Two takes on China
Google sent its explanation of its China censorship decision to Congress in lieuWhen Anonymizer does have products available in China, everyone will remember and trust the company. of a representative to participate in a Congressional Human Rights Caucus, about Human Rights and the Internet - The People's Republic of China, happening today in Washington, D.C.
The explanation is clear: Google doesn't want to lose market share to domestic chinese competitors who are also playing along with the Chinese government (and, probably, who have doled out shares to officials). Andrew McLaughlin, senior policy council at Google, writes:
The rationale for launching a domestic version of Google in China – a website subject to China’s local content restrictions – is that our service in China has not been very good, due in large measure to the extensive filtering performed by Chinese Internet service providers (ISPs). Google’s users in China struggle with a service that is often unavailable, or painfully slow.
The statement goes on to say that censored results pages offer an "explicit warning" that "search results are missing something that might otherwise be relevant." That warning isn't evident in any of the results comparisons provided that show how extensive the censorship is. Perhaps it isn't implemented yet. It would be helpful to see the warning's language and examples of its appearance on Google pages so that we can judge for ourselves whether this is "a meaningful step in the right direction" toward transparency.
John Stuart Mill wrote in 1859:
Strange it is, that men should admit to the validity of the arguments for free discussion, but object to their being "pushed to an extreme"; not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case.
The Google argument that a little information is better than none at all is hypocritical, because it lowers the chance the Chinese will look for the complete truth. A great Chinese-language Google site set up outside the country would attract more searches and create real differentiation from the censored domestic competitors.
Anonymizer, a developer of privacy tools for Web surfers, is setting up a proxy server that could help the Chinese more than a censored Google. Changed regularly, the proxy address, like many similar services, will provide Chinese users access to the Net outside of the Great Firewall with no censorship. An email list, which sends alerts to users about the change of addresses, operates from a changing source, so the Chinese can't block the sender address.
The company offers the same services in Iran.
Anonymizer makes no significant revenue from China, said Lance Cottrell, president and chief scientist, Anonymizer Inc. It does see serving the Chinese people now as a way to build credibility when the market is really free. The company received a cease and desist order from the Beijing Police Department in the mid-90s and simply ignored it.
"We've just blanket opened it up," Cottrell said. "They've been blocking Anonymizer for years." So far, he said, there have been no successful pursuits of Chinese citizens using the service. Those citizens will talk to their friends, and when Anonymizer does have products available in China, everyone will remember and trust the company.
Google (and MSN and Yahoo!, which also censor in China) ought to trust the quality of its uncensored service to attract Chinese, rather than bringing itself down to the level of a government that doesn't believe in free speech. The company's business would be healthier over the long term, even if revenues might rise in the short term because it cooperates with China's government. The brand is tarnished by this, the evil is on Google and any attempt to justify the decision as right will only deepen the scars that will show when China is really free—something that is closer than we think.