List of Companies Bowing to China's censorship

[Jehct]

https://mashable.com/article/china-c...-protests-nba/



Activision Blizzard: The gaming company suspended a professional player of one of their card games following the player's stated support for pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong protests began in June in response to an extradition bill that would have subjected Hong Kong residents to China's rule of law; in effect jeopardizing the civil and political rights afforded to the city's residents as a legacy of its colonial era.

American Airlines: Changed descriptions listing Taiwan as a country following pushback from China's Civil Aviation Authority. The Chinese government in Beijing claims sovereignty over Taiwan, which is self-governed.

Apple: Removed an app from the Apple Store that aided Hong Kong protesters in tracking police and removed the Taiwanese flag emoji from Hong Kong iPhones.

Audi: Used a China map at a press conference that excluded Taiwan, South Tibet, and parts of the Xinjiang region; a company statement, then apologized for their "incorrect geographical map."

Cathay Pacific: China ordered Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong-based airline, to suspend staff who support and participate in the pro-democracy Hong Kong protests.

Coach: Referenced Hong Kong and Taiwan as individual countries on a shirt, then later called the design a "serious inaccuracy."

Disney/ESPN: An internal memo distributed to ESPN employees prohibits reference to Chinese politics when alluding to a supportive tweet for Hong Kong protesters from the manager of the Houston Rockets.

Delta Airlines: Listed Tibet and Taiwan as countries on its website, and was ordered by China's Civil Aviation Administration to make an apology. Delta called their listing a "grave mistake" with no "political intention."

Gap: After selling a shirt that featured an "incorrect" map of China by not featuring Taiwan or South Tibet and receiving negative comments on Weibo, Gap apologized and removed the shirt from its stores.

JP Morgan: when they entered the China market and had to put "Taiwan China" It used to be just "Taiwan".

Marriott International: In a customer questionnaire, Marriott listed Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau as separate countries; Marriott was ordered by the Shanghai's Cyberspace Administration to take down its website for a week.

Medtronic: Listed "Republic of China (Taiwan)" on its website, then changed it and issued an apology following pressure from Chinese authorities.

Mercedes-Benz: Posted an Instagram photo accompanied by a quote from the Dalai Lama, then deleted the post, and offered a public apology to the Chinese people.

Muji: Eliminated maps in their store catalogues deemed "incorrect" by China's National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation.

NBA: The General Manager of the Houston Rockets, Daryl Morey, tweeted — then deleted — support for Hong Kong protesters; Chinese companies revoked sponsorship and the issue sparked controversy within the NBA.

Nike: Merchandise for the Houston Rockets was removed from Nike stores in large cities in China following Morey's tweet.

Ray-Ban: Changed website location listings from "Taiwan" to "China Taiwan," Unlike other cases, it is unclear whether or not this decision followed pressure from China.

Swarovski: Listed Hong Kong as a country on its website then apologized on their Facebook page for "misleading communication on China's National Sovereignty."

Tiffany & Co: Tweeted then deleted an ad campaign with a model covering her eye, a move that appeared similar to gestures made by Hong Kong pro-democracy activists. The company dubbed the image "was in no way intended to be a political statement of any kind."

Tik Tok: The platform, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, told moderators to censor videos featuring references to Tiananmen Square and Tibetan independence, as well as references to the banned religious group Falun Gong. These requests became public following the release of leaked documents from Tik Tok's moderation guidelines.

Vans: Eliminated Hong Kong protesters' entries in their annual Vans Custom Culture competition. In a statement, Vans said: "As a brand that is open to everyone, we have never taken a political position and therefore review designs to ensure they are in line with our company's long-held values of respect and tolerance, as well as with our clearly communicated guidelines for this competition."

Versace: Described Hong Kong as a country on a shirt that went viral. The fashion brand then tweeted an apology from Chief Creative Officer Donatella Versace apologizing for the shirt.

Viacom / Paramount Pictures: Trailers for "Top Gun: Maverick" censored the Taiwan flag in a jacket shown in the trailer, worn by Tom Cruise.

Zara: Listed Taiwan on a country list on their website; received an order from Shanghai's Cyberspace Administration to publish an apology.



Do you support China and censoring the voices that oppose them?

[PC2]

Do you support China and censoring the voices that oppose them?

I think the "speech has consequences" people didn't realize you can say that about arbitrarily anything, even speech that supports liberty and democracy.

People underestimate how big of a social conflict this could turn into, but it really depends on how much China grows its influence in the coming years and decades.

[Zan15]

Do you support China and censoring the voices that oppose them?

Mostly sounds more like companies trying to avoid political nuisances in their products and advertising....

it would akin to people getting angry that the CA is not listed as 2-5 separate states....based on the separatist movement ..and people getting angry about it.

On one side ya its a free speech issue, but on the other side its international and Chinese law that they are now part of china. It technically is supporting an coup against a govt in order to succeed from china. Imagine that happening in CA and the rest of the world attacking the US for not letting it happen.....

[Jehct]

I think the "speech has consequences" people didn't realize you can say that about arbitrarily anything, even speech that supports liberty and democracy.

People underestimate how big of a social conflict this could turn into, but it really depends on how much China grows its influence in the coming years and decades.

Totally. I understand what you are saying. It would just be cool if American companies took a stand against China and were more moral. But shit corporations being moral... who are we kidding.

[PC2]

Mostly sounds more like companies trying to avoid political nuisances in their products and advertising....

it would akin to people getting angry that the CA is not listed as 2-5 separate states....based on the separatist movement ..and people getting angry about it.

On one side ya its a free speech issue, but on the other side its international and Chinese law that they are now part of china. It technically is supporting an coup against a govt in order to succeed from china. Imagine that happening in CA and the rest of the world attacking the US for not letting it happen.....

I'm pretty sure 99.9% of the support for the Hong Kong protests is about the policy principles and not actually about Hong Kong and secession. Also it is incredibly obvious that Taiwan is a sovereign entity separate from (PRC) China by pretty much all definitions.

[Zan15]

Also it is incredibly obvious that Taiwan is a sovereign entity separate from (PRC) China by pretty much all definitions.

How so? It was legally accepted in the last 75 or so years about what would happen to Taiwan...…why now is it different?

[Edge-]

Activision Blizzard or NetEase?

NetEase is the Chinese publisher for Blizzards games.

[PC2]

How so? It was legally accepted in the last 75 or so years about what would happen to Taiwan...…why now is it different?

Legality isn't an argument for what is ethical and true. When they come into conflict then eventually what is true wins the conflict.

[Remilia]

Add in JP Morgan when they entered China market and had to put "Taiwan China" as opposed to it used to just be "Taiwan".

[Jehct]

Add in JP Morgan when they entered China market and had to put "Taiwan China" as opposed to it used to just be "Taiwan".

Added. I didn't know about that one

[Cthulhu 2020]

So Russia annexes territory with tanks and force of political propaganda, and China annexes territory by making the world kowtow to their demands or face economic consequences. Mmmmm, capitalism.

[Grapemask]

I think the "speech has consequences" people didn't realize you can say that about arbitrarily anything, even speech that supports liberty and democracy.

Not really the same thing, though, assuming you mean what I think you mean. When people complain that their shitty speech gets "censored" because they broke rules and it's removed, we tell them speech has consequences, because our laws don't guarantee that anyone has to like what they say or that private platforms have to be forced to carry it.

Our response to all of this really continues that same line of thought. Shitty actions by businesses have consequences. If companies like Blizzard are going to silence pro-democracy messages to make more money, the law doesn't guarantee that we have to continue using their services. People who say shitty things learn to stop saying shitty things after they keep getting banned, and companies that make shitty decisions learn to stop making shitty decisions after they keep losing customers.

[PC2]

Not really the same thing, though, assuming you mean what I think you mean. When people complain that their shitty speech gets "censored" because they broke rules and it's removed, we tell them speech has consequences, because our laws don't guarantee that anyone has to like what they say or that private platforms have to be forced to carry it.

Our response to all of this really continues that same line of thought. Shitty actions by businesses have consequences. If companies like Blizzard are going to silence pro-democracy messages to make more money, the law doesn't guarantee that we have to continue using their services. People who say shitty things learn to stop saying shitty things after they keep getting banned, and companies that make shitty decisions learn to stop making shitty decisions after they keep losing customers.

But speech that is pro-democracy and Hong Kong shouldn't have consequences. Violence-causing speech should have consequences, but not speech that is merely about ideas. Sticks and stones.

[Dendrek]

But speech that is pro-democracy and Hong Kong shouldn't have consequences. Violence-causing speech should have consequences, but not speech that is merely about ideas. Sticks and stones.

Protests often have consequences. In fact, for a protest to be meaningful, it almost needs to have consequences. Would you even know about this story if Blizzard's reaction was passive?

[PC2]

Protests often have consequences.

Something happening often doesn't mean that it makes sense or should be that way.

In fact, for a protest to be meaningful, it almost needs to have consequences. Would you even know about this story if Blizzard's reaction was passive?

I say let people protest without consequences as long as it's 100% peaceful and doesn't physically damage anything. I think people and organizations can reason with each other without the use of forceful tactics, even though we don't fully know how to do that yet.

[Dendrek]

Something happening often doesn't mean that it makes sense or should be that way.

No. It does make sense. To have a peaceful protest, you need a regulating body protecting the rights of those protesters. In the US (for example) we have the First Amendment as well as various laws and regulations that give us the right to peacefully protest with minimal backlash. This is the ideal situation. But it specifically requires the protection from a powerful governing body to be achievable.

In areas were those protections aren't given, protests are violent. Even in the US during the mid 20th century, a lot of protests were violent, even deadly. We've fortunately moved away from that, but it took a lot of violent protests to get to where we are now. If it hadn't happened then, it would be happening now instead.

This process is natural. That's not a judgement about whether or not it's good or moral. But to obtain the good or moral outcome, you're going to have to accept that sometimes you have to fight to get there.

I say let people protest without consequences as long as it's 100% peaceful and doesn't physically damage anything. I think people and organizations can reason with each other without the use of forceful tactics, even though we don't fully know how to do that yet.

It's not realistic. You want a company to make a change because a few protesters asked for that change, right? But why would the company make that change? If the protesters have no power, no influence, and no money, the company has no reason to listen to them. In general, protesters make up a small minority of a company's potential consumer base. If it's only that small group, the company would be better off taking the small hit in PR. For the protesters to gain more of a bargaining chip, they need to reach a larger base. More people need to agree and side with them. Simple and peaceful protests usually don't have that affect because people won't hear about them. One solution (but possibly not the only one) is for the protest to produce negative effects. At that point, more people will hear about it and more people will care, which impacts the company's bottom line.

You have a seemingly idealistic view on how things aught to be. But reality is never going to agree with you.

[Sunseeker]

Further demonstration that capitalism is a destructive ideology. Love of money over rights, humanity, justice and freedom is patently disgusting and the fact that the self-proclaimed "leader of the free world" isn't jumping to the defense of anyone who wants to stand up to China is sickening.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

Don't forget Google/YouTube.

[Remilia]

Don't forget Google/YouTube.

Google products actually are banned in china. That said their hardware products do come from china. They did try to revive their bid with project dragonfly but internal resistance seemed to kill it. That said there are a bunch of other issues with Google anyways.

[PosPosPos]

There's also Riot, but they are also pretty much part of a chinese company(Tencent) at this point.