China, Wikipedia, and Internet Restriction
Saturday, November 18, 2006
I’m going to say something controversial. I know, I know. The internet is for free speech. It is the last remnant of the American sixties counterculture. It’s about self-expression and information sharing. So why do I think it’s being blown out of proportion that the Chinese can’t access the same web content as Americans?
CNN.com is running an article on Chinese access to Wikipedia.
Wikipedia blocked again in China
BEIJING, China
(AP) — The easing of a ban on the popular online encyclopedia in China was short-lived.Barely a week after Wikipedia viewers were able to access the Web site
— after a year-long ban — they reported Friday that it was blocked again in several parts of China.Web surfers and free-speech advocates had earlier welcomed the apparent lifting of a ban on the English and Chinese versions of the site that provides free information written and edited by its users, although skeptics had voiced fears the end of the ban would be temporary.
So, you might say, why isn’t this a bad thing?
First, despite the belief that China stifles discourse online there are vibrant web communities. Internet bulletin boards are popular forms of communication at Chinese universities creating the potential to networked communities. It’s my understanding that these university communities have considerable freedom to address topics that interest them. Additionally, many of my Chinese acquaintances here in the United States use blogs to keep in touch with their network of dispersed friends and family.
Second, I’m not sure it matters that much to the average Chinese. When I was leaving for China one of my initial concerns was that I wouldn’t be able to access internet utilities that I use in the United States. When I spoke to professor Jian Wang about this he assured me that it would be a non-issue. However, when I got to China I found many of my favorite sites inaccessible and Google was crippled. This frustrated me but didn’t seem to bother the Chinese. Why? The web adapts. A majority of the content currently online is in English but that simple fact may make it inaccessible to most Chinese. Rather than relying on American web sites China has many which are homegrown, such as Baidu, which allow them to accomplish the same tasks.
Articles such s the one on CNN assume that China is trying to restrict the exchange of information. However, Wikipedia really isn’t an encyclopedia, it’s a community that exchanges information. The real issue at hand is not whether a government has the right to stifle free speech but whether they have the right to legislate cyberspace. I think they do. Creating codes of conduct and accountability in cyberspace is a good thing and serves to strengthen the community. Furthermore, when this legislation is enacted it will reflect the values of the societies that put them in place. We don’t have to look to China to see this. For example, American internet legislation protects copyright and prevents child abuse. The American government has a right to create these laws just as the Chinese have a right to legislate their citizens use of cyberspace.
In conclusion, blocking Wikipedia probably isn’t as earth shattering as journalists would like you to believe. Chinese communities are thriving and as China continues their rapid industrialization will probably become more prolific. When American journalists complain about policy decisions of the Chinese government they are imposing American values on a foreign country.
Scott, hmmmm…. the value of freedom of speech is pretty damn important to me, and very much indicative of a truly democratic society. (Yes, I know China is not a democracy; exactly*).
Rob
*p.s. I do believe democracy is still the best form of governance/regulation that we have so far discovered. When I come across a better one, I’ll acknowledge it.
What would you say if the US government voted a law by which Al Jezeera’s website becomes off limits because it has become a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda? (A law that would sound to many reasonable if it weren’t unconstitutional). A large majority of the Americans would not care about this, just like many Chinese do no care about Wikipedia. But would you, as a young, educated, informed, and freespirited individual accept the decision just because the rest of the country seems to be at peace with it?
Look at the timing on that! Great minds think alike. ;)
There is a fundamental difference between an unconstitutional law and restricting access to certain sites in China. First, it’s directly in contrast to our values in American society. The bill of rights and the constitution is a codification of the norms and rules that we follow in this society. However, these are not Chinese values. I am not saying free speech isn’t important. I’m not saying that we should roll over and give up our rights. I’m just saying that in China where these freedoms are already somewhat restricted it’s neither shocking or inappropriate for these societal norms to extend to online spaces. Drawing distinctions between what happens online and offline is unproductive. In both cases the individual needs to be held accountable regardless of the space that they trangressed against.
There are many laws in this country that I don’t neccesarily agree with. However, I as an individual do not have the right to choose which laws I will observe and which I will ignore. This is the same in China. The focus should not be on the space in which a transgression occurs but on the individual who transgresses.
This is a deep question: Is man innately transgressive?
I agree that China and the United States have different values which definitely need to be considered in this discussion, and while American and/or Western values are often exported globally without consideration as to their potential impact, there still needs to be evaluation of different cultural values.
So who evaluates values? The culture itself? People outside the culture? Are all values equally valuable/good/useful? What measure should we use and who should do the measuring?