Network management needs not only strategic objectives but also rational treatment

From the Netizen's point of view, Google in the Chinese market share second, some netizens have formed a high degree of loyalty, if the Google withdrawal will make this part of the Netizen to use the quality of Google service is greatly affected, they may feel very sorry.

Google to close the search engine, but also to China's entire search engine market impact greater. Baidu will be a single big, small engine may therefore win a cake. A single big one could have a lot of problems.

From a broader perspective, the operation of multinationals in China may face new variables. The company has broken the balance when it has created a potential or public balance between multinationals doing business in China, while Google is saying that multinationals are less likely to vent when they do business in China, while multinationals will be forced to rethink their Chinese strategy. This is also a damage to China's national image.

Google is not only a company, but also a commercial ecosystem, a lot of small and medium-sized websites will be implicated by Google, because they rely on Google AdSense. If the end of the matter is not ideal, those small sites will be hit, many personal webmaster may be unemployed. Now the private Internet market, due to the recent intensification of regulatory measures to survive more difficult, Google this matter, the whole environment is worse, but also damage the Chinese Internet industry.

The Internet is based on the efforts of many grassroots web sites, these sites are less and less living space, the vitality of the entire Internet will be greatly reduced. We are generally familiar with the large web site, but to support the development of the industry is millions small and medium Internet enterprises. The trend of Internet development is to disperse, personalized direction, if China and the entire Internet development trend is contrary to, the Internet has given Chinese netizens the rich information, entertainment choices, the convenience of life will be affected.

From the early history of Internet development, there is a network road with Chinese characteristics indeed. The early internet was widely seen as a technological tool and change that brought about equality and democracy, but now it is realized that in cyberspace, the world is by no means flat, but full of obstacles that could eventually lead to the integration of the global Internet into several spaces, A big part of this is the Chinese-style internet, which may be a big challenge to the development of the global Internet.

In the short term, the conflict between Internet freedom and China's national conditions is within reach. In the long run, we can see a huge change in the communication architecture. The development trend of the Internet communication architecture is that the central information control system is broken into personal and decentralized things. Governments around the world have found that decentralized, personalized ways of disseminating information are not good for their rule, so they try to centralize the decentralization of things and try to pull such structures back into their former structures.

There are countries with strong religious traditions, such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and, as we call it, Western constitutional countries, such as Australia, Germany and France, but such efforts are made in different names, such as to prevent child pornography and, in some cases, to protect intellectual property rights.

If a lot of human and material resources are invested in the short term, it seems to be able to achieve local results, but fundamentally, with the benefits of decentralized structures becoming a habit, it is hard for governments to accept the effort to centralize again. Government can control the information given to people, but it is almost impossible to control people to find information, the pace of freedom of information is difficult to block.

The recent introduction of the mainland's Web site whitelist system, strictly speaking, is the prior management of the Internet. In the traditional media, if it is a prior review, the severity is far greater than after the 追惩, this management model, the elimination of all the characteristics of the Internet liberation.

China is now too strict on internet management, which will create internet mobs. We've been through a cycle of chaos, and the reason we can't get out of this cycle is because we're too heavy on regulation, not governance. I think Internet regulation should go to governance development. The so-called governance, to realize that such a space should not be the government alone, should give full play to the community's strength, common to the Internet space for governance.

The government always makes the rules of the game alone, no matter whether the organization or the individual has no right to participate in it, and therefore, they may not comply with such rules, then two conflicts increased, the entire Internet to increasingly violent direction. In the 2009, especially after the 11 and December, when the government had so much control, the logic of control itself would bring the government to the extreme, even if some of the regulatory measures had a good starting point.

For example, you might start to crack down on cell phone digitoxin, and there's a certain amount of justification--to protect teenagers. However, when the user is found to turn off the text, the function of the short message, or even stop the number, this is the control machine can not be stopped after the inertia, leading to an absurd result. This is not simply a mobile SMS income problem, in fact, involves the user's privacy, involving public power and private moral boundaries where, involved who has the right to identify yellow jokes, what is yellow, in the end the legal basis where. There is no legal explanation, and eventually it becomes a very sliding standard, and in law enforcement it becomes almost as much as the controlling party wants to do.

Regulation has a significant impact on the development of China's internet industry. Tens of thousands of Web sites closed, stationmaster unemployed, a large number of domain names fled abroad, with their feet to vote; mobile operators to clean up the digitoxin, the closure of WAP services, Xinjiang for half a year of broken nets (although for the need for chaos), economic and trade impact, these should have more direct data.

From a more fundamental point of view, regulation may make society more stable in the short term, and may be more efficient, but in the long run, we know some closed systems, how they go to the end, because the information can not be circulated with the outside world, when its loss of openness, its vitality is very fragile, can not afford to trouble.

After the Google incident, many people regard this as a business issue. There are many who think it is a technical problem, as the Foreign Ministry replied that China was the biggest victim of hackers. There are both commercial and technical issues, but in the final analysis, we are now too much using the logic of success or failure to discuss right and wrong.

Speaking to Hillary, many people have interpreted the internet Cold War, like the Iron Curtain of Churchill's speech. Such thinking is actually a continuation of the Cold War mentality. The internet is a liberating force in the history of mankind, it will certainly impact on the existing vested interests, the past a variety of effective structures, which is a common challenge for all mankind.

The internet does not belong to some governments, nor is it wholly owned by netizens who see the power of the Internet as too powerful. As a social product, it is bound to be influenced by the government and by large commercial institutions. On the basis of this understanding, Internet governance is the governance that all stakeholders should participate in. The Government should lay down its posture, including the United States Government, and in its quest for global Internet governance, sit down and exchange positions with other parties to discuss solutions, and Cold War thinking is not conducive to such a cooperation and dialogue.

Author: Hu, associate professor, School of Journalism and Communication, Peking University