Practically every U.S.-owned search engine has caved to the Chinese government's demands that they censor political Web sites in China. But none of them seem to agree on just what sites need censoring. Google, at times, blocks Chinese users' access to the BBC while Yahoo! permits it. Yahoo! sometimes filters out Voice of America--Google doesn't. And Microsoft removes entries from the Chinese version of Wikipedia from its results while every other search engine includes them--even the dominant Chinese search engine Baidu.com.
Confused? So are the search engines themselves, says Nart Villeneuve, a researcher at the University of Toronto's Open Net Initiative. In a study released on Wednesday, he points to the wild variation in search engine censorship in China as a sign that the Chinese government isn't handing companies a uniform list of censored sites but leaving them to guess at which sites are contraband.
------------------------
In a congressional hearing before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission on Wednesday, ONI director Ron Deibert held up the study as evidence of the complicity of U.S. firms in China's control of the media. Worse, he argued, they seemed to be doing more than China's dictators required to repress information.
"This kind of self-selection raises the prospect of anticipatory over-blocking, in which content not officially blocked by China ends up being filtered because of the eagerness of search engines," Deibert said.
Read the entire article here
Read the my testimony to US Congress here
Read Nart's research paper here
|
This Month
Everyone's Guide to By-Passing Internet Censorship Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering Parchment, Printing, and Hypermedia: Communication in World Order Transformation |
Forbes: China's Overeager American Censors
Comments
Re: Forbes: China's Overeager American Censors
by
Shelley
on Sat 21 Jun 2008 12:48 PM PDT | Permanent Link
Re: Canada's Overeager Canadian Censors
I wonder if you would care to make a comment on the human rights complaint against Macleans magazine. You may know that it is alleged by the complainants that Macleans magazine is guilty of hate speech by publishing a chapter in print and online from Mark Steyn's book called "American Alone". Since censorship, the internet and freedom of access to the internet and by extension to information and opinion is your life's work, it seems logical to me that you would have an opinion. I look forward to your reply. Shelley |
Search
Profd Essential Links
Month Archive
|



