[WikiEN-l] Google bows to censorship

[Christopher Grant]

(from smh article)
>Mr Newhouse believes the site would be filtered under the Federal
Government's mandatory filter.

The plot thickens... Sure their articles racist and are basically designed
offend everyone, however I personally don't feel conformable with the
government being able to block a site like ED.

-- Chris

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> >> If censoring some things (like "the most offensive sorts of racial
> >> vilification you could possibly find"), and refusing to censor other
> things
> >> (like an historical account of a pro-democracy demonstration), is
> hypocrisy,
> >> then let me be the first to say that I'm in favor of hypocrisy.
>
> Silly Anthony. Don't you know that China was simply asking Google to
> comply with local laws against morals-destroying smut, the propaganda
> of life-destroying evil cults, and the subversion of mass-murdering
> terrorists?
>
> What's some peculiar racist humor compared with *that*? Strange moral
> standards you have there.
>
> > But then, treating one country differently from another country is not
> > hypocrisy.  Treating one situation differently from another situation is
> not
> > hypocrisy.  Looking at the relevant part of the Google statement, it was
> > this: "We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our
> > results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be
> discussing
> > with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an
> > unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all."
> > http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html
> >
> > It was a statement specifically about the Chinese government, and about
> > results on google.cn.  Google did not claim or even imply that it was
> > stopping all censorship altogether.  So I don't see the hypocrisy.
>
> It is, at the very least, inconsistent. One set of rules for the
> Chinese (and the world), and another set for the Australians. What
> difference is there between the 2 situations that justifies this? If
> there is no difference, then it's a plain contradiction. (Oh, you
> happen to agree with one and not the other? I see...)
>
> --
> gwern
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>