Nice Work EU: You've Given Google An Excuse To Offer A Censored Search Engine In China
from the handing-authoritarian-states-easy-victories dept
We've already explained why we think Google is making exactly the wrong move in experimenting with a government-approved censored search engine in China, called Dragonfly. However, the company continues to move forward with this idea. CEO Sundar Pichai gave an interview with the NY Times, in which he defends this move by... arguing it's the equivalent of the "Right to Be Forgotten" in the EU, with which Google is required to comply:
One of the things that’s not well understood, I think, is that we operate in many countries where there is censorship. When we follow “right to be forgotten” laws, we are censoring search results because we’re complying with the law. I’m committed to serving users in China. Whatever form it takes, I actually don’t know the answer. It’s not even clear to me that search in China is the product we need to do today.
A few people, who I respect, have tried to argue that this analogy is unfair. Mathew Ingram has a story at the Columbia Journalism Review that rightly points out the differences between deleting content because the subject of that content complains vs. when the government wants things disappeared. Former Facebook Chief Information Security Officer Alex Stamos argued that the comparison is "amoral and mendacious." He too agrees that there are problems with the RTBF in the EU, but China's censorship is to a different degree:
The "right to be forgotten" is a form of censorship that has been abused by many individuals and it's application extra-territorially should be resisted. However, China's censorship regime is a tool to maintain the absolute control of the party-state and is in no way comparable.
I both agree and disagree with this statement. What China is doing is to a different degree. But the mechanisms and the concepts behind them are the same. Indeed, we've pointed out for years that any move towards internet censorship in the Western World is almost immediately seized upon by China to justify that country's much more aggressive and egregious political censorship. Remember, back when the US was considering SOPA/PIPA, which would have censored whole websites on the basis of claims of copyright infringement, the Chinese government gleefully pointed out that the US was copying China's approach to the internet, and pushing for a "Great Firewall" for "harmful" information. It's just that, in the US's case, that "harmful information" was infringing information that hurt the bottom line of a few entertainment companies, while in China, they saw it as anything that might lead to political unrest. But, as they made clear, it was the same thing: you guys want to keep "harmful" information offline, and so do we.
That push for SOPA/PIPA gave the Chinese cover to continue to censor the internet -- and now the EU and its silly Right to be Forgotten is doing the same thing. So, yes, the style and degree of the censorship is not the same -- but the nature of what it is and how it's done continues to give massive cover to China in dismissing any complaints about its widespread censorship regime.
That said, it is reasonable to point out that Sundar Pichai should not be helping out the Chinese in furthering this argument on the pages of the NY Times... and I'd agree with you. But at least some of the blame must fall on the EU and other governments which have increasingly moved towards internet censorship regimes. Even if they're done for a different purpose, authoritarian regimes will always seize on them to excuse their own such behavior.
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: censorship, china, dragonfly, eu, right to be forgotten, sundar pichai
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Mendacious Google and commies will ALWAYS find excuse.
YOU are of course helping Google's mendacity by trying to displace blame onto EU.
Right To Be Forgotten, a mere matter of individuals, is on the same planet, yes, but entirely UNlike Chi-Com censoring in kind and degree.
Simply shameful excusing, Masnick.
And WHY do you do try to prop up this feeble excuse? -- You've again entirely omitted that Google "sponsors" you. That too is mendacious every time, it's highly relevant information that every person needs to evaluate your bias.
You and Google are ever more openly censors, spies, and indeed, fascists and commies.
By the way: anyone interested should read The Register and comments there on this topic, comparison will show how bizarre Techdirt is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mendacious Troll
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You’re still here?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here’s a fun question for you to consider: When Google is done being purged of results linked to RTBF requests, how long do you think people will wait before filing such requests with the actual news sites which hold the pages that those people want forgotten?
RTBF is an affront to free speech because it has censorious intent from the get-go. To defend it in any way is to defend government-sponsored censorship—a lesser degree of censorship than found in China, yes, but government-sponsored censorship all the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mendacious Google and commies will ALWAYS find excuse.
YOU are of course helping Google's mendacity by trying to displace blame onto EU.
It is a bizarre mind that would take a post that is openly critical of Pichai and Google's plans and excuses and interpreting that as me somehow "helping Google."
Want to try again? I have made it clear that I think Google's action wrt China are despicable and shameful. I find Pichai's comments here equally problematic, but am also pointing out how awful it is that the EU allows him to hide behind their own actions as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mendacious Google and commies will ALWAYS find excuse.
As a dedicated fluffer blue is, of course, not going to do anything aside from blame Google.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Voldemort Algorithm
#include <nothing_to_see_here_please_return_to_your_homes.h>
#ignore <all_the_rumours.h>
#pragma_override
#define Voldemort void
#end pragma override
Voldemort main(Voldemort){
find(the_truth);
return the_peoples_rights;
}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Blue boy Algorithm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Blue boy Algorithm
By the way, what does this function ACTUALLY return?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Blue boy Algorithm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Blue boy Algorithm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Blue boy Algorithm
This is not compilable code, but the point is that Voldemort, in this case, does not refer to reaction-hyper-triggering Blue Boy, but the right-to-be-forgotten laws.
If you want to experience a Googlenope, then these laws will help that to happen. You can imagine what Gollum-dogan (Er-Gollum?) would like to do with these.
It's a pity that blue boy causes such trigger events because a lot of ACs hold views that may not agree with some of the US voting electorate, yet they are not giblet-caressing blue boy, who seems as coherent as a goose in a GE90.
I guess by now you have already googled Al Khwarizmi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
technicians running wild
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: technicians running wild
Equally fascinating is the piss poor quality of their offered services. If you've ever had the displeasure of dealing directly with their APIs you'll know what I'm talking about. It's as if each employee is allowed to work on their own and just publish whatever they come up with sans any kind of peer review. If they do peer review then I'm even more disappointed in them. Apart from search and perhaps gmail, avoid their product like the plague.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: technicians running wild
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: technicians running wild
Source: my father, who spent literally decades as a Prof teaching MBA students.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: technicians running wild
In fact, I'm starting to think that's the entire point of business school.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: technicians running wild
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Clearly a legal scam
It's people like you, who give up without a fight even when they're within their rights, who destroy things for everyone.
If no one will stand up for their rights, we won't have any.
Being a citizen includes some responsibilities. One of those is to refuse to be trodden upon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Clearly a legal scam
Often there are economic justifications. If fighting costs more than {you can afford,the anticipated return from winning,some other limit} then it may be a sound business decision.
In the case of the non-profit transport safety site posting ancient power points, and disregarding the positive good of eliminating power points, I would see the business decision as comparing zero (income) to non-zero (cost to fight).
Fix the copyright litigation system, which may be a fairly large and difficult task, and you may lower the cost to fight so as to obtain better outcomes.
I have seen cases where ``losing'' makes more economic sense than winning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Clearly a legal scam
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Clearly a legal scam
Just as it's a sound personal decision not to vote - because my vote is profoundly unlikely to affect the election result, while for sure it'll take 45 minutes out of my day.
But good citizens vote anyway.
As I said, being a citizen includes some responsibilities. Above and beyond what's good for you personally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's only censorship...
when it's not something I want censored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another Censorship Article
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/11/french-investigators-to-work-directly-with-facebook-t o-monitor-hate-speech/?comments=1&unread=1#unread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So... how is that "Give ICANN to the world" policy looking now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So... how is that "Give ICANN to the world" policy looking now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
From the destruction of printing presses to the removal of websites.
History is repeating itself yet again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not the EU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]