By Sonia Arrison TechNewsWorld Part of the ECT News Network
01/27/06 5:00 AM PT
The argument in favor of staying is twofold: First, American companies want a slice of the lucrative Chinese market; second, the argument can be made that American activity in China will, over time, lead to democracy. That's because increased trade with people from a free country leads to the spread of information about freedom.
Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) recently created a public-relations firestorm when it unveiled a new search site in China that censors data on behalf of the Chinese government. Though the search giant's success stems from its birth in a free country, that doesn't mean the company is strong enough to enforce freedom around the world.
Many Americans were horrified to learn that American-grown technology firms such as Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO), Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), Cisco (Nasdaq: CSCO) and Google have been complying with the Chinese government's demands to control information. When Yahoo handed over data last fall that landed a Chinese journalist in jail for 10 years for simply e-mailing newspaper briefing comments to a democracy group in New York, outrage followed. However, the mistake many observers make is to equate the power of corporations with the power of governments.
The Real World
Michael Moore's rants aside, corporations cannot force anyone to do anything that they don't agree to do. Companies can persuade through advertising and other marketing, but ultimately customers decide. Governments, on the other hand, have the power of the sword, and China -- the world's largest communist dictatorship -- is known for wielding that power. That puts American companies at a huge disadvantage when the question of freedom arises in a country where the people aren't free.
In America, when the government appears to infringe on freedom, citizens can sue and companies can refuse to act. Indeed, the American Civil Liberties Union recently filed a lawsuit claiming that the National Security Agency's wiretaps violate the American constitution, and Google itself is currently refusing to hand over search data to the U.S. government. In China, the story is much different.
Companies that don't comply with government demands in China face expulsion from the country, and their officers may face imprisonment. You can't sue the Chinese government for free-speech violations because such protections don't exist there. That means American technology firms face a difficult question: Do they comply with Chinese government demands? Or do they leave the country and let other businesses take their places?
Sticking It Out
The argument in favor of staying is twofold: First, American companies want a slice of the lucrative Chinese market; second, the argument can be made that American activity in China will, over time, lead to democracy. That's because increased trade with people from a free country leads to the spread of information about freedom, no matter how tightly the government tries to restrict it.
When the Chinese people interact with American people, they share stories that slowly chip away at the government's hold. When the Chinese middle class finally sees what it is missing, the Chinese government will be in trouble.
It is not inevitable that increasing American contact with the Chinese people will bring about democracy. However, simply leaving and allowing other companies -- especially those from countries less free than America -- to provide those services makes it even less likely.
No one lives in a perfect world, and when the choices are imperfect, it's best to go with the one that's the least problematic. Google's motto is, "Don't be evil," but one might suggest it is now operating under a different mantra along the lines of, "Don't be stupid." That is, if Google doesn't compete in the Chinese market, others will, and the status of Chinese freedom will not have changed.
American tech firms are caught in the middle of a sad tension between freedom-loving individuals and an oppressive government. Those outraged at the actions of these firms should bear in mind that no company has the power to battle a country with weapons. Critics should target their anger where it belongs -- at the Chinese government.
Sonia Arrison, a TechNewsWorld columnist, is director of Technology Studies at the California-based Pacific Research Institute and co-author of "Upgrading America's Ballot Box: The Rise of E-voting."
Intel Stays on Small Track With 45-Nanometer Chips January 26, 2006
The advent of 45-nanometer processing is a key to Intel's goals of delivering more powerful, more energy-efficient processors. The company's time-to-market advantage puts the chip giant ahead of the rest of the semiconductor industry.
Related Stories
Google Eyes Classified Ad Market With 'Google Base' October 26, 2005
Forrester Research analyst Charlene Li said Google Base is potentially "much, much bigger" than simply an attempt to move into the classifieds space and represents its desire to be a central repository of every piece of information it can collect. A Google base could feed content to other search tools in the Google family, she added.
A Capitalist Solution to Freeing China September 23, 2005
If America is to maintain its place in the world, its high-tech leaders need to embrace freedom and capitalism. Those concepts not only define the underlying principles of a just world, but they also speak to what technology firms must do to survive on the world stage.
Blowing It With China August 02, 2005
Having a long-term time horizon is the first rule of Chinese business. If your firm is not ready to lose money for a long period of time while starting up in China, then it would be best to avoid China entirely. The second rule of Chinese business is to never enter into a partnership with a government-owned enterprise.
Google's China Filtering Draws Fire December 01, 2004
"China is censoring Google News to force Internet users to use the Chinese version of the site which has been purged of the most critical news reports," said a statement from Reporters Without Borders. "By agreeing to launch a news service that excludes publications disliked by the government, Google has let itself be used by Beijing."
Related News Alerts
More by Sonia Arrison
The Trouble With Augmented Reality and Other Cool Tech February 24, 2010
New technologies that allow users to interact with one another in virtual settings are undoubtedly cool, but augmented reality is served best with a heavy dollop of privacy -- or at least, choice. Social networking fans like Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg may believe that the new social norm is making one's personal life fully public, but the recent uproar over Buzz suggests that he's dead wrong.
Is Personalized Medicine Anti-Establishment? January 27, 2010
Affordable genome sequencing is coming soon, but few doctors appear ready to deal with the difficult issues this technology could raise. Suppose a doctor sequences a genome for cardiac data, but finds genes indicating a very high cancer risk in the process. Would the doctor have an obligation to tell the patient? "Doctors aren't prepared for these big conversations," said Stanford law professor Hank Greeley.
Net's Top Two Powerhouse Players Talk Policy December 18, 2009
Intellectual property was at the heart of many discussions at this year's U.S.-China Internet Industry Forum. Though the software piracy rate currently stands at 80 percent in China, there are hopeful signs. Now that it is moving toward a knowledge-based economy, the realization is dawning that it's in China's own best interests to do a better job of protecting IP.