Father Of The Great Firewall Defends Chinese Internet Censorship By Noting The US Does The Same Thing

from the not-quite...-but... dept

Fri, Feb 18th 2011 10:02am — Mike Masnick

The LA Times points us to a fascinating (English-language) interview with the guy in China credited with creating that country's Great Firewall censorship system, named Fang Binxing. The interview has a bunch of interesting nuggets -- including the fact that he has 5 VPN accounts to get around his own Great Firewall. Though, to be fair, he insists that those VPNs are for research only, to make sure the Great Firewall is doing what it's supposed to do.

The report also notes that Fang appears to be widely hated throughout China. When he recently joined a Twitter-like Chinese "microblogging" clone, he was immediately attacked by angry citizens who hate the Great Firewall. I actually find this admission quite fascinating, because the Chinese government, for many years, has tried to spin things to the rest of the world by claiming that most Chinese appreciated the censorship, because it kept them focused/less distracted/less subjected to dumb TV. However, Fang's admission suggests a lot of people are not at all happy about the Great Firewall.

But, the most interesting point of all is how he defends the Great Firewall by claiming that pretty much every other country -- including the US -- does something similar:

Such a firewall is a "common phenomenon around the world," he argues, and nor is China alone in monitoring and controlling the Internet.

"As far as I know, about 180 countries including South Korea and the US monitor the Internet as well."

Of course, "monitoring" the internet, and totally censoring it are two very different things. Still, this does highlight a point we've made a few times around here. Every time the US does something that appears to weaken freedom of speech or set up some sort of censorship system like COICA, we have less and less credibility or leverage when it comes to other countries and trying to convince them not to censor online services.

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

Filed Under: china, fang binxing, great firewall

59 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Skeptical Cynic (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 10:04am

When you want to hold yourself up as a standard...
you need to make sure that it is a standard that is good. the US has was once a an incredible example of true personal, individual freedom. Freedom in all things within basic boundaries of decent human behavior. But we have evolved in to a country trying to stifle innovation and force wrong ideas of protectionism on the world. We as a country created the network that would give rise to the greatest information distributional system the world has ever known. Why now can we not see that what we did (with warts and zits) is always going to be better than stopping the spread on information for whatever purpose!

Power breeds the need to control anything that could lessen your power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marc, 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:29am
  
  Re: When you want to hold yourself up as a standard...
  " the US has was once a an incredible example of true personal, individual freedom. Freedom in all things within basic boundaries of decent human behavior."
  
  Please provide a 10-year period during which U.S. was the magical fairy land.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - senshikaze (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:43am
    
    Re: Re: When you want to hold yourself up as a standard...
    I think there were a few months in 1776. Maybe.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Christopher (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 1:43pm
    
    Re: Re: When you want to hold yourself up as a standard...
    I would say never. The fact is that the United States has ALWAYS had it's boogie men who they railed against.
    
    Heterosexuals outside of marriage.
    Homosexuals.
    Blacks having sex with whites.
    Today, pedosexuals.
    
    Tomorrow, it will be someone else.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:22pm
    
    Re: Re: When you want to hold yourself up as a standard...
    23 years ago I was in Amsterdam and it was like we were rock stars in the coffee shops. Oh the American guys are here they would say, and before we knew it we were dispelling myths (our streets were lined with gold. No kidding Ali from Turkey really thought that.) and letting ppl know about our culture. It was truly amazing, everyone loved us, and it really changed my perspective. They treated each other much better than we do. I dont know if the magical fairy land ever existed, but the perception did. I would be curios how we would be received today?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 10:26am

I liked the part in the interview where they posted things on Fang Binxing's blog and called him a "running dog".

http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=94865

LOL!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Martin, 18 Feb 2011 @ 10:51am

Check which websites and searches are blocked in mainland China at http://www.greatfirewall.biz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ron (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:01am

We Do It ...
We do it, so they're gonna do it. If all the US Internet censors and supporters of censorship jumped off a bridge, would he Chiness equivalents do that as well? Oh, wait, that would be a good thing. Carry on!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:04am

But... But... CENSORSHIP!

Oh Mike, you are so transparent at times. If Fidel Castro came out against patents and copyrights, you would call him a great forward thinking man who supports freedom.

Watching you go when you get onto something is really quite amusing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:19am
  
  Re:
  Wow, you managed to hit ALL of the AC stereotypes in one go.
  
  You even managed to do the "But... But..." with a completely straight face. Kudos to you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:07pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Which is a derivative of the phrase: BUT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT!!!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:14pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Hey, if Mike can post this self-serving crap with a straight face, I can answer it in a similar fashion.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - techflaws.org (profile), 19 Feb 2011 @ 3:03am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      And be ridiculed in response.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:29am
  
  Re:
  Wow... so what would your headline for this post have been?
  
  "Enemy Of The State Criticizes China's Beloved Internet Firewall"
  or perhaps
  "Normal Day In China, No New Points Raised"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:55am
    
    Re: Re:
    No, how about "We Find Off Hand Case That Agrees With Our Warped View Of the World, View Confirmed"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcus Carab (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:33pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What view is that, exactly? Opposing government mandated censorship?
      
      Yeah, that's downright twisted...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:34pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      That would get old if you reused it for every story since there are so many of them.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        yet somehow appropriate.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 3:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        oh look another story about something looking like a duck and acting like a duck that is labeled the miracle sheep that can't be distinguished from a duck.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Ron Rezendes (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 4:17pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You stole my duck picture, now I have no duck!
        
        Could someone in Congress please help me protect the ducks?!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jackwagon (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:43am
  
  Re:
  a troll button would be nice
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:10pm
  
  Re:
  thanks TAM for checking in. Have a good weekend.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:25am

"When he recently joined a Twitter-like Chinese "microblogging" clone [...] because it kept them focused/less distracted/less subjected to dumb TV [...]"

Makes sense to me. There are a lot of people in China. Most are focused/less distracted/not wasting their time on a microblogging clone and the others don't like the great firewall :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
known coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:25am

like i tell my kids
Do as I say, not as I do.

of course that does not work so well with adults.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
weneedhelp (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 11:31am

Though, to be fair, he insists that those VPNs are for research only
This weeks "research" topic, the female anatomy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:00pm

Censorship and monitoring are not two completely different things.
Where a person or group of people know they are being monitored, this tends to have a chilling effect on freedom of speech. This is the reason most courts uphold the anonymous comments as protected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:05pm

Bullshit
This argument is so transparently vacant it's no wonder no one with any power has bought this.

Computer and Communications Industry Association President Ed Black questioned Morton on whether the seizure of domain names sets a precedent that will allow less Democratic governments around the world such as China or Iran to seize domain names in the name of intellectual property protection but are really aimed at shutting down political speech they oppose.

Morton said the agency must balance competing interests but added that "my view is that I don't want to pursue work on ICE based on concerns on how another country may misapply what we're doing."

http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2011/01/customs-chief-defends-seizure.php

The US has always enforced laws. But because other countries abuse laws, we no longer can have any at all?

Ludicrous as always.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mke, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:06pm

B.S.
This argument is so transparently vacant it's no wonder no one with any power has bought this.

Computer and Communications Industry Association President Ed Black questioned Morton on whether the seizure of domain names sets a precedent that will allow less Democratic governments around the world such as China or Iran to seize domain names in the name of intellectual property protection but are really aimed at shutting down political speech they oppose.

Morton said the agency must balance competing interests but added that "my view is that I don't want to pursue work on ICE based on concerns on how another country may misapply what we're doing."

http://techdailydose.nationaljournal.com/2011/01/customs-chief-defends-seizure.php

The US has always enforced laws. But because other countries abuse laws, we no longer can have any at all?

Ludicrous as always.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mke, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:06pm

Ludicrous
This argument is so transparently vacant it's no wonder no one with any power has bought this.

From the National Journal:

Computer and Communications Industry Association President Ed Black questioned Morton on whether the seizure of domain names sets a precedent that will allow less Democratic governments around the world such as China or Iran to seize domain names in the name of intellectual property protection but are really aimed at shutting down political speech they oppose.

Morton said the agency must balance competing interests but added that "my view is that I don't want to pursue work on ICE based on concerns on how another country may misapply what we're doing."

The US has always enforced laws. But because other countries abuse laws, we no longer can have any at all?

Ludicrous as always.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re: Ludicrous
  Nice strawman. That's the whole of the logic being used by other nations. The ICE seizures look a lot like censorship, so naturally, other, more repressive, nations are going to use that as an excuse.
  
  How is that not a logical extension of what's being said?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:26pm
    
    Re: Re: Ludicrous
    Law enforcement often looks like censorship to the guilty and their friends.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcus Carab (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:37pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      And censorship often looks like law enforcement to the oppressive and their friends.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:26pm
    
    Re: Re: Ludicrous
    look a lot like censorship? The ICE seizures are censorship. There is absolutely no doubt about that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:42pm
    
    Re: Re: Ludicrous
    Who cares? Do you really think China needs America shutting down piracy to censor its people? Newsflash: it's been doing it all on its own for years.
    
    Or do you really think Iran needs America speaking out against The Pirate Bay to shut down civil rights? Reality has already spoken, and no it doesn't.
    
    Did you know that (*gasp*) in America we put criminals in JAIL? But surely evil nations will use that as an excuse to unfairly incarcerate people in turn!?
    
    Quick! Empty the prisons! China might be ready to jail another activist!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 1:14pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      The trouble comes when you start using the shotgun approach like this. The US shutting down piracy is no big deal if thats what they were doing. Taking down the whole sites that include all sort of innocent people's stuff is when you get into trouble.. It's more like if putting criminals in jail was too much work, so the US just put the whole town where the crime occured in jail. *Then* the other countries who put innocents in jail would say "so what the U.S. does the same thing".
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gwiz (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      Who cares? Do you really think China needs America shutting down piracy to censor its people? Newsflash: it's been doing it all on its own for years.
      
      Nope. You are right. They don't need the US to anything to keep doing what they have been doing.
      
      The problem is that when the US starts doing these types of activities themselves it erodes the ethical foundation away and the US will no longer be able to stand on the high ground and decry such things anymore.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 3:11pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        I think it's credibility you are thinking of. They can still decry such things, it's just they will get laughed at more.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 8:13pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      Did you know that gasp! America puts mothers in jail for filming their kids birthday party?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 21 Feb 2011 @ 6:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      E- Poor effort. See me after class.
      
      Iran and China aren't trying to bully the rest of the world into increasing repressive measures whilst hypocritically pretending they are against such measures, like the US does.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:36pm
  
  Re: Ludicrous
  "my view is that I don't want to pursue work on ICE based on concerns on how another country may misapply what we're doing."
  
  See, that would make perfect sense, except for one thing: the U.S. is extremely vocal about being anti-censorship in other countries, and constantly makes statements to the effect that they ARE concerned about how other states around the world treat the internet, as well as dedicating money to promoting internet freedom overseas. They can't have it both ways.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike, 18 Feb 2011 @ 12:51pm
    
    Re: Re: Ludicrous
    Why can't you be in favor of shutting down piracy, child porn, and terrorist websites and still be in favor of freedom for political speech?
    
    It's always been that way in America.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 1:01pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      terrorist websites are probably going be mostly political speech for one thing... You would have to say you are in favour of certain types of political speech.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcus Carab (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 1:03pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      You can. But it means you have to be extremely careful - not reckless and indiscriminate - when shutting down the bad things.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Christopher (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 1:45pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      You cannot. The fact is that child pornography is just the new 'boogie man' foisted on society like pedosexuality is used as a boogie man in the same way.
      
      Terrorist websites? Would that be any website that calls for the overthrow of the United States? Which, by the way, our own Founding Fathers said was a viable choice.
      Another salient point, most of the 'terrorists' have been created by the United States own bad actions in the world in the past 100 years.
      
      Piracy? Get real, you are never going to get rid of that, and companies are just going to have to 'compete with free' by giving people things at a reasonable price with the peace of mind that those things are not virus/malware infested.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:17pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        The fact is that child pornography is just the new 'boogie man' foisted on society like pedosexuality is used as a boogie man in the same way.
        
        It isn't a new boogie man. It's the same item that has been used since the internet went commercial back in the mid 90s. See acts like COPA, COPAII, the Adam Walsh Law, all the administrative changes to laws like USC 18 section 2256 and 2257 (regarding commercial adult sites), and so on... all are done "to protect the kids", but have little or no "kid protection" in them.
        
        Child porn is a real issue. What ICE is doing is actually somewhat more effective than the usual hand wringing and finger pointing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        Why don't they just label everyone a child pornographer? I think it would solve this piracy thing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 3:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        Funny enough, the more people try to hide what they are doing online, the more likely they are going to be targeted by laws using whatever boogie-man is in fashion at the time. Child porn is an ongoing issue on the internet, and likely to be a very popular public face of aggressive attacks against everything from legal porn to piracy.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 3:52pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        And they say freedom is dead.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Ron Rezendes (profile), 18 Feb 2011 @ 4:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        "Funny enough, the more people try to hide what they are doing online, the more likely they are going to be targeted by laws using whatever boogie-man is in fashion at the time." You have made the point I prefer right there, in that statement! I don't want to hide anything I do online and unless it is something that is actually criminal in nature, IT'S NOBODY'S FUCKING BUSINESS - ESPECIALLY MY GOVERNMENT! However, when ICE (my gov't) independently decides that some sites might have done something wrong and remove the use of those sites without ANY proof, charges, or the use of due process as guaranteed to the citizens of this country by our founding fathers then the target needs to be the government agency who has overstepped their authority and ignored the rights of the citizens for whom they serve!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 8:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        Ron, the sites did enough wrong to justify the judge signing the warrant for seizure of the domains. That is more than just randomly selected domains and knocking them off for fun.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2011 @ 1:06am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        How do you know that?
        
        I can also say the sites did nothing wrong as not one of them has had a hearing in a court of law.
        
        Also the screw up shutting down 84.000 websites in one seizure is just a hint that those domains are not being checked correctly and the judge is just rubber stamping everything that comes his way.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2011 @ 6:13am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        *sigh*
        
        The hearing in court comes after. It may never happen if the people are not US citizens or residents, as they may never answer a summons.
        
        As for the "84,000", please try to follow along. They shut down a single domain. That the domain had "sold" or "given out" 84,000 sub-domains doesn't change anything at all. It is one single domain. The third level domains are a contract between the dynamic DNS people and their users, not subject to the rules and laws that exist for domain names, not part of the domain name agreement.
        
        Thanks for playing, but if you are going to rant, try ranting about things that have some basis in law.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Jay (profile), 19 Feb 2011 @ 10:02am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        Due process is one of those things.
        
        How about ICE try to do something constructive than alert the pedos that they're on to them and force them to flee like roaches?
        
        If you're going to rant they're in the right, why not make sure they go after the bad guys and NOT screw up on the BS such as this?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        btrussell (profile), 19 Feb 2011 @ 9:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
        They are going to have to. What is child porn? Breastfeeding?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 8:14pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Ludicrous
      Why can't you be in favor of actually putting criminals in jail and not warning them before hand it was always been that way in America but unfortunately it changed somehow.
      
      Now America want to censor its population.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2011 @ 2:47pm
  
  Re: Ludicrous
  The point isn't that Iran or China needs this to continue censorship.
  
  It's that the US is losing its own standing to speak out against censorship.
  
  The more of a hypocrite you show yourself to be, the less the rest of the world will take you seriously. You want to lose your credibility, by all means, commit the same violations that you're bad mouthing others for. Don't be surprised when other respectable nations start ignoring you though.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws.org (profile), 19 Feb 2011 @ 3:05am
  
  Re: Ludicrous
  And where exactly did Mike say the US needs no laws at all? Right, he didn't so why would you write such crap?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2011 @ 6:26pm

Since so many trolls derailed the point of this article, I think it bears repeating:

A Chinese firewall creator approved of he United States of America's censorship, and said it was just like theirs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
okwhen (profile), 19 Feb 2011 @ 9:44pm

Freedom is an illusion
Marc, I agree and freedom is an mythical illusion in the majority of all countries. For every freedom one thinks they have, I contest their are many laws against it or ways to infringe on it. In the USA where I live, this is a few of them. Indians, we have signed countless of treaties with them and yet the USA maintain higher rights over their sovereign nations. If anyone meaning an individual have ever directly confronted a large corporation then you know the legal fees are well beyond your capacity. The same is true with our legal system. The law and people consider someone agrees to accept a plea bargain as guilty and in many cases it is based on a monetary decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]