Opinion: China flexes economic power in Web censorship battle

Editor’s note: This is the first of a two-part series on Google’s refusal to censor the Web in China. In Part II, to run in the May 17 issue, John Copeland considers Google’s financial risks.

Few nations openly oppose China’s human rights abuses, including the government’s restrictions on information to its people. China’s economic power discourages harsh criticism of Chinese polices for fear of losing access to China’s profitable and growing markets.

Even the United States muffles its criticisms of China, not only because of fearing loss of business interests there but because China finances so much of our rapidly and dangerously growing national debt.

Given nations’ reluctance to oppose the Chinese government’s policies, Google’s recent defiance of China’s censorship of the Internet is surprising.  

Information providers doing business in China must agree to the government’s censorship demands.

China’s communist leaders assert the right to guide public opinion. China’s government demands that Internet companies censor the Web and remove any material offensive to the government or communist party.

China’s leaders fear political chaos, and they recognize the danger the Internet poses to communist rule. Fourteen government agencies and thousands of bureaucrats constantly scan the Web for forbidden information, including criticism of the government, its leaders and the communist party; China’s pro-democracy movement; Tibetan unrest; and the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest.

China’s President Hu stated in 2007, “Whether we can cope with the Internet is a matter that affects the development of the socialist culture, the security of information and the stability of the state.”

Policy deemed unethical
Even with the intensive screening, Chinese citizens receive some uncensored information. Talented computer users find ways to sometimes get around China’s censors. Already the government faces public outrage over information posted on blogs, computer bulletin boards and chat rooms on such topics as food and medicine contamination, and government corruption.

David Bandurski, an analyst with the University of Hong Kong’s China Media Project, told the New York Times last month, “The Internet is the decisive factor here. It is the medium that is changing the game in press control, and party leaders know it.”  

For years, Google dutifully met China’s demands in censoring the Web. But in December, Google discovered a sophisticated hacker attack on its information system. The attack focused on Google accounts of known Chinese activists. Google posted a blog making the hacker attack public knowledge that implied the Chinese government launched the attack.

China’s government angrily denied involvement in the hacking incident, and the relationship between Google and the Chinese government rapidly declined.

Google’s executives decided it was unethical to follow China’s censorship policy. In February, Google boldly announced it would no longer censor the Web. To keep from doing so, Google shut down its mainland Chinese search service and rerouted Chinese Web searches to its uncensored Hong Kong base.

China’s government accused Google of politicizing commercial issues and of violating the written promise to filter its search service made when it entered the Chinese market.

Some Chinese showed support for Google’s stand for freedom of information by laying flowers and candy outside Google’s Beijing offices.

The White House’s silence
Google received praise from international human rights groups. The Committee to Protect Journalists issued a statement saying it hoped Google’s move would increase pressure on China to give its citizens more access to information. Reporters Without Borders voiced similar support.

In Congress, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., called Google’s decision a “game changer” that would push the U.S. government toward protecting U.S. Internet business in foreign countries.

Four years ago, Smith drafted the Global Online Freedom Act. The unsuccessful act required U.S. companies to alert the State Department before complying with foreign governments’ requests to censor the Web.

So far, however, Congress is not moving to support Google, and the White House remains almost silent over the conflict between Google and China. The Obama administration merely released a statement expressing disappointment that the two parties could not resolve their differences.

It seems obvious that Google will not openly get U.S. political support in its battle against China’s Internet censorship.

Google’s executives must wonder if it will even get support behind the political scenes. It seems U.S. financial interests trump the country’s ethics in dealing with China, even at the cost of freedom of expression.

John D. Copeland, J.D., LL.M., Ed.D., is an executive in residence at The Soderquist Center for Leadership and Ethics and a retired professor of business at John Brown University in Arkansas. He’s also a Kallman executive fellow at the Center for Business Ethics at Bentley University in Waltham, Mass. He can be reached at jdcethics@gmail.com.[[In-content Ad]]