spam: the other white meat

You can read the meat of Google’s offical response to its critics here: Official Google Blog: Google in China

What is interesting to look at in the whole of Google’s response to criticism of their explicit acceptance of China’s filtering policy is how they understand what their mission is:

Filtering our search results clearly compromises our mission. Failing to offer Google search at all to a fifth of the world’s population, however, does so far more severely. Whether our critics agree with our decision or not, due to the severe quality problems faced by users trying to access Google.com from within China, this is precisely the choice we believe we faced. By launching Google.cn and making a major ongoing investment in people and infrastructure within China, we intend to change that.

Here, Google is clearly prioritizing quantity over quality, not surprising, but interesting that Google is framing their position as improving internet access as a whole. Yet, clearly what this position overlooks is that the point of the criticisms is that the quality of the content that they are providing is compromised. Google is suggesting that any content is better than the spotty service that they claim is the majority of the experience in China. Regardless of the truth value here, Google is trying to change the terms of debate. While they are being criticized for the quality of the information that they are delivering (in my case, particularly the legitimization of authoritarian propaganda), they answer that access is better than no access without addressing the substance of the criticism.

Chinese regulations will require us to remove some sensitive information from our search results.

Now, how information about the Tiananmen Square uprising constitutes “sensistive” is beyond me. What is disturbing about this situation is not having access to the depths of the filtering process- it is unclear what is being filtered out and why. In doing periodic searches, I haven’t been able to consistently see what’s being filtered and why. It maybe the case that because my IP isn’t from China, I’m getting different results now. Using the following search terms, I figured I’d be able to produce significant differences in searches:

great leap forward
Jung Chang
Dalai Lama
Tibet
tiananmen square massacre
china starvation

For “great leap forward”, the only document that seemed significant on the first page of results missing was this article from the BBC which is no hot bed of controversy.

I anticipated Jung Chang to produce different results, particularly with her arguments around the death toll during the Great Leap Forward. Yet, seemingly most of the results were fairly similar. Of the rest, the only one that produces extreme differences is “tiananmen square massacre”, but because of my lack of Chinese, it is virtually impossible to evaluate the content on these pages. Because Google is presumably doing prioritization of pages based on native language, the only way to really evaluate what Google is doing is to actually do a content analysis. “china starvation” also produced significantly different results, though again, limited by language, it is hard to do real analysis of these things.

I think if Google wanted to save some face, they’d disclose the filtering technology that they are using and ways in which they are weighting results in China. Yet, the following demonstration proves hard to stomach. This is an even more extreme example than i did earlier:

These searches are for “tiananmen square massacre” here and here respectively.

How much these results are skewed by language is unclear to me, but it seems hard to think that this is not the ugly face of a filter. Anybody want to offer up what the search would be in Chinese?

Update
This has some good information on Google censorship.
This is a good example of what Google actually censors when you search for “mein kampf” on Google France and Germany.
This is an appolgetic article, though contains some good information.

Update 2
This has a great list of terms that are being censored by Google.

In Davos at the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates came to Google’s defense in their policy of happily complying with China’s demands to censor themselves.

While it’s not surprising, especially given Microsoft’s own compliance with China, it’s painfully clear that Gate’s (and probably Google’s) position is that as long as China provides market access, he’s willing to engage. The begged question is of course what engagement actually means. For Gates, even a censored presence is substantial: “access to the outside world is preventing more censorship”.

This claim, while perhaps true to the extent that access makes it harder to censor absolutely everything, entirely overlooks the fact that the compliance with the Chinese censorship rules legitimizes information censorship by the Chinese government. Even if the remote possibility is increased slightly that individuals might have a chance of having access to information, the immediately accessible information (which has been directly propagandized- opposed to the implicit propaganda found elsewhere) becomes increasingly legitimate through two factors:

1) the Google brand legitimizes content by virtue of its function. By being a top ranked item on Google, the user believes that their search result reflects in some sense the greatest number of other sites which see the search result as relevant. This is a perfect example of the “wheat separating from the chafe” of liberal free speech theory. While this is criticizable in its own right, what is relevant is that the Google brand creates a credentialling mechanism for content.

2) By submitting to censorship, Google is actually devaluing their own brand (which of course has its own implications), but more significant is that Google effectively endorses a direct propaganda model of information. Though it is imaginable that there are circumstances where this is desirable, it seems uncontroversial to argue that this is not one of them.

Gates, of course, doesn’t see things this way. Instead, he sees the potential for profit expand, and pulls a Reagan-esque “trickle down” argument:

He added that despite the disparity between China’s urban and rural areas, the country was on track toward reducing poverty, a move that would mean more people would be able to afford broadband internet access.

“The greatest surprise in poverty reduction … is China,” he said.

While it is entirely unclear from the article how Gates thinks this might happen, he takes a turn for the worse, suggesting that increased access to censored content sets the stage for national change:

“I do think information flow is happening in China … saying that even by existing there contributions to a national dialogue have taken place. There’s no doubt in my mind that’s been a huge plus.”

While one needn’t go back to Marx to look at the claim that capitalism does an amazing job at liberalizing society, what seems nefarious in this incarnation of the confrontation of authoritarianism and capital is that the capitalists are even less interested in the evisceration of authoritarianism- they are happy to accept it as long as it provides a market. Certainly while the mercantile class which tore apart feudalism had its own version of political agnosticism, what appears different in this case is that capital is actually propping up authoritarianism.

Original Article

Update
Sites Google Censors gives a good idea of how Google’s filtering impacts search result returns for “mein kampf”
This also has a pretty detailed list.
This is a fairly apologetic article, although has some good pieces of information.

A universal binary version of firefox. Joy.

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mac:Intel

Ok, while the footage isn’t amazing, it’s interesting to see. Check out the story here and here. Video is here.

I’m working on getting the E-Publish module all ready for Drupal 4.7. I’ve gotten it to an alpha stage at this point- there is display to clean up and surely some functionality to deal with. However, it is seemingly barely workable already.

This script to update legacy drupal code is extremely helpful.

Download

Here’s what Google says about themselves (taken from here)

4. Democracy on the web works.

Google works because it relies on the millions of individuals posting websites to determine which other sites offer content of value. Instead of relying on a group of editors or solely on the frequency with which certain terms appear, Google ranks every web page using a breakthrough technique called PageRank™. PageRank evaluates all of the sites linking to a web page and assigns them a value, based in part on the sites linking to them. By analyzing the full structure of the web, Google is able to determine which sites have been “voted” the best sources of information by those most interested in the information they offer. This technique actually improves as the web gets bigger, as each new site is another point of information and another vote to be counted.

Unless of course, you’re tempted by the idea of marketing to a billion plus people. Then of course, you might change how you do things. Just maybe. Take for example the following two searches for “tiananmen square” on google.com and google.cn (China).

This announcement that just found it’s way into my mailbox is an interesting articulation of the strange conjunction between how the Right understands fascism and it’s understanding of the political Left’s (albeit intentionally a vague definition of ‘left’) relationship to fascism.

In some sense, the failure of the Left at this moment to develop an articulate critique of fundamentalist movements and instead following A.N.S.W.E.R’s and the I.S.O.’s uncritical support for any anti-U.S. organization has opened the door for the merging of a critique of a left position and a simultaneous rejection of fundamentalism.

Though this label ‘Islamofascism’ ought to be rejected out of hand as it is a vacuous understanding of both fascism and fundamentalist movements, what is worth considering is that a lack of a visible left position on the US occupation which seriously considers the actual politics and socially destabilized terrain of Iraq and Afghanistan allows for the emergence of the ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend’ position that both Right and Left seem to be making.

To quote Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Smith: “revolutionary politics must necessarily be an active intervention in history, and [can] not consist simply in adopting ‘correct’ positions and waiting to be proved right”.

United American Committee Announces a National Rally Against Islamofascism Day

The United American Committee is currently organizing a National Rally Against Islamofascism Day to be held at venues all over the United States next Feb. 1st, 2006.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) November 30, 2005 — The event, described on the UAC�s website at www.unitedamericancommittee.org has already scheduled 13 locations nationwide where rallies will be held. Many more locations across the USA are expected to be added as the scheduled date approaches.

The main rally will be held at Ground Zero at the former location of the World Trade Center in New York. Other states scheduled to participate with rallies include Washington, D.C., Virginia, Texas, Missouri and Arkansas with more signing up each day.

�We figured Ground Zero was the main rallying point, but this is an event for all who support America regardless of their faith, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other. All are welcome to participate,� said UAC leader Jesse Petrilla.

The rally is to solidify and support understanding in the United States of the hard work done by American law enforcement agents in the Border Patrol, the Coast Guard, FBI, local police and all other government agencies who work to protect all Americans from potential terrorist attacks being planned by the Islamofascist movement and to encourage people to make their jobs easier.

One goal of the rally is to get all Americans to take the initiative to report all suspicious activities to the police and FBI that might out groups from within the United States who are working to aid terrorists overseas or who might be trying to engage in terrorism here in America. This includes working to prevent illegal immigration and preventing funding for overseas groups that may ultimately go to helping terrorist movements.

Another goal is unconditional support of all American troops overseas and at home regardless of one�s opinion about the War in Iraq. The Rally will also express total appreciation for the job done by our men and women in uniform and to find ways to show that appreciation.

�Muslim groups are especially welcome to join us and show their support for America,� Petrilla emphasized. �The purpose of this rally is to unify all Americans behind a common goal and against an enemy that is seeking to destroy values we all hold dearly. He continued, �This is not a rally to promote hate, but a rally to promote peace and tolerance and make clear what America stands for. Republicans, Democrats, Pacifists, all ethnicities are urged to march on the day of the event and show their true support for the United States of America.�

The UAC�s position is that America is still under threats by Islamofascists and needs to show a unified front against such an enemy. While some other groups are marching in American cities accusing the Untied States of being an oppressor or supporting movements that fight and kill American soldiers, the United American Committee feels that its time the majority of Americans who feel strongly about showing a strong face against Islamofascism has come.

The rally will alert Americans to the threats we all face that we need to recognize and that accusations of bias by certain groups in the US that secretly work to aid terrorist groups from overseas are unfounded. The main rally held at hallowed ground at the World Trade Center will remind Americans to pull together and be vigilant and work as a team to overcome and defeat those who would destroy America and what it stands for — freedom.

Those interested in staging a local rally in their area or for information about rallying points already scheduled can find information by contacting the appropriate organizers on the UAC website.