(Clearwisdom.net) International Herald Tribune published an article authored by Philip Bowring on September 21, 2005. The article pointed out that it is troubling that Yahoo provided information which helped China's state security apparatus to track down and jail a reporter. The spreading of this virus of unprincipled greed into the heart of the Internet is deeply disturbing. Yahoo operates internationally and should endeavor to follow some common principles. However, Yahoo's message is that it cares only about money.
The article warned Hong Kong journalists to beware. Hot on the heels of news that Yahoo provided the information that helped China's state security apparatus to track down and jail a reporter comes the same company's announcement that it is to hire a journalist to provide its own coverage of major global events.
The article said that the first item is troubling enough and the juxtaposition of the second is alarming. It is hard not to draw the conclusion that Yahoo's news gathering will be driven by the same profits-at-all-cost mentality behind its cooperation with China's suppressors of news providers and whistle blowers.
The defense is that Yahoo operates in China and, like any other resident corporation or person, must abide by its laws. The article commented that this sounds reasonable in principle but is both naïve and disingenuous. As a matter of fact, according to reports, the identity was established though Yahoo's Hong Kong operation. Hong Kong is part of China but operates under different laws and does not yet have all-embracing "state secrecy" laws.
But there are more fundamental issues. In no particular order they include:
The article stated, "Just following orders" is no excuse for unethical behavior. It might be a mitigating circumstance, but no more. This is unethical by the standards of Western journalism.
The article expressed, Yahoo operates internationally and should endeavor to follow some common principles - in the same way as extradition is applied only in cases where similar laws apply. Assisting in tracking murderers, suicide bombers and drug smugglers is not the same as handing over providers of what in most countries would be legitimate news to which the public had a reasonable right.
The article said, Yahoo is an American-owned and -based company. The world - not to mention fellow Americans - likes to think that its leading companies try to operate according to the values represented by its constitution. People the world over still expect it to set some ethical examples when issues like freedom of information are concerned. Yahoo's message is that it cares only about money.
The article pointed out that of course there is nothing new in media organizations putting profit before principle. Many have for years avoided coverage of aspects of Singapore politics for fear of losing some commercial advantage the city-state offers. Rupert Murdoch is known for buying commercial favors through media bias. Most notoriously he took the BBC World News off Star TV, and his HarperCollins backed out of publishing Chris Patten's account of his governorship of Hong Kong to curry favor with Beijing for access for his satellite programming.
But the spreading of this virus of unprincipled greed into the heart of the Internet is deeply disturbing. Will Google follow suit? Will Skype, now being acquired by eBay, provide China's state security with digital records of its Internet voice traffic?
The article pointed out, ironically, all this kowtowing may prove in vain as far as money-making is concerned. Foreigners can sell some programming and get some minority stakes in Chinese media. But Beijing has made it abundantly clear that the state will retain control of media other than the most peripheral. The foreigners will be allowed to pick up some scraps of profits to appear to justify their Chinese investment. But they will have sold their birthrights - freedom of information and due process - for a mess of pottage.
