Yahoo! is in turmoil, with investors angry at the recent poor performance of the former Internet juggernaut and employees ready to jump ship the moment the right offer comes along. The world’s free speech advocates are no fans of Yahoo! either, charging the company with caving to China’s totalitarian regime by helping the government finger “dissidents” who write about topics the government deems seditious.
Speaking today at a sometimes contentious stockholders meeting, Yahoo! co-founder Jerry Yang once again defended the company’s practices of complying with China’s censorship laws, saying that Yahoo!’s relationship with Chinese law enforcement “is more complex than is generally understood” and “rarely” does Yahoo! even know the names or occupations of the members it turns over to authorities.
At least one Chinese citizen has been jailed and tortured because Yahoo! was complicit in identifying the man as a source of pro-democracy articles. Yahoo! does not condone this kind of punishment, Yang said, and called for the release of prisoners who have been locked away for their political writings on the Internet.
“We remain deeply concerned about governments that imprison their own citizens…for expressing their political views…particularly online,” he said. “We call for the release of these prisoners.”
But as he always does, Yang stopped short of saying Yahoo! would stop complying with laws that require Internet companies to filter content or turn over damaging user information, saying, in essence, that Yahoo! can transform countries for the better even if the price to pay is censorship. “Information is a powerful tool for change” and Yahoo! is delivering information to the Chinese people, even if in proscribed ways.
Yahoo! is trying to make sure that China’s Internet users understand that the information they receive is filtered by authorities first. “We strive to obtain maximum transparency to the user,” he said.
Moreover, Yang also said (as he always does) that governments and not corporations should work out these matters. “Private industry alone can’t affect foreign governments…agencies such as the state deparment [and other agencies] have the most leverage in this area.”
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 4:11 PM | Print | Comments (0)
Google is clearly on the defensive when it comes to privacy matters. Not only are U.S. public interest groups lobbying to block Google’s acquisition of ad giant DoubleClick until the search leader implements some privacy guarantees, but also Privacy International just released a blistering report that accuses Google of having an “attitude to privacy…that at its most blatant is hostile.”
One of Google’s milder detractors, the European Union, recently complained about Google’s privacy practices through its Article 29 Working Party. This complaint followed Google’s announcement that it would “anonymize” search records after 18 to 24 months, meaning that beyond that time period, users’ search records wouldn’t be traceable back to identifiable individuals.
The Working Party thought that interval is too long to protect privacy. After mulling it over (and in the interim getting beat up even more on privacy matters), Google announced this morning that it will shorten the search log retention window to 18 months, tops.
Google articulates a number of reasons why it has to keep user search logs in the first place, including the enhanced ability to improve search algorithms, protection of their systems from outside attacks and responding to subpoenas from law enforcement officials who are hunting for child molesters. Google thinks it can meet these “security, innovation and legal” objectives with non-anonymized search logs that last only 18 months, instead of the full two years.
One other issue raised by the Working Party is the fact that Google’s cookies, which track a web user’s movements, last 30 years. Privacy International also attacked Google’s retention of cookie data as it relates to the Google toolbar, criticizing the search giant for not giving users the opportunity to expunge this data from its records.
Google, however, will “explore ways to redesign cookies and to reduce their expiration without artificially forcing users to re-enter basic preferences such as language preference.” Look for a new policy regarding cookie privacy soon.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield at 10:40 AM | Print | Comments (0)
Blogs We Read
