The Same Day The NY Times Praised Google For Standing Up To China, The Times Paid Singapore's Leaders
from the parallels dept
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.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
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 ]
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 ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
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 ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
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 ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh please, praise Google?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]