Self-Censorship in China
Eric Schabel & Fahad Pervaiz
The Issue

In order to reach a wider audience by
joining in on the massive Chinese market,
western companies such Google, Yahoo,
and Microsoft have opted to relax moral
standards by voluntarily cooperating with
the Chinese government’s strict censorship
laws—many of which violate the rights to
freedom of speech and information that are
valued by cultures across the globe.
The Issue

Human rights groups, free speech activists,
hackers, company executives, and many Chinese
citizens have all spoken out against this selfcensorship, especially after the launch of
Google.cn.

The companies participating in self-censorship
have defended their positions—sometimes
claiming a moral imperative, such as
utilitarianism, in order to operate in the country
despite the denial of basic freedoms with which
they cooperate.
The Mechanisms of Censorship

The Chinese government has direct control over the ISPs
(Internet Service Providers) that provide internet access
within the country, meaning material that it deems
“sensitive” will be blocked before internet users ever
have a chance to discover it.
– Blocked sites include western media outlets and human rights
organizations, among many others


The ISPs also filter email services in much the same way
spam is filtered, allowing them to block unwanted
subjects from being discussed over the internet.
Beyond the technology, however, it is the culture of fear
that works most effectively to keep the web selfcensoring—people can and have gone to prison for
breaking China’s censorship laws.
The Problem with Self-Censorship
The Chinese government’s strict censorship laws
can be easily be viewed as a denial of basic
human rights, and rightfully so, but the
companies that have entered the Chinese
market at the expense of these rights are also to
blame.
 By cooperating with Beijing, Google, Yahoo, and
Microsoft (among others) are contributing to the
oppression of the freedoms of speech and
information.

The Problem with Self-Censorship
At least 50 people, including journalists, are currently
imprisoned in China for writing about “controversial”
subjects on the internet.
 One unfortunate example of this is
Shi Tao, a poet who was sentenced
to ten years in prison for sending an
email to a pro-democracy
organization.
 The information used to prosecute
Tao was supplied by Yahoo.

The Problem with Self-Censorship


By foregoing respect for human rights, the western
companies that have access to the Chinese market are
actively participating with the Chinese government’s
culture of human rights oppression and fear, even if it is
indirectly.
This disrespect for humanity is the very definition of
unethical.
Researching Tiananmen Square

Google.com

Google.cn
The Other Side
Information for all
The Other Side


China has the largest population of any country in the
world—over 1.3 billion people.
Some estimates claim that 150 to 200 million Chinese
citizens currently use the internet regularly—a number
that rivals or surpasses U.S. statistics. By 2010, this
number will be at least 250 million.

Even using an
outdated chart, it is
easy to see that
China’s presence on
the net is significant
and growing:
The Other Side
Why should these people be denied access to powerful tools
like Google?
 Yahoo and MSN have a simple response for critics, maintaining
that their respective companies will always respect the laws of
the countries in which they work.
 Google has gone through great lengths to express that it is
their view that having Google services available to Chinese
internet users, even in censored form, is best for the greater
good of the Chinese people.
 By having a presence in China,
Google can better help to affect
change in Government policy
towards censorship.

Google.cn: Making a Difference?
Outside of China
Self-censorship is not limited to China—in
France, Italy, Austria, and Germany, sites such
as Google, eBay, and Amazon are required to
block white supremacist and nazi-related items.
 Though few would argue in support of such
material, it is still an example of self-censorship
and the denial of freedom of information within
the western world.
 Is this form of self-censorship more
acceptable?

What is Your Take?

In France, one cannot buy Nazi
paraphernalia from any merchant. eBay
cooperates with this law by blocking all
products and users linked to Nazism from
their sites.
– Is this form of censorship more acceptable
than Beijing’s policy of blocking “sensitive”
topics? Keep in mind that buying Nazi
products is completely legal here in the
States.
Your Take, Pt. 2

Is self-censorship in China a subject that
western society should see through a lens
of cultural relativism? While very few
people actually agree with what the
Chinese government is doing, is it
necessary to fault businesses for
attempting to exist in the ever-expanding
Chinese market?