My God... I think it is brilliant, even if it isn't unintentional. I am frankly heartened, since it has now been shown that the consolidation of media into a few corporations has done nothing to diminish their critical capabilities.
Next up: Geraldo Rivera does an expose on himself.
just some stirring-the-pot questions, because i don't know how i feel about this:
free speech is an american/western conceit. china doesn't claim to honor it anyway. and free speech isn't necessarily a 'human right' in the same way that protection from torture and arbitrary imprisonment [ahem.] are.
is it right to criticize yahoo for their conformance to chinese law when they operate in china?
would the chinese be able to ignore u.s. law when operating in the u.s.?
wouldn't it be simply more american cultural imperialism for yahoo to flout chinese law in their belief that western ideals/values are superior?
Steven,
why does Free Speech is an ''american''concept?
As far as it seems to go...free speech seems a foreign concept as well over there...with the Creationist vs Darwinist debates in school or the FOX-Bush take-over of news coverage...
It's more of an Human-right concept and Free Tought.
Foreign companies dealing with China should try to improve the life of human beings over there not go in pair with the totalitarian side of the government (wich on it's lighter side, in a way has made a few steps toward respect of it's citizen in the last 10yrs...)
didn't say free speech was an american 'concept' > said it was an american 'conceit', meaning something that we seem to hold in high esteem, at least if you listen to the way we talk about it all the time.
while we in the west have come to equate free speech with human rights, i do think that there is a distinction to be made between things which are about personal freedom and things which are about bodily/human dignity and safety. china has had a record of human-rights abuses separate from whether the people are allowed to speak freely. so has the u.s.
foreign companies MIGHT try to improve the lives of the chinese with whom they come in contact but should do it in more subtle way than positioning themselves counter to china's government. they can't be seen to be acting in conflict with chinese law because this could be problematic both for yahoo and for the u.s. china is a sovereign nation; not a satellite subject to western-style freedoms.
btw, i expect free speech as a concept became popular in enlightenment-era france. ideas were probably generated well before, in isolated places, but not in common parlance until then.
gotan - free speech isn't an American "concept," it's part of the constitution. Specifically the bill of rights and the first amendment. For those of you that are rusty on your American civics:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We can argue over how Fox News or other media outlets put personal bias, or "spin" on the news. Or you can discuss how some parents want their children to learn creation in lieu of evolution, but the free speech has nothing to do with either, at least as far as the constitution is concerned.
Free speech means that the American government cannot make a law telling Fox News what it has to report. Some may argue me on this but as far as I'm aware, there is no law censoring American media.
actually, if you watched 'the corporation' you might have noted that american courts have decided that news stations are not obligated to tell factual information.
media outlets do not have a bias anymore... they can do anything they want. it's up to us to make some sense between all the information we receive.
Sep 9, 05 9:27 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
PLEASE BOYCOTT YAHOO! for Free speech'sake!
Disgusting...
When even the ''new'' capitalism goes in pair with totalitarian government
10 years in jail for posting
errr... ok. i am having an ideological shortcircuit right now. you posted a link to yahoo news right there. is that subversive or complacent?
My God... I think it is brilliant, even if it isn't unintentional. I am frankly heartened, since it has now been shown that the consolidation of media into a few corporations has done nothing to diminish their critical capabilities.
Next up: Geraldo Rivera does an expose on himself.
who uses yahoo anyways? i haven't since the early 90's.
other reasons for this at http://www.exanthema.net/boycott-yahoo/
dammit.
Miouhahah!!
I googled for Shi Tao...
it found out this news on Yahoo! exposing it's ''dark side''
eating itself
just some stirring-the-pot questions, because i don't know how i feel about this:
free speech is an american/western conceit. china doesn't claim to honor it anyway. and free speech isn't necessarily a 'human right' in the same way that protection from torture and arbitrary imprisonment [ahem.] are.
is it right to criticize yahoo for their conformance to chinese law when they operate in china?
would the chinese be able to ignore u.s. law when operating in the u.s.?
wouldn't it be simply more american cultural imperialism for yahoo to flout chinese law in their belief that western ideals/values are superior?
maybe we shouldn't boycott yahoo, but products made in china..
lets see, what does my fortune cookie say about that..
"If your desires are not extravagant, they will be granted.â€
hmmm....
pasha, good to see your self critical side. first time i agree with you.
Steven,
why does Free Speech is an ''american''concept?
As far as it seems to go...free speech seems a foreign concept as well over there...with the Creationist vs Darwinist debates in school or the FOX-Bush take-over of news coverage...
It's more of an Human-right concept and Free Tought.
Foreign companies dealing with China should try to improve the life of human beings over there not go in pair with the totalitarian side of the government (wich on it's lighter side, in a way has made a few steps toward respect of it's citizen in the last 10yrs...)
gotan-
didn't say free speech was an american 'concept' > said it was an american 'conceit', meaning something that we seem to hold in high esteem, at least if you listen to the way we talk about it all the time.
while we in the west have come to equate free speech with human rights, i do think that there is a distinction to be made between things which are about personal freedom and things which are about bodily/human dignity and safety. china has had a record of human-rights abuses separate from whether the people are allowed to speak freely. so has the u.s.
foreign companies MIGHT try to improve the lives of the chinese with whom they come in contact but should do it in more subtle way than positioning themselves counter to china's government. they can't be seen to be acting in conflict with chinese law because this could be problematic both for yahoo and for the u.s. china is a sovereign nation; not a satellite subject to western-style freedoms.
btw, i expect free speech as a concept became popular in enlightenment-era france. ideas were probably generated well before, in isolated places, but not in common parlance until then.
gotan - free speech isn't an American "concept," it's part of the constitution. Specifically the bill of rights and the first amendment. For those of you that are rusty on your American civics:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We can argue over how Fox News or other media outlets put personal bias, or "spin" on the news. Or you can discuss how some parents want their children to learn creation in lieu of evolution, but the free speech has nothing to do with either, at least as far as the constitution is concerned.
Free speech means that the American government cannot make a law telling Fox News what it has to report. Some may argue me on this but as far as I'm aware, there is no law censoring American media.
There is a lesson in here somewhere . . .
is that a buy or a sell? I can't be sure
actually, if you watched 'the corporation' you might have noted that american courts have decided that news stations are not obligated to tell factual information.
media outlets do not have a bias anymore... they can do anything they want. it's up to us to make some sense between all the information we receive.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.