The Same Day The NY Times Praised Google For Standing Up To China, The Times Paid Singapore's Leaders

from the parallels dept

Mon, Apr 5th 2010 6:27pm — Mike Masnick

Two big stories recently were Google's decision to effectively leave China and the NY Times' agreement to pay Singapore's leaders for daring to refer to the fact that a father and son pair had both been prime minister as a "dynasty." The Times' public editor is now comparing the two situations -- and while he notes that Singapore is an important market for many media publications, and from a business perspective, the decision makes sense, he seems to suggest that Google got this right, while the Times got it wrong:

Google faced a similar painful dilemma in China. With potentially billions of dollars at risk, it stuck to its principles, and The Times applauded editorially. I think Google set an example for everyone who believes in the free flow of information.

Filed Under: china, singapore
Companies: google, nytimes

12 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

kryptonianjorel (profile), 5 Apr 2010 @ 6:36pm

"...The Times applauded editorially. I think Google set an example for everyone who believes in the free flow of information."

Oh the irony! A 'free flow of information' from the NYT can be yours for $17.99 a month...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymous coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 7:05pm

Google didn't "stick to it's principles" until China attacked them individually.

I mean, yes, stand up to censorship, but do it from the start, not when it suits your childish need for revenge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 7:07pm
  
  Re:
  Google is still better than Yahoo and Microsoft.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 8:02pm
  
  Re:
  Google embarked on a generational plan to change China.
  
  They had to be around long enough to influence the people who live there. More importantly, the up and coming generation of "makers"
  
  Then they made a huge point over what's wrong in China.
  
  Then they punctuated the sentence with an exclamation point, and walked.
  
  It's now up to those people who they influenced to change their own country.
  
  I think this is all going according to a very brilliant plan. In fact, I know it is.
  
  The "attacks" are just a convenient excuse to execute the next part of the plan.
  
  (I mean, Chinese hackers have been attacking US sites since got their first IP address. Get real.)
  
  Idealism is good and necessary. But idealism should only inform realism, not replace it. We need China to change. For real.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - anonymous cow, 6 Apr 2010 @ 6:32am
    
    Re: Re:
    I suppose it is possible that what you write is true. So unlikely though; I call shenanigans.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - enrolled agent exam preparation, 7 Apr 2010 @ 3:16am
    
    Re: Re:
    You need China to change... but, change what? Or, change into what? A single company won't be able to reform a country that is so bound to tradition. Do you ever wonder why, even if it has the biggest population on Earth, China still seems as timid as a baby, albeit a giant baby? It's because their government has a solid grasp on their traditions, on their governance over the people. Google won't change any of that. Heck, I'd bet my house if even half of the Chinese population knows what Google is. Let alone know its intentions, regal or childish.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 7:23pm

Once again highlighting the difference between old and new media.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 10:54pm

wow. the amount paid was 114k which is lower than the costs of running it through the legal system. sometimes it is just better to pay and get it over with. hard to compare googles risk with this. big stretch to slam old media again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 5 Apr 2010 @ 11:11pm
  
  Re:
  big stretch to slam old media again
  
  Heh. In your rush to slam me, perhaps you missed that this was the NY Times slamming the NY Times.
  
  Details: not your strong suit.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 6 Apr 2010 @ 1:07am
    
    Re: Re:
    you are running the story. your site your opinion.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 6 Apr 2010 @ 4:35pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      How exactly it is a "big stretch" if..the "old media" is already slamming...itself. That's called, in the world of sane people, 0 stretch.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James_Sladen, 6 Apr 2010 @ 1:09am

Oh please, praise Google?
Google is the Skynet. Say hello to doomsday. Look, Google even hates dogs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]