Google, China: Tarnish the blue sky!
When the Austro-Hungarian Empire tried to erase the name Italy from the official maps of Europe, in order to legitimise its own rule there, the English essayist William Hazlitt wrote this:
"Go on, obliging creatures! Blot the light out of heaven, tarnish the blue sky with the blight and fog of despotism, deface and trample on the green earth; for while one trace of what is fair or lovely is left in the earth under our feet, or the sky over our heads, or in the mind of man that is within us, it will remain to mock your impotence and deformity"
()
In other words, if you want to suppress the truth you have to do it ruthlessly and totally. Leave a shred of it and you look idiotic, and the masses of the people "mock your impotence". Tonight, on thousands of bulletin boards inside and outside the Chinese firewall, impotence is being .
The astonishing thing about Google's about-turn on self-censorship in China is not the move itself. Still less the fact that gmail accounts were hacked. It is that the crowd that gathered outside Google's Beijing HQ was sympathetic to Google and have actually been laying flowers. The last time a corporation got caught up in global criticism of China's human rights record it was Carrefour, which saw its supermarkets invaded by nationalist Chinese youth simply because the Olympic Torch procession was disrupted in France.
By contrast here is just one example of the reaction of Chinese netizens:
"Shut it down. TG [The government] already does whatever it wants.
Entering email boxes, deleting the account owners' emails...is tantamount to
entering someone else's company and kicking out the old customers. They [the company] can no longer do business, so of course they will want to leave. I ding you Google. Your name will go down in history."
The rising generation of Chinese youth is deeply attached to the rule of law and market principles and will see the cyber-attack on Google as just the latest in a string of government measures on the internet which flout these principles, which are incidentally also enshrined in the Chinese constitution.
But do not expect the goodwill to last. Even among some bloggers in China there is mistrust of Google for trying to, as one netizen says, "foist its ideology on China".
The background is a massive rise in low-level defiance of authority by Chinese netizens. You can get a great translated selection on the . Chinese youth have adopted a whole Rabelasian code to discuss sex on the internet; meanwhile mobile telephony has enabled two other gaps in the Great Firewall to open up - to porn and to surreptitious twittering about politics. In Orwell's 1984, you will remember, the heroine, Julia actually works in a Party-run porn factory. But today - in the west as well as the east - governments have lost control of this particular form of online discourse. Chinese young adults regularly mix risque discussions of sex with discussions of freedom. It's no big conspiracy - young people tend to be heavily interested in both phenomena.
In recent days China has launched a crackdown on porn, widely interpreted as a cypher for a wider crackdown on low-level anti-establishment conversations on the web. To give one example of how mild but at the same time canny Chinese netizens' discourse has become, last December netizens nominated the Chinese character for "blocked" as the key word of the year. Young people began to express that the internet phenomenon of content being blocked was also a metaphor for their own lives, which felt perpetually "blocked" - though few people then went on to say what by.
Before we condemn China for cracking down on web porn, anybody whose children use the Internet will be aware of how untrammeled and accessible porn is on the internet, and how readily Google serves it up to you from the most innocuous search terms. Google points out that it has upped the power of its safe search technology, but accepts its an area of concern.
But China's porn crackdown does seem to be a pretext: it has allowed them to introduce in swift succession a ban on individuals registering URLs; plus a warning to Chinese mobile phone users that their SMS services will be cut off if they upload porn. There is also the persistent monitoring of web cafes, and the reported 40,000 members of the Internet police who pro-actively take down content and post bogus content critical of the west and human rights campaigners. Since June, when Chinese state TV attacked Google for carrying porn results, Chinese netizens have been accusing the state-run TV news of siding with rival Chinese-owned search engine Baidu, which they point out has spent tens of billions in ad revenue with CCTV.
Is Google's response proportional? The attack on Google seems to have been what spooks call "humint" - that is it wasn't a hack of Google's own systems but malware allowing intelligence agents (or, yes of course a totally voluntary group of private individuals who suddenly decide to collect intel on the Chinese state's opponents) into Google's systems. It did, Google alleges, involve the theft of the company's own IP.
Google has felt harassed by the and initiatives but I read Google's immediate decision to start listing search results about Tiananmen, and threat to pull out of China, as a measure of how frustrated western businesses are becoming about operating in this state, which to call it what Hazlitt would have called it, is a one-party despotism where the rule of law barely exists.
As I write, for example, Chinese prosecutors are of Rio Tinto employees, one an Australian citizen, arrested on espionage charges coincidentally just after a Chinese attempt to buy a stake in Rio Tinto fell through. And read , for a micro-level account of what happens to entrepreneurs in a country where people in power are simply allowed to make things up, unchallenged by a free media, and unqueried by any kind of online democracy.
Whatever the outcome, and whatever the motivation, as Chinese netizens log on to do their nightly rants against the west, France, CNN, the ´óÏó´«Ã½, Amnesty Internatioanal, and - surreptitiously - the government, the CCP, police brutality, and nouveau rich airheads, one astonishing thing is becoming clear:
It is impossible for repressive regimes to close down information without closing down the functioning of modern society. This was the nightmare Orwell depicted in 1984, and of course remains the dream of the people currently running Iran and Burma.
But the Chinese state has just found out it is not possible. And in a popularity contest between the CCP and Google among urban Chinese youth, I would not like to bet on the winner.
Comment number 1.
At 13th Jan 2010, tawse57 wrote:In the early days of the Internet a number of British cable companies, banks and high-street stores tried to set up an Internet 'walled garden' - basically, they wanted to try and control the Internet in the UK, who used it, how it was accessed and, of course, wished to maximise revenue by charging people to access their virtual 'high street' and then charge them again to buy things.
It failed dismally - but not until squillions had been spent on it.
In the past month we have seen British Broadcasters, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ amongst them, begin attempts to create their own 'walled garden'. Obviously, some are still trying to flog that dead horse. Times change but British Broadcasters just don't get it. I digress.
The Internet has become one of the great levellers in global society - it informs, it educates, it entertains and most importantly, unlike certain Broadcasters I can think of, it democratises the process by allowing everyone and anyone to become a blogger, a twitter, a writer, a journalist, a broadcaster. Broadcasters and politicians do not like that - losing that control, losing that power - hence, no doubt, the digging up of the 'walled garden' plans again.
Anyhow...
It will be interesting to see who will win - the Chinese Government or the likes of Google. What happened in Broadcasting in the US, UK and elsewhere is now happening in China but the stakes are much, much higher. The Broadcasters lost out, at first, to the likes of AOL, Microsoft, Apple and so on. Is Google the new champion? As the Chinese say, may you twitter in interesting times.
Speaking of porn... There was a time in Europe, not so long ago, when the countries that downloaded/viewed the most porn were the countries that had the most oppressive porn laws. The UK, for example, once held the record for the most viewed porn sites whereas the free-loving Dutch could not be bothered at all and hardly visited any porn sites. They still don't.
As the Internet spread, and access to the Internet became more widespread, it was interesting to note that many countries in the Muslim World have become very big viewers of pornography online and certain search engines are accutely aware of which countries are searching for porn and for what particular porn 'interests' they are searching.
I will say no more.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 14th Jan 2010, watriler wrote:Google will lose and is probably on balance more useful to the progressive forces in China even in its semi-gagged state. Just how will the CCP have its grip on China loosened? If it delivers rising material standards at the current rate and gives most of the people red meat and X boxes it could be a very long time. I suspect there is more likely to be radical change in the CCP allied with the sheer impossibility of 'micro-managing' a large country and a billion plus population, but dont hold your breath.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 14th Jan 2010, shireblogger wrote:I see the point about China using the anti-porn censorship as a pretext and observers need to be vigilant of that oppressiveness. However, Australia is looking to curb unrestrained internet usage. Our icon-standard for human rights, The European Convention, provides an exception to freedom of expression in the case of necessary laws in a democratic society to protect morals ( art 10(2) ).
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 14th Jan 2010, supersnapshot wrote:Safe Search is (Always) On
There are always rules, tacit or explicit. Anyone who comments on this blog has agreed to undertake the limits and constraints inisted upon by the ´óÏó´«Ã½ - an organ of the state.
Breaching this accord will result in censorship and expulsion ( anyone remember the odious Jaded Jean ? ). Do we not coerce with our oppressors in our own oppression ?
Within the permitted discourse we are constained by what Barthes called " a given language " and it may be within this that the knots and focii of resistance become articulate.
Control may be able to cut off access to an exterior, but as Paul highlights, the seeds of change can also be nurtured from within.
The desire of a Post-Colonial West to be the gatekeepers of a 'Knowledge Economy' also have to overcome similar problems of guardianship if the dream is to become incarnate.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 14th Jan 2010, UltraTron wrote:Nice page 404 test card by the way, point well made.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)