16 ms·
US workers may have to change social media use as firms adapt to China's rules
- hprotagonist 7y agoIn two words: bite me. there aren't too many things that i'm a raving aboslutist about, but the freedom of political speech is one of them. If my employer attempts to step on my neck for saying things about china that china doesn't like, on my time, and my personal accounts, their next contact from me will be from an ACLU lawyer.
- thereare5lights 7y agoAFAIK, political speech is not protected against employer discrimination.
- goobynight 7y agoIf it isn't explicitly not protected though, there could still be a fun case to deal with.
- bilbo0s 7y agoFor precision's sake, it should be pointed out that it is explicitly not protected in a lot of cases. This is due to the fact that a lot of people sign papers that they never read when they start at many corporations. The correct play here, is to get the word out that people need to review every single paper they sign and line out the clauses that allow dismissal for bringing yourself or the company into public disrepute. People have to understand that they shouldn't be just signing away their rights like that. The ACLU can't protect you if you've signed these kinds of contracts.
- dfhfkslhhj 7y agoIt would be good if it were though. If employers were unable to do anything about an employee's political speech, then China would face the choice between isolating itself economically, or tolerating criticism.
- LocalH 7y agoThat's honestly part of the problem. Increasingly, every single right that we have that was enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights has been encroached upon by the government via workarounds and loopholes (see: Commerce Clause).
- willis936 7y agoIf it’s such an issue then surely a larger federal government is the solution.
- claudeganon 7y agoGovernment encroachment of these rights has always been a problem, but the real issue is that America tries to nurture two systems within itself: a liberal, democratic government with correspondingly enshrined rights and an economy arranged around authoritarian hierarchies with no such protections. While it’s all well and good to prevent the government from quashing speech and other rights, when your boss can fire you for saying something they disagree with or if you refuse things like workplace surveillance (potentially costing you your housing and healthcare in the process), these protections seem pretty threadbare. I think we need to do more to check the authoritarianism of our economy if we have any real aspiration to adhere to them.
- hprotagonist 7y agoI'm pretty sure that this is going to get you sued into oblivion: 1. I work for private company X. 2. X tells me to vote for Y, says that Y is awesome, supports Y, donates to Y. (pick any of these) 3. I campaign for and vote for Z. 4. I am fired because i voted for Z. Any outcome in which X is not crushed into little pieces is so incredibly far off the deep end from what the values of who we are as a country are that it's frankly inconceivable to me. If the free expression of political speech is so crabbed and constrained that the above is ok, or legal, or both, then we're fucked.
- thereare5lights 7y agoMy point is that I am not aware of any legislation (at least on the federal level) that is widely accepted to protect political speech even in the example you bring up. Many people assume that gay and transgendered people are protected from employer discrimination but that is also currently being adjudicated.
- ImprovedSilence 7y agoI want to agree with you here, but I fear that this reality is closer than we expect, perhaps less than a generation away.... it starts with citizens untied, and it means we’re already fucked, just not completely, not yet.
- mc32 7y agoI know there are companies that try to tread lightly especially when they have sizable mainlander ranks and go to pains to try to not offend. And we obviously don’t want to speak to the people at large, but I definitely think we should have no qualms about calling out behavior of the Chinese gov as we do the Russian gov. It’s such a contrast for Russian expats and Chinese expats and how company wide comms go out asking people to be mindful and not offend (but never get comms about not offending Russkies). I think this speaks to the importance of where the money comes from and how sensitive they are to that.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoPart of the deal is that the Chinese are much more hypersensitive than the Russians. The Chinese seem to have a deep inferiority complex about their country (a couple centuries of being over-run by foreigners can do that to you), and they are responding by aggressively trying to shut down any criticism whatsoever of China. But strong nations don't need to do that. Weak nations do. Russia is actually stronger than China here, because Russia doesn't feel like they have to stop all criticism.
- mc32 7y agoMaybe but Russia has had a history of being weak and controlled as well as being a target for colonization by two at the time super powers of Europe with visions of grandeur. They also likely feel “victimized” as losers of the Cold War... (though wrongly).
- vbezhenar 7y agoIf you're talking about French war and WW 2, then both of those wars were won by Russians, so those are examples of Russian superiority when we're talking about nation pride. Also I don't think that many Russians thinks that Russia lost Cold War. It was internal rebellion and has nothing to do with US. Last time Russia lost was Mongol invasion but it was so long ago.
- 7y ago
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoChina wants us all to not say bad things about China. It doesn't want to stop oppressing the Uighurs. It doesn't want to give any freedom to Hong Kong. It just wants us to shut up about them doing these things. Forget. That. Noise.
- Amezarak 7y agoWhat case would you have? We've heard over and over that we have freedom of speech, not freedom from the consequences of our speech. If a corporation wants to exercise their right to stop associating with you, that trumps our right to be employed by them or to use them as a platform - or so we're told. And it's not the US government leaning on them, but a foreign government. Don't see a legal case here, and it's even in-line with popular moral sentiment nowadays.
- o_p 7y ago>We've heard over and over that we have freedom of speech, not freedom from the consequences of our speech. Thats some nice doublespeak. By that definition the chinese people have total freedom of speech, just no freedom from the consequences of being disappeared by the CCP!
- bonoboTP 7y agoFor some reason, a lot of people consider it a problem only when the consequence is brought on you by the government. Somehow corporations are seen as naturally good, from whom protection is not needed. Only the government is seen as a potential source of tyranny or oppression. How long will this be justifiable, with the rapid gain in power by corporations?
- pessimizer 7y agoIt's not that it's only a problem when the consequence is brought by the government, but that US policy is so actively hostile to worker interests that the vast majority of employees can be fired at any time for any reason other than when that reason is somewhere explicitly stated to be because the worker is a member of a short list of protected classes. There's no "right to publicly support things that are not illegal without employer punishment."
- ghaff 7y ago>problem only when the consequence is brought on you by the government It's not that corporations (or individuals) are seen as being naturally good. But they don't have the power to imprison you or silence you by force and, in fact, would be committing a crime by doing so. They have some civil remedies for stealing trade secrets or breaching NDAs. Certainly major corporations have a lot of power. But it is still a fundamentally different degree and type of power than the government has.
- gibspaulding 7y agoRelevant XKCD from way back in 2006: https://www.xkcd.com/137/ https://www.xkcd.com/137/
- eecc 7y agohmm, that one hit
- deogeo 7y agoHe has since changed his mind: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
- imgabe 7y agoThese are not contradictory.
- rumanator 7y agoDoesn't sound like he did at all. The first cartoon states that you should have the right to say everything you feel you should say, while the second states that no one is forced to listen to you.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- im3w1l 7y ago"If you are yelled at, boycotted [due to pressure from China], have your show cancelled [due to pressure from China], get banned from an internet community [due to pressure from China], your free speech rights aren't being violated"
- oarsinsync 7y ago"It's just that the people listening think you're an asshole." I don't think it's unfair to presume that the author wasn't considering "people" to be "nations" in this context.
- claudeganon 7y agoWhile I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. It’s not protected in many cases and they can always just fire you and exhaust your resources in any resulting legal battle. If you had a union on the other hand, it could stipulate protection of this kind of speech as part of the employment contract and marshal the resources to mount an actual, meaningful defense if your employer were to try these tactics.
- andrekandre 7y ago> While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. couldn’t that also be accomplished though employee ownership? e.g. without the militancy?
- claudeganon 7y agoAbsolutely! Co-ops are a great way to enshrine these protections as well.
- rumanator 7y ago> While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. Sounds an awful lot like a socialist euphemism for an ideologically-motivated blend of censorship.
- iamasoftwaredev 7y agoI don't see how you can possibly get that from the comment. Socialism, yeah okay. Pro-censorship?
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y agoI'd say that whatever I do outside of work should stay outside of work, not just political speech. Whatever personal pictures I post on my personal instagram are none of my company's business. That said, I don't post anything public outside of forums like this.
- qbaqbaqba 7y agoAre you sure you haven't signed some obligatory arbitration clause?
- dragonwriter 7y agoPolitical activity isn't protected against workplace discrimination federally, and I would think that, were one an absolutist about freedom of politics speech, one would have to view state establishment of political activity as protected against private discrimination (in employment and in public accommodations) as California has established to be a violation of the absolute freedom of political expression otherwise enjoyed by employers and operators of privately-provided public accommodations.
- malms 7y agothis is nice
- kick 7y agoHow long is it going to be before someone sets up a betting service on which companies will bend the knee fastest?
- davidhyde 7y agoThe title of this article is designed to trigger the target audience before they even open the link.
- samfriedman 7y agoAgreed. There's really no new information here, just that a reporter got someone from an institute to speculate on corporate social media policy.
- eznoonze 7y ago"speculate"
- imgabe 7y agoI remember when news used to tell you about things that did happen instead of things that might happen. Until a company actually does this, this is just clickbait speculation.
- krilly 7y agoWell, no. All this recent controversy stems from the recent NBA incident.
- smsm42 7y agoThat's like saying "until US president is elected, talking about elections is a clickbait speculation". Policies are born out of speculation about the future, and public speculation (aka debate) about what is going to happen can influence them. We see evidence (NBA, Blizzard, Apple, Mariott, Gap, etc.) of US companies prostrating themselves before Chinese censorship. It is reasonable to discuss this phenomena and speculate what policy change it may bring in.
- imgabe 7y agoAre you proposing that a majority of election coverage is not clickbait speculation? Have you actually watched any election coverage? There is plenty of real coverage that takes place, but it doesn't fill a 24-hour news cycle. It consists of things like direct quotes of what candidates actually said and things they actually did. The rest of it is filled with guesses about hypothetical policies they might adopt and what horrible/wonderful things might occur if they do get adopted. In other words, clickbait speculation.
- ourlordcaffeine 7y agoName and shame companies who bow to Chinese censors https://github.com/caffeine-overload/bandinchina https://github.com/caffeine-overload/bandinchina (Repo named after south park episode)
- kovek 7y agoI think you might be the owner of the repo so I'd suggest here instead of there. I think this could be a wikipedia page, and sources could be added.
- gnode 7y ago"There is" is more accurate. "There is a separate whitelist here (as link)" would probably be clearest.
- TurkishPoptart 7y agoThis would be an excellent Wikipedia page. Fantastic idea!
- rjpr 7y agoYou should update the Blizzard entry. Blizzard didn't just ban the player, they rescinded his prize money and fired the 2 casters that were with him on air.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- inthenewsaklj 7y ago> Cathay Pacific CEO Rupert Hogg stepped down after one of the airline’s pilots was found to have taken part in the protests. Wow, that is crazy.
- favorited 7y agoThey asked him for a list of employees who participated, and he sent them a list with 1 name: his own. Resigned immediately after. It was a badass move.
- yellowapple 7y agoBadass move from a badass man with a badass name. I can't seem to find any indication that it actually happened, though. You happen to have a source? I'd love to read more about the badass that is The Hogg.
- favorited 7y agohttps://www.newsweek.com/cathay-ceo-refused-name-hong-kong-protesters-chinese-government-named-himself-instead-resigned-1455371 https://www.newsweek.com/cathay-ceo-refused-name-hong-kong-p... https://www.ibtimes.com/cathay-pacific-ceo-praised-not-giving-names-staff-joining-hong-kong-protest-2815487 https://www.ibtimes.com/cathay-pacific-ceo-praised-not-givin...
- consciouskernel 7y agoYou provided two links which both reference the same news source, which cites their source as > One of the first netizens to share this news, David Ng, a student at the Education University of Hong Kong, told Taiwan News that this information came from a trusted source who works as a manager for Cathay Pacific Airways
- favorited 7y agoNot sure what you want from me, I don't have internal company memos or anything. I'm just sharing what I read in news articles.
- eaandkw 7y agoThe only thing that is going to stop this is when these companies start losing money. They would sell their first born if they thought it would increase their stock prices. I would boycott these companies but to be honest I don't have any accounts with them in the first place and I am actively closing accounts and reducing my presents on the internet.
- JumpCrisscross 7y agoCall your elected leaders.
- theandrewbailey 7y ago> reducing my presents on the internet. Presence? Though I also agree that you shouldn't have presents on the internet, either.
- eaandkw 7y agoYep, that's the one. I think that is one of those words that I always use wrong until someone points it out.
- whateveracct 7y agoProtections from government influence on free speech is a fundamental American cultural value. Just because it's a foreign government doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to abide by that value.
- Grimm1 7y agoThey can bite me as well. This a foreign nation exerting its will over our politics via economic control. The govt should make strides to curb this imo.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y agoHello pot, let me introduce you to kettle.
- sangnoir 7y agoIn this thread, it's pretty easy to spot people who've mostly lived in the US grapple with the experience of being on the sharp-end of a (nascent) foreign hegemon. Expats and non-American's can list countless examples of exertion of American "soft-power" all around the globe, which usually doesn't hit most Americans' radar.
- drak0n1c 7y agoHopefully tariffs and sanctions convince them to back off. This kind of commercial censorship is arguably a trade infringement that can be responded against in kind.
- zimbatm 7y agoEvery nation is doing the same thing. Remember Cuba?
- mfer 7y agoBefore we were voicing everything on the Internet there was both a separation between professional lives and private lives and far more localized communities that had lower interaction with each other. With the way many are using the Internet is blurs or removes the lines between private and public along with removing regional group barriers. So, I used to be able to run my mouth locally on some topic and have no work or global repercussions. Now, you do that on the Internet, it could be seen be people thousands of miles away, and it could impact ones career. It's not just technology but how we choose to use it and guide others to do so as well.
- ghaff 7y agoIn practice, most people can still enjoy a degree of separation unless they're in a relatively public role and/or haven't tried to separate their personal and professional personas on, e.g., Twitter. That said, the walls between personal and professional can break down in a big hurry if some ill-considered (or just unconventional) remark/action/etc. goes viral. Companies will cut their connections with most individuals very quickly if that's the easiest and least embarrassing response to an online mob.
- bilbo0s 7y agoWe need to be a bit more accurate though so that we can concentrate minds on solving the real problem. From what I can see, companies are not "embarrassed", they are "afraid". They don't care about online mobs, they care about the drop in revenue that will come from lost business. Reputations that take years to recover impact revenues for each of those years. That's the issue. If we could think of a way to insulate companies from lost revenue, the problem could be solved. To date, there have only been clumsy, amateurish attempts to do this. Actions like, telling everyone, "Hey, go spend your money with this company!" Which for a lot of reasons rarely, if ever, works. We have to come up with something that would provide decision makers at these firms more certainty.
- ghaff 7y agoI'm not sure how you even go about "insulating companies from lost revenue" though. The online mob may not be responding rationally (or in a way you agree with) but groups of people certainly have the right to publicly denounce and call for boycotts of a company. Which, as you say can be damaging to their brand and ultimately their revenue, ability to hire people, etc. The fact is that the path of least resistance to mitigate and close out the damaging outcry as quickly as possible is often to apologize, fire someone, make some harmless concession, etc.
- cryptonector 7y agoAt some point there will have to be a confrontation with China over its tyranny.
- pessimizer 7y agoThis is not Chinese tyranny, this is the American tyranny called at-will employment.
- gnode 7y agoWhile companies should be held to account for caving to economic pressure, and boycotting them is justified, I think it's important to recognise that this pressure exists, and for all companies, not only those yet to have an infamous PR incident. It is the responsibility of government to counteract such pressure and protect business from becoming proxy to foreign interference in domestic political discourse, not to mention protecting such discourse in itself.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- thesquib 7y agoIf Apple has "removed" the Taiwanese flag now, soon maybe they'll automatically translate what people say into NewSpeak which is acceptable for the China market. Just saying...
- Porthos9K 7y agoNeither Beijing nor my employer get a say in what I post online, whether it concerns the resemblance between Xi Jinping and Winnie the Pooh or the true paternity of Jesus H. Christ (my money is on Zeus).
- iamasoftwaredev 7y agoOr maybe we should start standing up to an authoritarian regime. oh wait, capitalism. Nevermind. Let's pander to them instead.