ONI Country Profi le
275
protecting Internet information security, ”
23 and showed no signs that the government
would be willing to negotiate with Google.
In March 2010, after a series of strained negotiations between Google and Chinese
authorities, the company fi nally made good on its threat to stop fi ltering content,
stating that it would redirect all traffi c from Google.cn to its unfi ltered Chineselanguage site, Google.com.hk, based in Hong Kong. Later that month, there were
numerous reports that the government had blocked both Google.cn and Google.com.
hk, though blockings appeared to be somewhat sporadic.
24 In June 2010, Google ’ s
senior vice president, corporate development offi cer, and chief legal offi cer, David
Drummond, said, “ It ’ s clear from conversations we have had with Chinese government offi cials that they fi nd the redirect unacceptable. ”
25 To renew its ICP license and
continue serving Chinese audiences (while still refusing to censor search results),
Google altered its approach to include a link to the Hong Kong site on the Google.cn
home page, rather than automatically redirecting users. Google ’ s ICP license was successfully renewed on June 30.
The overall effect of Google ’ s decision to take a public stance on Internet censorship
and cease compliance with PRC censorship policies has been widely discussed among
both the Chinese and international communities. Whether or not the company ’ s
actions serve to improve the overall online environment and Internet freedom for
Chinese citizens is not entirely clear. However, Google ’ s actions have directed widespread international attention to the censorship practices of the PRC government;
heightened global awareness of issues surrounding targeted malware attacks, Internet
controls, and human rights; and placed the actions of the Chinese authorities and
their manipulation of cyberspace in the international spotlight.
Chinese leaders consider China to be one of the largest developing countries in the
world — one that is following its own model of development, which suits its own
national conditions and is shaped by its unique history, social system, and culture.
Chinese leaders place great emphasis on equality and mutual respect for sovereignty
in foreign relations and are particularly sensitive to criticisms of the Chinese state and
its handling of its internal affairs.
In 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the country for threatening
the free fl ow of information. In her January speech on Internet freedom, Clinton
remarked, “ On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for
freedom and progress, but the United States does. We stand for a single Internet where
all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the
world ’ s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. ”
26
In response, an op-ed in the state-run Global Times accused the United States of
using the notion of an unrestricted Internet as a disguised imposition of its values on
other cultures — in other words, information imperialism. The op-ed argued that
“ countries disadvantaged by the unequal and undemocratic information fl ow have to
275
protecting Internet information security, ”
23 and showed no signs that the government
would be willing to negotiate with Google.
In March 2010, after a series of strained negotiations between Google and Chinese
authorities, the company fi nally made good on its threat to stop fi ltering content,
stating that it would redirect all traffi c from Google.cn to its unfi ltered Chineselanguage site, Google.com.hk, based in Hong Kong. Later that month, there were
numerous reports that the government had blocked both Google.cn and Google.com.
hk, though blockings appeared to be somewhat sporadic.
24 In June 2010, Google ’ s
senior vice president, corporate development offi cer, and chief legal offi cer, David
Drummond, said, “ It ’ s clear from conversations we have had with Chinese government offi cials that they fi nd the redirect unacceptable. ”
25 To renew its ICP license and
continue serving Chinese audiences (while still refusing to censor search results),
Google altered its approach to include a link to the Hong Kong site on the Google.cn
home page, rather than automatically redirecting users. Google ’ s ICP license was successfully renewed on June 30.
The overall effect of Google ’ s decision to take a public stance on Internet censorship
and cease compliance with PRC censorship policies has been widely discussed among
both the Chinese and international communities. Whether or not the company ’ s
actions serve to improve the overall online environment and Internet freedom for
Chinese citizens is not entirely clear. However, Google ’ s actions have directed widespread international attention to the censorship practices of the PRC government;
heightened global awareness of issues surrounding targeted malware attacks, Internet
controls, and human rights; and placed the actions of the Chinese authorities and
their manipulation of cyberspace in the international spotlight.
Chinese leaders consider China to be one of the largest developing countries in the
world — one that is following its own model of development, which suits its own
national conditions and is shaped by its unique history, social system, and culture.
Chinese leaders place great emphasis on equality and mutual respect for sovereignty
in foreign relations and are particularly sensitive to criticisms of the Chinese state and
its handling of its internal affairs.
In 2010, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the country for threatening
the free fl ow of information. In her January speech on Internet freedom, Clinton
remarked, “ On their own, new technologies do not take sides in the struggle for
freedom and progress, but the United States does. We stand for a single Internet where
all of humanity has equal access to knowledge and ideas. And we recognize that the
world ’ s information infrastructure will become what we and others make of it. ”
26
In response, an op-ed in the state-run Global Times accused the United States of
using the notion of an unrestricted Internet as a disguised imposition of its values on
other cultures — in other words, information imperialism. The op-ed argued that
“ countries disadvantaged by the unequal and undemocratic information fl ow have to