PressEthic

A Chinese journalist was jailed recently because he dared to publicize the government's plans to crackdown on protestors for the fifteenth anniversary of the Tiennemann Square Massacre. While human rights violations are unfortunately nothing new in China, the way the journalist was brought to justice is: with the help of Yahoo!, the California-based Internet portal, which complied with the Chinese government's request to provide them with the journalist's IP addres from his email. The journalist, Shi Tao, writer for the Dangdai Shang Bao, will now serve the next 10 years in prison.

When I first read the story earlier in the week, I was shocked by the lack of coverage in the news media. Yes, the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is still very relevant, but is there not room for a story of this magnitude? Even Abi Wright, a member of The Committee to Protect Journalists didn't seem too agitated when asked about the controversy, saying "We think Yahoo's role is very sad in this case, and we hope Yahoo re-examines its policies. Yet it isn't Yahoo, but the Chinese authorities who are jailing this man, and we feel the focus of attention needs to remain on the authorities." As for Yahoo!, it's co-founder, Jerry Yang, defends his company's actions by simply stating, "To be doing business in China, or anywhere else in the world, we have to comply with local law."

Finally, after several days in the news, a major outlet is spoke up with the appropriate response. From the LA Times commentary page

Imagine what would have happened if during the 1980s an American communications company had provided information that allowed the South African government to track down and imprison an anti-apartheid activist. That is pretty much the moral equivalent of what Yahoo has just done in China in the case of journalist Shi Tao. And the California-based Web giant deserves the same kind of public opprobrium that would have fallen on any Western firm that dared to publicly cooperate with the enforcers of apartheid.

The LA Times proceeds to call for government intervention or, failing that, a mass private investor uprising calling for companies to 'disinvest' in China or at least abide by 'good corporate behavior' that would presumably prevent situations such as these.

The story will likely be forgotten soon in America. Meanwhile, a journalist will be spending the next 10 years of his life in prison in part because Yahoo! didn't have the courage to deny China's request out of fear of losing future profits. The only way anything will change is if the news media covers the story enough so that companies like Yahoo! think twice before blindly complying with inhumane and unjust local laws.