« And on top of everything else... |
Main
| Google gagged update »
January 29, 2006
Rationalising The Wrong Choice
It is extraordinarily easy to rationalise an act which goes against your own beliefs. Personal reasons, legal reasons, or even cultural reasons can be blamed for such breaches of faith, and most of us do it at some point or another in our lives, whether it be against our political beliefs, our religious or cultural beliefs, or even to control or modify personal relationships. We use voodoo logic to rationalise something that seems to go against every principle we have ever claimed to support, and we end up believing our own spin, or that of another person/group/organisation/government, even if we disagree with it - because (we attest) it's "easier" to make change incrementally, rather than revolutionise a system.
Of course, it's not easier to make changes from the inside, and as a mole in a larger system, we end up reinforcing a culture rather than systematically breaking it down. We become hypocrites.
There are many examples of rationalising the wrong choice that I can see around me today. But probably the best example of this is the decision by Google to work effectively in China, by agreeing to censor results in line with Chinese government policy. Read the blog post rationalising the decision to prioritise functionality over freedom of speech.
Once you've read this apparently logical and reasonable post, then read the November 2005 letter from Vint Cerf to the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce in the US House of Representatives on draft telecommunications legislation ... The ideological conflict between the two statements is profound.
Those rationalising the wrong choice would argue that the two statements cover very different topics, but that just isn't the point. When you take a stand and argue for net neutrality, openness and freedom of speech, and then even reluctantly act in accordance with the policies of censorship and restricted access, you are being hypocritical. That is the point.
And I am positive that Google will suffer from this act.
Posted by jj at January 29, 2006 6:39 AM
Comments. Please PREVIEW your comment before submitting. This helps the server to save your entry.
Makes it hard for Google to justify its "Don't be evil." stance ... and makes a mockery of their Code of Conduct! http://investor.google.com/conduct.html
I wonder what the 1.3 Billion Chinese Users think?
Evil or Not Evil?
Posted by: H at January 29, 2006 8:25 PM
I wonder how it will work. Chinese net censorship seems to be a constantly evolving thing - sites may be blocked only for a short period, until an issue has faded. Will there be a commissar at the server farm? A weekly email from the censors, listing sites to block this week?
Posted by: mitchell porter at January 29, 2006 9:25 PM
Very good questions from you both....
- H: You're right, it is a breach of their code of conduct... How interesting - could this feasibly be the basis for some kind of civil legal action?
- Mitchell: Also an interesting notion... It sounds absurd, but the idea of a Comissar at the local server farm is quite possibly what they have in mind - assisted, of course, by some advanced decision support systems that filter out content. Then there's probably a report mechanism for any sites that criticise Chinese policy, and punishments for those who visit such sites but fail to report the content as inappropriate. There's nothing like fear to reinforce the dominant (and oppressive) culture. Of course, how it's really monitored, we'll probably never know - and I think that worries me nearly as much.
Posted by: jj at January 30, 2006 2:02 AM
Post a comment
Please PREVIEW posts before submitting. This helps my host server to save your comments.