Views: 6114|Replies: 14

China's Response to Banning Microsoft? [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-6-19 21:41:28 |Display all floors
China’s Response to Banning Microsoft

The news story about China banning the words “democracy” and “freedom” from parts of Microsoft’s website is burning through the US forums. The stories I believe are greatly sensationalize and I have replied so many times. However, I have yet to find a story countering it on China Daily, that gives China’s side of the story. Is there such a story, or any official message from the Chinese government on this?

Thanks.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-6-19 22:44:29 |Display all floors

It's all just so much BS - and sensationalism much like your chosen "title."

Microsoft was not banned

The words were not banned - you used them in your post.

The use of the words in a website address are not allowed.

Sort of like one the website www.bushsucks.com. It used to redirect you to the Vote Bush/Cheney website and now it is owned by a company in the Cayman Islands that will only direct you to search engine.

www.bushlies.com still exists but it was created before madmen in Washington could register it - and it's a funny site, so is www.toostupidtobepresident.com.

Just another of those universal situations that the McMedia latch on to now and then to use in their crusade to insult China in any way possible.

Lots of words in countries all over the world that various countries will not allow to be used as a website address.

Not a big deal at all - except for those with small lives and even smaller minds to get worked up about.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-6-19 23:00:14 |Display all floors

谢谢

Yes, the fact that I used the words in my post pretty much make it self evident that it is BS. I was just looking for a news story, or official statement, that gave China’s response.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2005-6-20 02:26:57 |Display all floors

It is strange....

...that freedom would be banned.

"June 10, 2005 11:42 PM ET  Microsoft bans 'democracy' for China web users
  
All Financial Times News Microsoft's new Chinese internet portal has banned the words "democracy" and "freedom" from parts of its website in an apparent effort to avoid offending Beijing's political censors.

Users of the joint-venture portal, formally launched last month, have been blocked from using a range of potentially sensitive words to label personal websites they create using its free online blog service, MSN Spaces."

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2005-6-20 07:47:01 |Display all floors

Reports were that MicroSoft banned the words

Reports I saw said MIcrosoft banned some words from its blogs, which included some profanity in addition to politically sensitive words.  Apparently, it was a choice Microsoft made when it determined that it wanted to do business in China.  And many businesses that are investing in China do not wish to be associated with any political agenda, as is the case most everywhere.

In America it woud be very unusual to see a corporation like General Motors or General Electric endorse congressional term limits or parental consent for abortion.  People lilke to keep politics and business seperate, except when the politicians begin to interfere in the marketplace.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-6-20 11:27:00 |Display all floors

wookie...things aren't always what they appear to be...

CHINA IS CHANGING. I don't understand the logic of Westerners who are pushing her to change according to their desires.  Would they be willing to let a foreigner tell them how to change their country?  Of course not!   Let China change at her own pace, and in her own way.  She is doing just fine, and I can tell you after having lived here for 2.5 years that the grand majority of Chinese people are more than satisfied with the overall direction of the country.

The MOST important change has already taken place, and the results have been spectacular. Of course I'm referring to the right of economic freedom. Ultimately, this is far more important than freedom of speech, information, religion etc...

China will have all the best that the world has to offer. Why shouldn't it? For every example of an abusive local leader, there is another example of a leader who is doing his best for his people and his country. Equally important, the leadership in Beijing is grounded in reality and while no government gets every decision right, they are doing an outstanding job of building a strong, prosperous and peaceful China.

I pulled the article below off of the internet (here in China). Ideas are not sensored nearly as much as is reported in the west.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2005-6-20 11:28:37 |Display all floors

China's New Frontiers: Tests of Democracy and Dissent

From the New York Times, as found on the internet in China
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/international/asia/19democracy.html?ei=5088&en=b807694ea18492be&ex=1276833600&partner

ZEGUO, China - With his smart clothes, blow-dried hair and speech peppered with references to Rousseau, Voltaire and Montesquieu, Jiang Zhaohua, the young Communist Party secretary for this prosperous township, bears little resemblance to the usual Chinese politician.

Under his leadership, Mr. Jiang's township of 110,000 people recently embarked on a novel experiment in governance, allowing citizens' preferences to determine, after detailed consultations over the pros and cons, which major projects will go ahead, and how their money will be spent.

"Our original manner was the government deciding everything, only announcing the results afterward to the people," Mr. Jiang said candidly, with a sharp sweep of his arm to suggest official high-handedness. "We never got to know the public's opinion. It was 20 people sitting in a room who decided everything."

The downside of that method, common in China, has been a lack of transparency, runaway corruption and in recent years an explosion of sometimes violent unrest in townships and villages. Angered by abuses of power, rural Chinese, networking even in the countryside via cellphone and computer, have been taking matters into their own hands.

In fact, the starkest contrast to Zeguo might be Dongyang, a city a few hours down the road in the same coastal province, Zhejiang.

This spring, after local officials simply handed 163 acres of land to 13 private and state-owned chemical plants, the displaced farmer-tenants set up roadblocks around the plants. An estimated 30,000 villagers fought off more than 1,000 riot policemen. Many people were injured; the plants were idled.

[In the most recent dispute over land use, 22 people were arrested over an attack on village residents in Dingzhou, a city in Hebei Province, Agence France-Presse said, quoting state press reports on Saturday. On June 11, up to 300 thugs had descended there to force out villagers who refused to make way for a new power plant. Six farmers were killed and 51 wounded in the clash.]

Although he would not discuss Dongyang's problems, Mr. Jiang said he had drawn a firm conclusion from the spread of violent conflicts. And although he insisted he was not meaning to lecture, his words sounded like a neat coda to the last century in China, a period marked by catastrophic policy blunders like the Great Leap Forward.

"No matter how smart we are, we officials have limited information," he said. "The easiest way to avoid mistakes is by having more democratic decisions."

Zeguo's political experiment involved the polling of 257 randomly chosen people, and was conducted in large part on the advice of a Stanford University political scientist, James S. Fishkin, who was brought in as a consultant. After lengthy briefings on the pros and cons of a long list of potential municipal projects, the electors showed a decided preference for environmental works, including sewage treatment plants and public parks.

If unique in form, Zeguo's experiment takes place against a backdrop of a broad effervescence of democratic ideas bubbling up into local politics all over China.

By one estimate, there will be 300,000 village committee elections in China's 18 provinces this year alone. In many areas, officials are making efforts to involve ordinary citizens in local decision making.

"The experiments taking place here and there are very meaningful, because China's economic reforms began the same way," said Li Fan, director of the World and China Institute, a nongovernmental institute in Beijing that studies electoral reform. "The central government didn't know how to carry them out, so it relied on local governments."

Mr. Li said, however, that the most important breakthrough would come when the already existing assemblies - local, provincial and national groups known as people's congresses - were given a real say, instead of meeting one day a year, as is typical, to endorse the government's decisions. "The Communist Party doesn't want this, because they are afraid the congresses will criticize the government," Mr. Li said. "They prefer a rubber stamp."

In Dongyang today, the villagers would seem to have prevailed against the chemical factories, which they say have ruined the area's land and water. They smashed 14 government cars and 40 buses by one account; as many as 30 policemen were reported hospitalized and a handful of villagers were injured.

Most of the villagers who took part were older. The younger people, fearing arrest, stayed away, and today go about their lives. It is the older villagers who continue to man their makeshift roadblocks, preventing access to the plants.

"We have no other means," said a man in his 70's, dressed in rough blue farmer's breeches and standing guard recently under the straw and bamboo roadblock. He declined to give his name. The government, he said, "wants tax revenue, and if the money is big enough, people's health can be ignored."

Another man, in his 60's and wearing an old brown suit, offered this assessment: "The government always deceives us. They say they'll move the factories away today; tomorrow they say they'll close them. Ordinary folks don't believe in government."

By HOWARD W. FRENCH
Published: June 19, 2005

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.