February 17, 2006 4:00 AM PST

Perspective: The China Internet debate's going nowhere

See all Perspectives
The China Internet debate's going nowhere
As far as Washington drama goes, this didn't rise to the level of the Army-McCarthy hearings.

But the stern lecture delivered to the technology industry during a House hearing on the Internet in China earlier this week underscored the futility of this increasingly stale debate.

Congress ostensibly called the hearing to learn how U.S. tech companies were helping China to censor Internet access. The real purpose was (a) to grandstand, (b) to pressure the companies into changing their policies, and (c) to grandstand. (Did I already mention that?)

The hearings offered a prime-time stage for China bashing. Beijing's communist regime is always an easy mark for populist politicians looking to score points with the folks in the home district, and a lot of that went on. But it was also the first time that representatives from Yahoo, Google and Microsoft (Cisco was there as a bit player) were forced to depart from the script and offer straight answers to the public.

related video
Watch the hearing
Members of Congress take tech
companies to task over China.

Fact is, these folks are in quite a bind. Living in the real world involves compromises. And when it comes to China, they've obviously been compromising away--something their dainty PR offices have assiduously attempted to hide. No longer. Microsoft has taken down blogs, Google has restricted certain search terms and Yahoo has provided information the authorities used to track down dissidents.

Google's Elliot Schrage summed it up for the House panel this way: "In an imperfect world, we had to make an imperfect choice."

That was the only breath of fresh air during an otherwise unctuous performance by the invited panelists. It took an afternoon of browbeating before they stopped shucking and jiving and owned up to the rules of engagement their companies had all submitted to.

Watching the cybergentry sweat made for a fun afternoon, but more important is what comes next. The administration has proposed something it grandiloquently called the Global Internet Freedom Task Force. The idea is to reduce government efforts to censor information.

Sounds impressive, though I'm not sure how this is going to work in practice. I can't envision Washington pushing especially hard. China flows billions of dollars into the U.S. economy each year, buying bonds that pay for our domestic spending spree. Tick off the Chinese and there's always the danger they'll retaliate by closing the spigot.

Meanwhile, U.S. officials are involved in a delicate campaign to nudge China to establish a more flexible foreign exchange rate policy. Going into this, the Chinese are bound to be irritable because an upcoming U.S. Treasury Department is shortly expected to report that Beijing has been manipulating the Yuan. You think George Bush is going to jeopardize a successful resolution of the negotiations in order to guarantee Internet freedom in China? Besides, this administration gets distracted when the subject turns to cyber-related topics. Just look at the five years' worth of backburner treatment it's given network security.

Representative Jim Leach, an Iowa Republican and one of the more sober voices in Congress, was especially uneasy about the prospect of American companies blocking American voices. He's right to be concerned. If the government allows Yahoo, Google and Microsoft to determine economic policy, nobody should be surprised by what gets decided.

Biography
Charles Cooper is CNET News.com's executive editor of commentary.

More Perspectives

See more CNET content tagged:
China, Beijing, policy, Yahoo! Inc., Washington

12 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment (Log in or register)
Did Yahoo! really do anything wrong?
From what I have heard and read, Yahoo! did nothing more than respond to a government subpoena for information and provided no more than they would have been required to if the US Government aquired a warrant for the same information. We can not ask or expect Yahoo! to go into any foreign market and attempt to do business if Congress tells them that they can not respond to a legal warrant issued by that foreign market's government. There appears to me to be a double standard in place: you can get their money, but only follow their laws if we like them...but any company of theirs that tries to do business here better follow our laws, or we'll kick them out.
Posted by Z4ns4tsu (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Same Argument Was Used at Nurmeburg
"We were only following orders," is disingenuous at best. It ignores the fact that we have (theoretically) a popularly elected government and if we don;t like their tactics we can throw the bastards out periodically. China is an oligarchy  a totalitarian, violently repressive regime  and for a US company to hand over information that any reasonable person would have assumed was going to lead to imprisonment was, as Rep. Tom Lantos stated, "a disgrace."

Complying with the legally issued warrants of a duly elected government is NOT the same as collaborating in the suppression of free speech by thuggery.

Clifford VanMeter
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://techpolitics.us" target="_newWindow">http://techpolitics.us</a>
Posted by (3 comments )
Link Flag
Where there's a will ......
there is bound to be a way! I think software companies wanting
business in China or for that matter in any country practicing
information control are in a hard place. Can we really expect
them to confront the higher powers to be? I don't think they can
if they want to do business. I also think they should not be
helping such regimes find out who posts what as well. This is
where they need to draw the line. Let people who set up web
sites figure a way to stay one step ahead of censors. Help people
who use the web to provide truthful information to find a means
to circumvent the controllers who are obviously in fear of what
people find out. Information cannot be suppressed. It's like
water under pressure. Leaks will spring open in the seams of
controlled communication and the true nature of things will get
out. If you run a software company keep your business going
just stay out of the way of those who care to see reality stream!
Posted by kfdan (21 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Well said, grandstanding
China went thru 50 years of proproganda warfare with USA, just like Rice is proposing $75m to blitz Iran. One thinks any country capable will be guarded, especially when our politician behave they way they do.

Should be gradeful for the fact the these companies are in China, conforming to the law of the land earning invisible exports to help balance of payment.

Until the day the internet community can govern itself with regards to responsible expressions, I can see more countries with firewalls in the future. Funny cartoons only.
Posted by Wpan (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
responsible expression
By "responsible expression" do you mean to exclude honest and open discussion of the Laogai and Tibet? I feel sorry for anyone who actually believes it's somehow utilitarian to be fed outright lies. The US may feed us lies too- but at least we are given the freedom to hear the opposition.

Such censorship is an insult to the intelligence and humanity of every Chinese citizen.
Posted by dosware (13 comments )
Link Flag
Double standards
You sponsor Palestina, U.S. describe now as terrorist state. You claim to respect human rights but still you have established Guantanamo Bay prison. Shall I go on???

And do not tell you that U.S. has no censorship. I come from ex-USSR and has few/no illusions on how such states (USA, USSR) are working. Innards are barely different.

IMO, people do deserve their rulers. Respecting law of the country is must.

But to the country of double standards, of course rules can be relaxed, for sake of uhmmm... human rights (like in Guantanamo Bay), for sake of free speech (like CIA/FBI people sitting in every major TV station).

You, people on other side of Atlantics, got to get a wake up call. 9/11 - instead of wake-up call - seems to put you even deeper into the self-induced trauma.

I'll repeat: people deserve their rulers. Respecting law of the country is must. Laws made by rulers - anyway we see them are paramount. You wanna make friends? - respect their laws. Wanna make enemies? - respect nobodies but your own laws. (Try to guess where U.S. is at moment.)
Posted by Philips (395 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Double standards ?
Ihar Filipau comments that: "You wanna make friends? - respect their laws."

This is CREATING a double standard, not abiding by one. For a quick example--try applying that rule to other countries and regions, such as the middle-east or China...

If the middle east respected laws of free speach--would there be riots throughout Pakistan and clerics issuing contracts to kill artists?

If China respected these laws would this entire debate even be happening?--Free speach and free dissemination of knowledge is LAW in many, many countries, and seen as a natural right by many tens of millions of people.

But do you dare make a call for this right to be respected by all? Sometimes there's a difference between doing what is right, and making friends. And a great many believe that ethical integrity is more important than popularity.
Posted by Bloogy (1 comment )
Link Flag
Very little grandstanding
I watched the coverage on CNN and saw lots of moral passion, but think that the charge of grandstanding is in your own head, simply because you can't believe anyone in Congress would really care if American companies engage in information censorship. No, they care, and do so deeply, as do I. I just regret that you do not. As you quote Google, "In an imperfect world, we had to make an imperfect choice." No, they didn't. No one is forcing Google to do business in China. For google, it is simply a case that money is more important than morality. If they had not opened Google.cn, do you seriously believe that our China trade and loans from China would be endangered? Of course they would not be.
Posted by samgmcf (20 comments )
Reply Link Flag
How to settle a political debate
The politicians will never accomplish anything. Most likely the real change will come from the private sector. For instance, all that needs happen is some ambitious attorney dig one of these Chinese guys out of prison, get them into the U.S. for political persecution and use them to enter into litigation against Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft. Think of it, billions in legal fees could be made, these companies sacrificed the freedom, lives, and health of these people and their families for economic gain. The minute an attorney gets one of these guys onto U.S. soil these internet companies might as well hand them a billion dollars, it'll be far cheaper then hearing it in a courtroom.
Posted by candhobbes (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
"responsible expression"
By "responsible expression" do you mean to exclude honest and open discussion of the Laogai and Tibet? I feel sorry for anyone who actually believes it's somehow utilitarian to be fed outright lies. The US may feed us lies too- but at least we are given the freedom to hear the opposition.

Such over-the-top censorship is an insult to the intelligence and humanity of every Chinese citizen.
Posted by dosware (13 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

ie8 fix

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (-0.60%) -74.92 12,454.83
S&P 500 (-0.22%) -2.86 1,317.82
NASDAQ (-0.07%) -1.85 2,837.53
CNET TECH (-0.20%) -4.05 2,040.30
  Symbol Lookup
ie8 fix
  • Recently Viewed Products
  • My Lists
  • My Software Updates
  • Promo
  • Log In | Join CNET