The world’s largest Internet search engine, Google, recently decided to close its operations in China because it was opposed to China’s demands that it filter searches containing key search words such as “Tiananmen Square massacre,” “Falun Gong” and “Dalai Lama.”
Google’s decision shocked the world, but even more interesting is the fact that we have yet to see pro-unification media outlets within Taiwan take the stance of promoting freedom and criticizing China for harming human rights and freedom of the press.
All we have seen these media outlets do is applaud the Chinese authorities and say Google chose to give up substantial business opportunities for “political purposes,” and that it was not wise for Google to remove itself from the world’s largest market.
These media outlets have also taken pleasure in ridiculing Google’s falling stock prices and talking about how great China’s Baidu search engine is and how much its stocks have overtaken Google’s in value.
On the day Google chose to withdraw from the Chinese market, Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen not only praised Google for making the right decision, he also encouraged Microsoft’s Bing and other companies like Yahoo to withdraw from China. Sarcastic comments even appeared in China’s Chongqing Evening News about how it was not right for China to give Google no choice but to leave China. It is very regrettable that Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) last instructions to uphold democracy seem to have been totally erased from the minds of pro-unification media outlets by the Chinese Communist Party.
Does Google really not care about commercial interests? As one of the world’s largest companies, Google definitely knows what it is doing. The childhood experiences of Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, in the oppressive totalitarian USSR and the constant spying that underlay its rule are probably some of the main reasons for Google’s withdrawal from China.
The corporate image Google has managed to uphold and the trust it has gained from its users as a result of the decision to leave China are much bigger gains. Two weeks after the company’s withdrawal from China, its stock prices in the US were higher than they were before they left China, while Baidu’s stock price remained flat. It is also worth remembering that it is meaningless to compare Google and Baidu’s stock prices because Baidu’s capital stock is much lower than that of Google’s.
However, Google did not really leave the Chinese market. The company’s other business operations are still running as normal there, and Chinese Internet users can still use the simplified Chinese character version of the Google search engine, although its Web address has been changed to Google’s Hong Kong site.
Unfortunately, Chinese Internet users are still unable to get results for searches that use words like “Tiananmen Square” and “Dalai Lama.” The biggest thing to come out of Google withdrawing its search engine services from China is the way in which the international media has mocked China for its “Great Firewall” while applauding Google for not giving in to China by agreeing to filter search results. Pro-unification media outlets in Taiwan should remember this and strive to uphold democracy.
I applaud Google and would like to urge Internet users to stand up and show their distaste for the way China blocks information and hampers the basic human right of free access to knowledge. I would also like to urge the international media to refuse unreasonable requests from China.
Michael Chen is president of ZiPCOM Corp.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS