A popular Chinese proverb goes, an ant may well destroy a whole dam. It took what most corporations would have considered an insignificant footnote in their pursuit of the big Chinese market?an attack on the Gmail accounts of some human rights activists?to persuade search giant Google to stop censoring its search service in China, shut down its google.cn site and migrate users to a Hong Kong site. If this was a fable and we were looking for a moral ending, these developments would lead the government to relax its straightjacket over information and the Internet. All the photographs of Chinese people leaving flowers outside local Google offices perhaps feed such romanticism. But it couldn?t be more misdirected.
Consider the geography of political protests at present. They can claim density only in ethnic pockets like Xinjiang and Tibet. Around 60% of Internet users are under the age of 30, but campuses are not roiling with heat. And this is despite the fact that YouTube, Facebook and Twitter?those benchmarks for the growth of social networking and associated freedoms of personal expression in India, the US and elsewhere?have been blocked for some time. Sure, there are dissident voices. Chinese artist and activist Ai Weiwei, for example, says that 140 Twitter words would amount to a novel in Chinese characters, sustaining profound discussion on freedom, poetry and the like.
A select group on the mainland is undeterred by the Great Firewall. Technology helps. Twitter has an open application programming interface, which allows the posting and retrieving of tweets on alternative sites. The way in which the Chinese government chases down tweets on different URLs, one by one, is obviously a precursor to how Google will try to get ahead of the Chinese censors at its Hong Kong base. In some sense, the future rests with fundamental technological innovations? ability to outpace the Chinese government?s evident desire to increase control over the Internet and beyond. Two factors are in the government?s favour. First, cheap Internet services that offer access only to Chinese sites (as opposed to the ones in English and other ?rebellious? languages) are very seductive for students and similar communities. This is the secret of success for domestic companies like Baidu, Tencent and Youku. Second, it appears that entertainment resoundingly trumps information as the object of Chinese Internet activity and searches. Domestic companies that are equally happy about complying with censorship dictates and defying copyright norms are in a win-win situation. Since Google announced a possible exit from China in January, its shares have lost around 6% of their value. In contrast, shares of Baidu have climbed around 50%.
If there is little evidence to suggest that the Google move will spearhead reforms in the Chinese system, is there any to suggest that it will at least spearhead American companies to take a more confrontational stance with respect to censorship and protectionism? The American Chamber of Commerce in China?which is traditionally strong on lobbying for more engagement with China?has been polling companies? sentiments for four years. In its 2009 annual survey, the percentage of companies that feel they are unwelcome in the Chinese market has jumped to 38%, up from 26% in December 2009 and 23% in 2008. But look at statements from Google?s peers. Yahoo! has expressed support. But Bill Gates has voiced scepticism. Factor in that Bing may be looking at capturing Google?s local marketshare, but also factor in the fact that it?s pretty much a non-player as of now. Then consider the emphatic statements?Microsoft is committed to staying in China, but it?s looking at a 20-year rather than a 3-year journey. It believes that if you do business in a country, you have to obey its laws. And it?s clear which way the wind is blowing.
If Google can?t count on technology peers for support, can it count on the US government? Co-founder Sergey Brin has called on Washington to make China?s censorship of the Internet a high priority: ?Since services and information are our most successful exports, if regulations in China effectively prevent us from being competitive, then they are a trade barrier.? Such an argument plays into the currency dynamic that?s capturing many headlines at present. US President Barack Obama is under tremendous domestic pressure to persuade the Chinese to let their currency appreciate and thereby trim the gargantuan trade gap with the US. On the Chinese side, domestic pressures are equally aggressive. On both sides, partisans are mounting the artillery to argue that the other side will suffer more in the event of a face-off.
Google can afford a face-off. Google.cn reportedly accounts for only 1-2% of the company?s revenue. But US and Chinese governments are too interdependent to imitate the Google playbook. And if you consider the growing number of American and Chinese students travelling to each other?s lands for higher education, the Siamese effect is actually growing at the ground level.
renuka.bisht@expressindia.com