my own private I dunno: résumé | screenplays | fan fiction

Censuring the censorers

| | comments (4)

Google promised us it wouldn’t be evil, and then it was, choking its own service in China in order to get into that market. Yahoo! never promised it wouldn’t be evil, so perhaps it was easier for the folks there to rat out dissidents to the Chinese government. But hey: “Yahoo executives feel ‘horrible’ about political arrests of Internet users in China,” according to News.com. But they also believe it’s better to make a ton of money in a new market and take a few PR hits than not to make a ton of money. (I’m paraphrasing. They think this: “it's better to operate in that market and cooperate with authorities than not be there at all.”)

But it turns out, it’s not just the huge companies that have no trouble making a buck off the miseries of entire peoples. As Xeni Jardin, one of the editors at uber blog Boing Boing, points out in an editorial at The New York Times:

The initiative found that SmartFilter has been used by government-controlled monopoly providers in Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates. It has also been used by state-controlled providers in Iran, even though American companies are banned from selling technology products there. (Secure Computing denies selling products or updates to Iran, which is probably using pirated versions.)

According to OpenNet, filtering products from another American company, Websense, have also been used by a state-controlled service provider in Iran, ParsOnline. Yemen uses Websense products to filter content on its two government-owned service providers. Websense software, the initiative says, filters out "sex education and provocative clothing sites, gay- and lesbian-related materials, gambling sites, dating sites, drug-related sites, sites enabling anonymous Web surfing, proxy servers that circumvent filtering, and sites with content related to converting Muslims to other religions."

The initiative also found that Myanmar, arguably the most repressive regime in the world, uses censorware from the American company Fortinet. And Singapore's government-controlled Singnet server uses filtering technology from SurfControl, a company formed from the merger of several censorware companies that is now technically British but has its filtering operations headquarters in California.

One of our most laudable national goals is the export of free speech and free information, yet American companies are selling censorship.

What’s the solution?

While some advocates of technology rights have proposed consumer boycotts and Congressional action to pressure these firms into responsible conduct, a good first step would be adding filtering technologies to the United States Munitions List, an index of products for which exporters have to file papers with the State Department. While this won't end such sales, it will bring them to light and give the public and lawmakers a better basis on which to consider stronger steps.

Interesting. And yet, a more practical solution -- and a lucrative one, for the first entrepreneur with a few million to throw into it -- might be found at Boing Boing’s Guide to Defeating Censorware:

For BoingBoing readers in the UAE or Qatar, or other countries where BoingBoing is blocked, one anonymous reader tells us: "There is an internet via satellite called OPENSKY sold through www.broadsat.com which goes around these problems. Using VPN with normal dialup, the signal gets sent back from Europe, so, uncensored. Works really well and is cheap!"

I don’t know anything about the technical details of such a scheme, but it sounds like you can just throw a satellite up and offer Internet access through it to anyone anywhere? The first company to offer uncensored Net access to those billion-plus Chinese is gonna make Goggle look like a corner lemonade stand.

4 Comments

The idea of putting "filtering software" on the Munitions List strikes me as pretty stupid and counterproductive. The software is just a tool that can be used for a variety of purposes. The reasoning here isn't all that far off from, putting, say, Microsoft Office on the list because a foreign government might use it to keep a database of dissidents. But stuff like Internet via satellite to evade censors... *that* is cool! Yet another example illustrating the truth of this famous Internet maxim: "The Internet reacts to censorship as damage, and routes around it." -- John Gilmore (apparently - see http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/reagle/inet-quotations-19990709.html)
I said before, and I'll say it again: People are too hysterical over the Google China thing. Google censors results here in America, as well. Go do a search on "Xenu" and scroll to the bottom of the page. The DMCA is evil, but they comply with that here, because it's the law. Obviously there's a limit to what you should comply with, but if that limit is censoring search results to appease the government, then Google shouldn't be operating in America either. And besides, the filters are laughably easy to get around: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/31/1310225 Misspelling things will defeat them. Filtering search results is a small concession to make because it's simply unworkable. You'd think China would have learned something from that big ol' wall they built to keep out the Mongols. This censorship won't work, the information will get through, and I think that that makes what Google is doing worthwhile.
Eh? Not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing when I search for "Xenu". As expected, I see a bunch of links relating to Scientology's version of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, bless His noodly appendages.
Oops, my mistake. Do a search for "site:xenu.net scientology" (remove the quotes) and at the bottom you'll see the message from Google that they've removed results from the search.

Leave a comment


I'm MaryAnn Johanson, writer and editor, and this is my scratch pad, idea-jotter-downer, portfolio and resume, and general hang-out blog.

• film/TV/pop culture critic at FlickFilosopher.com
• contributor, Film.com
• member, Online Film Critics Society
• member, Alliance of Women Film Journalists
• member, International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences

[become a Facebook fan]
[visit my personal Facebook page]
[follow me on Twitter]


Location: New York City
[email me]

photo by David Speranza

archives

recently at FlickFilosopher.com

Powered by Movable Type 5.01

what I’m watching
(region 1)

what I’m watching
(region 2)

what I’m reading



my book
(Amazon U.S.)

my book
(Amazon U.K.)