Microsoft China blocks words ‘democracy’, ‘freedom’

[enajh2]

The users of Microsoft's new China-based internet portal were recently blocked from using the words ‘democracy’, ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’ in a move by the software giant to please Beijing. Other words that are not permitted on Microsoft China's free online blog service, MSN Spaces, include: ‘Taiwan independence’ and ‘demonstration’.

If a user attempts to post one of these words in his blog, he would recieve the following message: "this item should not contain forbidden speech such as profanity. Please enter a different word for this item".

Microsoft has already been critisized for working with the Chinese government in an attempt to censor the internet.

Source: http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=28937&category=main

 

[melon]

Capitalism, that is $$, trumps democracy every time.

Melon

 

[Se7en]

Capitalism, that is $$, trumps democracy every time.

Melon

yep.

 

[Sparkysgrrrl]

Sad

 

[nbcrusader]

This is the fault of the big bad corporation?


You want licensing rights in China, you play on their terms. The grip of the Chinese government is all over this one.

 

[Se7en]

kowtow to beijing -> get licensing rights -> get money.

or...

don't kowtow to beijing -> don't get licensing rights -> don't get money.

 

[nbcrusader]

So, Bejing seems to be the root of the problem, not capitalism.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Yes, Beijing is most certainly the root. I think what people are trying to say is it's a shame that capitalistic wants will greedily bow down to that problem. But I guess it's not that simple. Question is, what's better? Corporations bend to fit, or they say f*ck off and stay out of China? Which is more likely to bring about change?

 

[verte76]

Beijing is definitely at fault. Microsoft can't stay out of China and they have to screw with a repressive government to do this. I wish they could get rid of the government but unfortunately that's beyond their control. I'm sure they'd greatly prefer not having to screw with this government but they don't have a choice. I think it'd be worse if they just stayed out of China altogether. This way the Chinese can be exposed to the world outside of China, and that's a positive thing.

 

[nbcrusader]

Yes, Beijing is most certainly the root. I think what people are trying to say is it's a shame that capitalistic wants will greedily bow down to that problem. But I guess it's not that simple. Question is, what's better? Corporations bend to fit, or they say f*ck off and stay out of China? Which is more likely to bring about change?

I understand the situation. But I believe that the Chinese will benefit from a slightly censored internet vs. no internet at all.

 

[Se7en]

i think the point is that it's a shame that no one will stand up for human rights, democracy, etc, all of the things we supposedly cherish, when a few greenbacks are at stake.

i think a sudden end to foreign investment would create a social/economic unrest that would ultimately benefit the people of china in the long run more than google or yahoo! will. unfortunately there's no money in it.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

That might just simply lead to disaster. China is lightyears more open then it was 2 decades ago. Little things creeping in may eventually work far better than essentially crashing the whole country with your fingers crossed.

I guess it's all down to how the business is done. For example, the many allegations against Murdoch for softening his China reporting in his Western media, in return for favourable deals there - that's flat out wrong.

 

[Se7en]

That might just simply lead to disaster. China is lightyears more open then it was 2 decades ago. Little things creeping in may eventually work far better than essentially crashing the whole country with your fingers crossed.

i don't think the entire country would collapse, but it could create a situation where the people are able to take it back.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

If you pulled 'the West' out of China completely, ie we aren't sending them Coke anymore and they aren't making our Nikes anymore, then at this stage it would be near impossible for them to recover.

Having said that, they do appear at the moment to be doing their darndest to catch up and compete. For example, it won't be that long till there's a Chinese car maker with a dealership in your area. I read an article the other day that said, as another example of where China will head and how quickly they could get there, that they were graduating several hundred thousand engineers a year in China. At a certain level, the pay in the US would be $150,000 a year, but in China it's $300 a month. They interviewed an American in China who also believed that they were better than in the US, work harder, better educated, more drive etc. It's just one example from a country that has the ability to absolutely boom on it's own. That to me = 'problems'.

 

[A_Wanderer]

i think a sudden end to foreign investment would create a social/economic unrest that would ultimately benefit the people of china in the long run more than google or yahoo! will. unfortunately there's no money in it.

What the hell are you talking about, foreign investment has drastically improved China, it is raising a middle class and improving living standards and allowing the bloody people to survive. Sure it sucks that they suffer political repression but there are loopholes to these systems and having a relatively affluent group with education and global telecommunications will be a force for change.

It would fuck over the people; there would be famine and tremendous suffering. The idea of creating a "self-sufficient" nation is the hardest and cruelest form of punishment a government can do to the people.

North Korea tried this and engineered one of the worst famines of the last hundred years Not a good thing!

 

[Se7en]

What the hell are you talking about, foreign investment has drastically improved China, it is raising a middle class and improving living standards and allowing the bloody people to survive. Sure it sucks that they suffer political repression but there are loopholes to these systems and having a relatively affluent group with education and global telecommunications will be a force for change.

It would fuck over the people; there would be famine and tremendous suffering. The idea of creating a "self-sufficient" nation is the hardest and cruelest form of punishment a government can do to the people.

North Korea tried this and engineered one of the worst famines of the last hundred years Not a good thing!

what government imposing what punishment on whom? jesus, don't get your britches in a knot so quickly.

 

[A_Wanderer]

You said that China would be better off without foreign investment. The usual way that this occurs is when a government comes to power with promises of making a country "self reliant". Policies like that kill people in very large numbers and I really, really find it abhorent.

 

[melon]

China has been having sporadic peasant revolts lately. I think it's safe to say that China is no longer communist in the true definition of the word, but, rather, an autocratic capitalist nation.

Melon

 

[A_Wanderer]

China has been having sporadic peasant revolts lately. I think it's safe to say that China is no longer communist in the true definition of the word, but, rather, an autocratic capitalist nation.

Melon

I would agree with this; an autocratic capitalist nation is a shade better than an autocratic communist nation but a free nation leaves them both for dead. The question remaining is how to get a free nation.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I think if China continues in the same direction it will happen, slowly, but will happen. Just letting go bit by bit organicaly rather than any sweeping change. The question then is: How far will they let that organic process go before they throw the brakes on? I guess this threads example is a good one. Even just a decade ago (if it were there) it would have been a massive stretch to imagine China allowing this Microsoft internet package at all, but here in 2005 they will, but they've thrown the brakes on at 'freedom' etc. I guess that can be an analogy for the overall process.

The other question is, how far will will others let them go? That to me is just as interesting. That's why I brought up the example of the engineers. A country that can produce several hundred thousand engineers a year who have the same resources and are as educated as those in the West, but working for 2% of the wage of the West, are going to boom quickly and in a massive way (and it's common across most professions there now). There are some that I think will not like that one bit - democracy or not.

A_Wanderer - there was a good article in the SMH on the weekend about this, meaning it was probably in your Age, had a funny story about the Chinese wine industry. It was virtually non-existent 5 years ago, now it's the new hotspot for wine. The Chinese decided they wanted 'in' on wine so they sent a team over to Australia to learn the ropes, and take a bunch of Australian experts back with them to help get it up and running. Within 5 years later, they're on top of the game. The funny part is, one of the Chinese groups was visiting Tasmania and were treated to a reception at the Tasmanian Govt House. They liked the building so much they asked for a copy of the plans, which they were given. Now standing on some Chinese winery is a brick for brick exact replica of the Tasmanian Govt House.

The article listed many other examples where, like wine, China's jumping in, and in a big way. Electronics, cars etc. All sorts. Not just manufacturing our brands anymore, but creating and building their own with their own plans of dominance.

 

[A_Wanderer]

My cousin goes to ag college in the riverina and told me about the Chinese government running a trial thing out there; interesting stuff.

I doubt that there would be war between the USA and China, the mutual benefits of trade really are a great way to keep the peace.

 

[mikal]

i don't blame them. after seeing how much George W. has misused those words, i'd block them too.