> Dean argued that [...] China’s surveillance is analogous to the U.S.’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants, secret warrants purportedly issued for

> Dean argued that [...] China’s surveillance is analogous to the U.S.’s Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants, secret warrants purportedly issued for the purpose of rooting out foreign spies. So, since Google has made it publicly clear they disagree with the opacity around FISA warrants and have fought to make some transparent, can we expect the same level of public disagreement and fight for China policies? This is what is frustrating me more than the actual censorship. Businesses that kowtow to Chinese government demands may use this whataboutism to compare to western governments, and they're right about the similarities. But they refuse to publicly even disagree with the practices like they will for western governments. If you do business in the US and your principles are pro freedom and/or pro privacy and publicly denounce US government actions against those, how can I really believe those are your principles if you remain mum in other instances. Does even the inability to disagree w/ certain ideals publicly trump your principles? Google and other companies need to stop drawing comparisons if they refuse to draw them in the other direction. Google, come out in an official blog post and say you don't like China asking you to censor stuff. Apple, come out and officially say you don't like being forced to use Chinese clouds for your user data. This isn't like asking you to expose an NSL, it's like asking to to oppose the idea. Otherwise, we have to assume you do agree with the practices, or at the least don't disagree.