Shanghaiist: Is Yahoo a moral pygmy?

color_remix

Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:16:17 +0800

When apartheid was going on in South Africa, many Americans demanded better behavior from US companies operating there. I think this case is pretty similar.

matty

Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:45:58 +0800

I'm sorry, i wrote "death" I should have wrote "jailing."

matty

Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:08:22 +0800

I think this is a bold, bold move on the part of the Duncan guy. When it comes to the lives of individuals only the most deluded would speak in terms of things like Nazis, terrorists, corporate citizenship and the like. He has pulled everything out of the book in order to justify and rationalize the fact that Yahoo was a direct, active and to some, criminally complicit in the death of a human being. Now i know that other companies have done worse and the US is not a saint - they have more dirty deals than anyone in history. But the bad actions of others does not make the actions of yahoo morally "right" in this situation. That would be like saying that one can get away with murder, cause when you compare your single murder to the amount of people Hitler helped kill, it doesn't seem that bad. It is bad, it is wrong and this apology does not sound like an apology so much as a justification for committing a morally bereft action.

TheChinaGame

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:59:27 +0800

In the U.S., we hold certain values to be more important than others. One of the most sacrosanct values is freedom of speech. And there are times when it is appropriate to challenge the law on this point. Just take a look at the case of Josh Wolf, the blogger who was jailed for not obeying a court order to reveal his sources. The TechCrunch piece uses a logic that is so elementary as to be reprehensible. This notion that since we do business with China we must accept their ideology is wrong. Just look at the instances where America offers political assylum to individuals from various countries. In general, we should respect the laws of other countries, but when those laws run counter to our highest values, we have to give pause. Freedom of speech is an important value on its own, but it must mean *something* to Yahoo. For god's sake, they're a media company.

nanheyangrouchuan

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:56:25 +0800

First, Yahoo lied under oath, that is perjury. Second, if Yahoo was required to turn over emails, they are following local law. But there is alot of speculation that Yahoo actually gave this information without PSB inquiry or request to curry favor with the CCP. That could fall under US laws barring the bribing of foreign gov'ts, in this case the bribe was with a man's life and not money or technology. Third, China is a racial supremacy obsessed country. Look at what the kiddies are taught, 150-400 years of humiliation by barbarians who haven't realize their place below the guardians of heaven. Fourth, I agree with Duncan that the US (and all of Europe) is hypocritical, false, hollow and bad for doing trade with China while we cursed the existence of Cuba and the USSR, curse the re-emergence of Russia as well as Venezuela's and Iran's emergence. Why this hypocrisy? Because MNCs and Wall St. saw 1.x billion potential slave laborers who would stand at attention and faithfully spout company lines, and then become 1.x billion consumers who would spend their money on consumer gibberish. The revolution WILL be televised.

yusiye

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:55:03 +0800

just a addon: Now I start to understand why Bush can push his way through in state. thanks to people like Duncan, they "obey" the law and never question its legitimacy. /here's some money, dont question anything else

yusiye

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:40:02 +0800

I'm kind of confused here. Is someone suggest that threw Shitao into jail a justifiable action? I understand compare China with Nazi is unfair, but has Duncan ever read anything Shitao wrote? He can sit in his comfy office and criticize any government official, when Shitao did the same thing... You know the rest of the story.

All Roads

Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:00:36 +0800

Calling Yahoo a moral pygmy is the pot calling the kettle black.. and Duncan's response is spot on. Where Yahoo shot themselves in the foot is that they were spineless. they could have easily turned the table on the criticism by pointing out the very point Duncan makes. Were Yahoo served a warrant by a law enforcement agency, they could be held in contempt of US court for not complying. As far as congress's criticism and its stance go, it is bs, and the bill that is currently being considered in congress to prevent Yahoo, Google, and others from turning user records over to foreign governments is just people trying to get reelected. A cursory review of the bill reveals that a 2 million dollar fine is the worst that can happen to Yahoo in the future.. 2 million dollars. Weight that against their advertising revenue in China and it is pretty easy to see that their bill is nothing more than window dressing.