The Internet has become a staple of life in the 21st century. Beyond its obvious technological worth, however, the Internet also carries great symbolic value. In a time when we find ourselves in an international divide on religion and politics, the Internet has given the world something to share.
Companies like Microsoft, Yahoo and Google have become household names, capable of reaching people in every corner of the world. Both Microsoft and Yahoo have pushed global frontiers and while race, culture and language might divide people of different nations, all of the 150 million Google users worldwide have the access to the same online information. Well, almost.
Perhaps this picture presented itself as a little too perfect, since recently the big three have found themselves under fire from global human rights committees for censoring information from its websites accessed by users in China.
The three Internet companies are currently shrugging off all allegations, claiming to simply be following laws dictated by the local authorities. Though the Chinese State Council argues for its Internet censorship to protect younger users from pornography and other harmful sites, any searches providing proof of atrocities committed by the government are also barred. Complying with the Chinese Communist party's demands, websites in China currently blacklist terms such as "Falun Gong"(a religious movement put down by the Chinese authorities through imprisonment and torture of its members) and "Taishi Village" (a shooting of protestors by local authorities).
What's more, Google does not just censor certain of its sites, but some are filtered entirely. Users in China thus find information that is seemingly unbiased, but only after it was handpicked to show up by the Chinese governing party. While some dogged Chinese hackers have attempted to get past the "Golden Shield," the name coined for the Chinese filtering system, this has come with its consequences.
Shi Tao, a local reporter, was arrested for forwarding an account of the Tiananmen Square massacre to foreign Web sites, but only after Yahoo handed the digital fingerprints of his email to the Chinese government. Microsoft recently shut down a blog that criticized the firing of a progressive Chinese journalist. Ironically, the very companies that should be advocating Western ideologies of free speech and expression are enabling China to deprive its citizens of these rights.
Having three powerful Western companies obey the oppressive laws of a communist government invariably has its political implications, but this could also lead to some strong repercussions for the Chinese economy.
On the one hand, having access to Yahoo and Google is certainly better for the Chinese public than being deprived from this completely. Likewise, Microsoft, Yahoo and Google would strongly disable themselves by not doing business in one of the world's largest economies.
While the regulations imposed by the Chinese ruling party are stringent, Western Internet companies can only strive for these to become less severe if they work from the inside.
Making an enemy out of the Chinese government might currently seem to be an idealistic move, but it is certainly not one that is economically beneficial.
On the other hand, it is precisely because China is one of the leading economies in the world that censoring and filtering regulations will impose a negative strain on its financial market. As China continues to adapt to its role as a key player in international business, increased government intervention and dependence will hinder its efforts to conform to a free market economy.
If Internet sites are constantly filtered, investors will soon start to wonder whether they are receiving accurate economic news on businesses. Likewise, consumer confidence will not grow if consumers believe they are receiving incomplete information.
The Chinese authorities consistently express a fear of conveying any form of national instability to the public. However, having information policed at all times decreases transparency and makes it more difficult for bankers and businesses to engage in a full discussion about GDP, debts and interest rates, especially when these do not reflect positive economic growth.
Clearly, while compliance with the Chinese government might be an obligatory step for now, it is a strategy that will not be beneficial in the long run, neither for the Chinese economy, nor for Western companies.
In a few years' time, the Chinese government will not be able to confine the nation's fast learning and exponentially expanding group of bloggers.
By then, the Chinese will have grown skeptical of Western businesses that helped to slow China's economic growth, which will put an end to a highly profitable east-west financial relationship before it has even come to fruition.
The Chinese government must realize that censoring information will lead to the opposite of what it intended with this oppressive operation.
If the government really wants to convey a message of stability, it should allow a free discussion of all national controversies, even those harmful to the image of the China worldwide.
