Memex 1.1

From Technology Review…

BEIJING (AP) — New rules by a Chinese government-backed Internet group maintain strict controls over the country’s bloggers, requiring them to register with their real names and identification cards.

The guidelines from the Internet Society of China, a group made up of China’s major Internet companies, contradict state media reports this week claiming that China was considering loosening registration requirements for bloggers to allow anonymous online journaling.

The society’s new draft code of conduct seen on its Web site Wednesday says Web log service providers must still get their users’ real names and contact information.

Critics say the requirement violates a blogger’s right to freedom of expression and puts them at risk of punishment or imprisonment if they post controversial opinions about politics, religion or other issues.

The society’s proposed code of conduct for blog service providers comes in addition to already existing government regulations that govern China’s Internet. The country’s official Internet watchdog banned anonymous Web site and blog registration in 2005.

Online bulletin boards and blogs are the only forum for most Chinese to express opinions before a large audience in a society where all media are state-controlled.

China has the world’s second-biggest population of Internet users after the United States, with 137 million people online. It also has some 20 million blogs, according to government figures…

From today’s New York Times…

Speaking at the annual shareholder meeting on Thursday, Eric E. Schmidt, the chief executive, said Google’s long array of initiatives was organized around three ideas.

“Our next strategy evolution is to really think about three components,” Mr. Schmidt said. “Search, ads and apps,” he said, using a common shorthand for applications, or software programs.

The move is less a strategy shift than a new message — a way for Google to talk about its disparate initiatives in a way shareholders and the public can readily understand.

“It is worth saying that our underlying mission has not changed,” Mr. Schmidt noted.

The first two — search and ads — are well known to shareholders, and they account for virtually all of the company’s success. The third — apps — puts under one umbrella Google’s growing business of offering an eclectic mix of software.

Mr. Schmidt said the unifying theme behind the seemingly disparate programs was that they resided on the Web, rather than on users’ PCs, and were available wherever there is an Internet connection.

The programs include photo storage, social networking, online calendars, e-mail, instant messaging, word processing and spreadsheets. Most are free, and many compete with paid offerings from Microsoft. But Google has started charging businesses for some of them. “That is a business that looks like it is going to grow very nicely for us,” Mr. Schmidt said.

But a shareholder proposal to force Google to resist censorship in countries with authoritarian regimes like China was defeated “by an undisclosed tally”.

Surprise, surprise. Corporations don’t do ethics, any more than my cats respect fledglings’ rights.

From Saturday’s Herald Trib…

MOSCOW: At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia’s largest independent radio news network, the incoming managers had some startling news of their own: From now on, at least 50 per cent of the reports about Russia must be “positive”.

In addition, opposition leaders cannot be mentioned on the air and the United States is to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told.

The report goes on to say that:

Parliament is considering extending state control to Internet sites that report news, reflecting the growing importance of Web news as the country becomes more affluent and growing numbers of middle class Russians acquire computers.

Business as usual in the Kremlin, then.

Like most senior executives of western companies, the Microsoft Chairman has been assiduous in sucking up to the Chinese government. Recently he was rewarded with the title of “Honorary Manager” at a ceremony at Beijing Peking University. He also gave a lecture on “China’s Creative Future”. So it was highly fitting that he was greeted by a chap proclaiming the merits of Open Source software. The demonstrator, I need hardly add, was bundled away and is no doubt languishing in gaol.

Thanks to Rex for the link.

From the blog of one of our Wolfson Press Fellows, Lara Pawson…

Well there’s a funny thing. I wrote a blog four days ago, criticising the BBC (and indirectly British foreign policy) for its contradictory approach to Africa, in particular its interest in Zimbabwe compared to Angola. And this afternoon, some time between 3pm in Luanda and 6pm, it disappeared. Yes! It vanished from my site. Is this Blogger falling prey to the heavy hand of British censorship, or just a clumsy oversight on my part? I’d encourage you to respond with your own thoughts: I really haven’t a clue. All I can say is that it is a strange feeling to be living in Angola - which is not known for its press freedom - and to feel like you are being censored from afar, possibly from home. Can a techno please enlighten me on what might have happened to my posting, ’substantially worse’?

Fortunately, she had saved a copy and was able to re-post the item — which is well worth reading btw. But for one nasty moment, I had a creepy feeling. Angola (from where she is currently reporting) is a dangerous place, but it’s not where Google resides. Was it just a technical glitch? If the BBC had complained about her post, surely Google would have pulled the entire blog, not just the offending post? Hmmm…

Every day, for as long as I can remember, there’s been a lone Falun Gong demonstrator outside the Chinese Embassy in Portland Place. Here is this morning’s protestor. It’s an impressive, quiet display — all the more so when you see someone sitting motionless in the freezing cold for hours on end. Meanwhile virtually every UK university and FTSE company is sending people to China, touting for business like tarts on the road from Milan airport. And of course Google China (and Yahoo and MSN) block access to search results for ‘Falun Gong’.

From TCS Daily…

In a cramped jail cell in Alexandria, Egypt, sits a soft-spoken 22-year-old student. Kareem Amer was remanded to over a month in prison for allegedly “defaming the President of Egypt” and “highlighting inappropriate aspects that harm the reputation of Egypt.” Where did Amer commit these supposed felonies? On his weblog…

This morning’s Observer column…

What do these countries have in common: Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam?

All are listed by the human-rights organisation Reporters sans Frontieres as having governments that seek to curtail freedom of expression on the internet. Some are the usual suspects, but it’s interesting to see cuddly Socialist Cuba keeping up with the massed goons of Burma, China and North Korea.

The two ’stans’ are also coming along nicely, as their oil wealth increases, and of course Iran remains a staunch opponent of internet freedoms - or any freedoms at all.

Despite these efforts, Farsi has made it into the top 10 languages on the net, a reflection of an extraordinary phenomenon: the way Iranians, especially women, use the net to combat government control of conventional media. It seems to date from 2001, when hardliners shut down more than 100 newspapers and magazines and detained writers…

Amnesty is campaigning to support bloggers who are being censored or imprisoned for their views. There’s an online petition here.

This morning’s Observer column…

Dr Godfrey sued for defamation and, in 1997, won. Demon appealed but then unexpectedly decided to settle, paying Godfrey damages and costs. As a result, a chilling legal precedent was set which essentially undermines Gilmore’s blithe confidence in the ability of the net to overcome censorship. Godfrey v. Demon Internet established the principle that if you complain to an ISP about something hosted on its servers and the ISP does nothing about it, it can be held liable in subsequent proceedings.

Every since then, censoring the web has been child’s play, at least in the UK and Europe. Here’s how it works. If you don’t like something someone says about you on a website, get a lawyer to write a ‘notice and takedown’ (snotty, in other words) letter to the ISP that hosts the site. Seven times out of 10, the ISP will pull the plug on the site without further ado - and certainly without considering whether your complaint has any merit.

You think I jest?