Countries in Western Europe were known to censor content for centuries. When the views of journalists, citizens, or scientists did not find agreement with the views of the ruling monarch or other form of leader, this almost inevitably led to censorship. Many scholars fled to Amsterdam in that period to enjoy a relatively higher level of tolerance in what they could publish. Nowadays, censorship is all but eradicated from most countries Europe. The positive impact of this cannot be underestimated: it gives rise to a ‘fourth column’ to control the other powers within a country and keep them accountable to their actions.
However, a new alarming trend is developing. Xiaomi, a Chinese mobile phone producer, has been found to have the option at hand to censor content even outside of their internal Chinese market. Lithuanian researchers have found that one of the company’s flagship phones, the Mi 10T, receives regular updates on keywords it should block from their manufacturer. These keywords include controversial topics such as ‘Uyghurs’, ‘Tiananmen Square’ and ‘Taiwan independence’. While the feature to actually block these keywords has been disabled in countries other than China, it has been found that in theory, Xiaomi HQ could block these even abroad with ‘one push’ on a button.
This brings about the need for a discussion. How far should the reach of companies go in what we can and cannot say online? The Chinese firm is not the only company operating in this grey area; following the Capitol attacks in January this year, former U.S. President Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter. One could certainly argue that this is also a form of censorship. The crucial distinction here, though, is that in the case of Xiaomi, it is operating to change the public discourse to more pro-China topics, while in the case of the Capitol attacks, the ‘censorship’ was done to protect democratic integrity. However, the line is thin and there will surely be critics on both sides of the story. Perhaps we need programmers and philosophers to have some conversations on morality and ethics in order to find agreement on what is and what is not allowed online. Essentially, we have to decide together in what kind of online world we want to live.
Interesting article since censorship is certainly an important topic nowadays. I however, do not think the line between Xiaomi’s censorship and the banning of trump from twitter is as thin as you sketch. A Multinational who deliberately censors messages (probably under pressure) is rather different than a U.S. president who initiates attacks on democracy through a social media network. My opinion is that censorship should in some cases be used, for example when it is threatening certain believes or if the messages convey discriminating content. However, it should not be used to limit people in their ability to discover information about controversial topics.
Even though the fact that Xiaomi could censor certain words in all their products wherever they are situated is daunting it is not censorship until they actually do it. I am no expert in the field but it would not surprise me if western companies could virtually do the same if they want to. The only difference is that with Xiaomi the feature is pre-programmed, but then again the products are produced in China where it is probably required to implement certain features.
Lastly I think that a public debate or a conversation between programmers and philosophers would indeed offer new insights or could maybe even set out guidelines for what is allowed online and not but they are not the group that can solve the issue at hand. The government is in my opinion the only player in the game who could enforce laws on censorship and set out the right course for the future.