search engines.

How do you get control of search engines that are abiding by U.S. law. Simple, draft laws that they are not abiding by. Currently Sen. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) is drafting legislation that will put search engines in hot water. This is all orchestrated so that the government can get leverage over the search industry.

Let's also get one thing straight. Since when has the government cared what U.S. companies are doing in China? And why just Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft search? There are dozens of Fortune 500 companies that have been conforming to Chinese regulations for years. What about them?

Conclusion: Google and other search engines will lose this fight and evenutually be forced to hand over key information about how they operate. Once the government has reverse engineered search ranking algorithims, they will be able to manipulate search results at their pleasure. People will then see the results that the U.S. government wants them to see.

Welcome to the new world order that is controled so that people never know the truth.

Don't believe me? Read all about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]