By John Ballard
Google's challenge to Chinese authorities over web censorship is attracting flowers, at least at the corporate headquarters.
Some Web users are showing their support for the company on Twitter,
which, though blocked in China, can be accessed by tech-savvy netizens,
where they began organizing to take real-world action. At Google
offices in China, pictured below, fans of the company gathered, some
bearing flowers and messages wishing Google well. The so-called �flower
campaign� gave rise to several slogans, such as �Farewell for Reunion�
and �GoogleBye.�
But others see an ulterior motive on the part of Google. Evgeny Morozov, originally from Belarus, is a Yahoo! Fellow at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. He's skeptical of Google's real reasons but seems grudgingly appreciative of an obvious PR success.
Unlike many other honorable members of the technology blogosphere, I am not too excited about Google's ultimatum to the Chinese government (if you have been living in a cave or are not on Twitter: Google wants to either stop censoring search results on Google.cn or shut down their Chinese shop altogether).
Of course, all companies make mistakes, and Google's executives may have discovered that they blundered when they decided to offer a censored version of Google.cn. I grant them the right to to fix the situation.
But to wrap their decision in the melodramatic rhetoric of cyberattacks on Chinese human rights activists? Give me a break. Their supposed naivete about whom they were dealing with just doesn't sound very convincing. Are we really supposed to believe that, until they experienced cyberattacks on the email accounts of the Chinese human rights activists, they thought that their counterparts in the Chinese government were all good and well-meaning chaps who would never think of such a thing?
I won't be surprised if it turns out that cybercriminals in virtually every country wage cyberattacks on Gmail and other Google services. This is now what Internet companies should be expecting: cyberattacks just happen. Is Google going to threaten to leave from all those countries, too, even if it doesn't censor the Web there? If other companies were ready to shut down their shops in China or Russia every time they come under cyberattacks, they would all be done in their first months of operation.
[...]
Here is my very crude and cynical (Eastern European) reading of the situation: Google was in need of some positive PR to correct its worsening image (especially in Europe, where concerns about privacy are mounting on a daily basis). Google.cn is the goat that would be sacrificed, for it will generate most positive headlines and may not result in devastating losses to Google's business (Google.cn holds roughly 30 percent of the Chinese market).
All the talk about cybersecurity breaches seems epiphenomenal to this plan; it may simply be the easiest way to frame Google's decision without triggering too many "why, oh why?" questions. Besides, there is no better candy for U.S. media and politicians than the threat of an all-out cyber-Armageddon initiated by Chinese hackers. I can assure everyone that at least a half of all discussions that Google's move would spur would be about the need to make America more secure from cyberattacks. No better timing to throw more terrorism-related meat to the U.S. public ("what if they read Obama's email?").
Now, if you believe that Google was wrong to censor the Web in China in the first place, I doubt you'll suddenly become a fan of their work -- they still don't seem to recognize that censoring the Web in China may have been wrong for ethical reasons and frame it simply as a business decision (based on new security threats). You'll probably think that they are now doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
If, on the other hand, you believe that they did the right thing in China by offering their limited service (rather than no service at all), I don't see how this move could make you feel good either: all it took to get Google to shut down their "public service" was to launch a bunch of cyberattacks (so, should we expect that, instead of direct censorship, authoritarian governments would now simply launch cyberattacks on their targets and force them to leave under psychological pressure?). Thus, you'll probably think that they are now doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons.
So, I don't really understand all the enthusiasm about Google's move. Can anyone really make a coherent argument that by threatening to leave China because of cyberattacks, they are doing the right thing for the right reason? I'd very much like to hear it.
H/T Blake Hounshell. That guy reads everything.
Hard to see through the fog to determing what truly motivated Google to bail. For some time now, they were portrayed as tools of the Chinese government, never a PR prize. They may have done the right thing for the wrong reason, as you suggest, but I am satisfied with the outcome even the motivation is suspect. As far as Google's inconsistent behavior in other nations, this is the realpolitik way the world works. Great post. www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteAgree. Credit to Praktike.
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks.
(I pick up as much from Twitter now as is do from the aggregator. At the rate things are changing, blogging may follow newspapers into oblivion.)