World renowned media magnate Rupert Murdoch must feel disheartened after being denied entry to China’s media markets. On September 19, Bloomberg published an article titled “Murdoch Says News Corp. Has Hit ‘Brick Wall’ in China.”
According to the article, Murdoch said his company was denied access to a recent China media conference in New York City that was hosted by former U.S. president Bill Clinton. Murdoch said that the Chinese government is overly sensitive to news that filters back into China and said that China had originally promised to welcome overseas media and transnational corporations to operate print and electronic media in China. However, China has once again shut its doors on overseas media—a sharp change in its policy compared to a year ago.
Murdoch’s criticism is not insignificant considering that he is known as a “good friend” of the Chinese government as is Robert Kapp, the President of the United States-China Business Council. These two men have depicted China as an investment gold mine with the greatest investment return potential in the world and worth paying any price for by engaging in joint ventures. Murdoch has never commented on whether the Chinese media is a free media, or if the Chinese people have any freedom of speech and human rights.
Murdoch sacrificed his political and moral principles to make a deal and generously help the Chinese government financially, yet in the end, the Chinese government still just regards him as any other businessman and keeps him at a distance. Murdock not only lost face; he also suffered a huge loss of his financial investment. Businessmen like Murdoch want to know what they must do to be acceptable to the Chinese government. How low must they bow before they can enter China’s media market?
Yahoo is a good example. Recently, news spread widely on the Internet that Yahoo had provided crucial testimony to the Chinese government so that Chinese reporter Shi Tao could be arrested and sentenced to ten years in prison on the charge of “leaking state secrets.” Germany’s Der Tagesspiegel ( Daily Mirror) described Yahoo’s role in the case. As the court was trying the case of Shi Tao, the indictment used a report from Yahoo as evidence. The user information provided by Yahoo Hong Kong, Ltd. clearly indicated that user no. 218.76.8.291 used this email address via telephone number 0731-4376342 on April 20, 2004, at 23 hours, 32 minutes, 17 seconds. Investigators used this information to pinpoint Shi Tao. This incident shows that Yahoo is helping the Chinese government search for Internet users who are critical of the government.
However, the Shi Tao incident is not the first time that overseas Internet service providers have been implicated in working closely with Chinese authorities. Dissident writer Zheng Yichun of Laioning Province was sentenced to seven years in prison on the charge of “instigating and subverting political power” on September 22. The only criminal evidence is dozens of emails. Clearly, Internet service providers gave key information to the Chinese government.
Internet service providers are competing intensely to enter the Chinese market. Google and Microsoft, Yahoo’s competitors, have been competing with Yahoo to meet China’s requirements for “political performance.” One by one, they have cooperated with the Chinese National Security Department to censor international web based news and blogs. Yahoo gained significant ground in August of this year when it paid $US1 billion to acquire shares in Alibaba, China’s largest domestic on-line auction site.
Facing overwhelming criticism from international human rights organizations, Yahoo insists that it is just “acting in accordance with the laws of China.” Others in the industry remain silent. Only U.S. AOL Time Warner Chairman Richard Parsons once criticized Yahoo for providing the Chinese government with information. However, AOL Time Warner’s actions show that it is also trying its best to become a “good friend” of the Chinese government. CNN’s extensive reports on China for the past two years have almost surpassed the overseas version of the People’s Daily in conforming to “party line.” Perhaps it’s only a matter of time before AOL Time Warner also helps Chinese authorities arrest dissidents.
Why do media and transnational corporations compromise principles so easily when dealing with the Chinese dictatorship? Such compromises will have dire consequences for the Chinese people, who will be more isolated and vulnerable on the path toward democracy. We hope that Murdoch and other entrepreneurs eager for investment opportunities will also have concern for people’s human rights. If Mr. Murdoch is able to put aside his desire for personal gain and act on humanitarian principles, perhaps one day he will be known as “the most remarkable businessmen of the 21st century” and will be heralded in the Chinese media of the near future.
Feeds