Content uploaded by Simon Rogerson
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Simon Rogerson on Mar 15, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Technological Growth in China:
A Discussion of Some Ethical Challenges
Terrell Ward Bynum and Simon Rogerson
Introduction
The ETHICOMP Conference series was launched in 1995 to provide a forum for scholars
worldwide to engage in debate and dialogue concerning the social and ethical implications of
information and communication technologies. The resulting community of scholars is culturally
diverse and multidisciplinary, supporting many new scholars and projects. However, our review
of the first decade of ETHICOMP events and projects made it clear that our goal of worldwide
dialogue was far from being achieved. Most events and projects had focused upon Europe, North
America and Australia, even though a few scholars had participated from other parts of the
world. We decided to reach out to other cultures and communities across the world to diminish
the risk that our perspectives were biased and ill-informed. Consequently, ETHICOMP 2007 was
held at Meiji University in Tokyo, Japan and a new initiative, the ETHICOMP Working
Conference 2007, was held at Yunnan University in Kunming, China. In this article we reflect
upon our experiences in China, which included the two-day ETHICOMP Working Conference in
Kunming, lectures and conversations within the Schools of Computer Science and Business at
Zhejiang Wanli University in Ningbo, the Department of Philosophy at Peking University and
the Chinese Academy of Social Science. Especially important was a conversation we had with
Ke Xiang, Master of the Ningbo Seven Pagoda Temple and Member of the Board of Directors of
the China Buddhist Association.
Two Initial Perspectives
While discussing ethics and information and communication technologies at the ETHICOMP
Working Conference 2007, it became apparent that the “technologist’s perspective” in China was
remarkably similar to that of technologists in Europe and North America before computer ethics
was fully integrated into university curricula. In both cases, technologists, in general, believed
that “technology is technology and ethics is ethics, and the two are not related”. This narrow
view is problematical because it causes technologists and public policy makers, to ignore the
wider social and ethical impacts of technology. Issues like social inclusion, intellectual property
ownership and individual privacy, for example, can easily be overlooked with such a narrow
outlook.
A broader perspective was expressed by the Buddhist Master, Ke Xiang when he used an
analogy between a table and the Internet. Just as coming to the table brings people together, he
explained, so using the Internet can have a similar effect, but in a much broader sense. At the
same time, he acknowledged that the Internet has many ethical pitfalls. He said that it is not
technology that should be central in our thinking, but human beings and how they educate their
children. If parents and society properly educate the children to become ethically responsible and
virtuous citizens, their interaction with and use of technology will be socially appropriate.
In our view, this wise advice should be applied to all levels and areas of education. Therefore,
computer science courses at universities should not only address the science, but also the social
impacts. In particular, we believe it is paramount that computer ethics be embedded within the
computer science curriculum. Indeed, this multidisciplinary education of professional engineers,
including those involved with computers, was recommended nearly 20 years ago by a Chinese
academic. In an oral history of China, Portraits of Ordinary Chinese, edited by Lui Bingwen and
Xiong Lei (1990) there is a fascinating insight by Xie Xialing who “… now a lecturer in
philosophy at the prestigious Fudan University in Shanghai, was once a ‘Red Guard’ in the early
days of the Cultural Revolution” He became disillusioned and outspoken which led to him being
imprisoned and then exiled as a ‘class enemy’. “Originally he majored in engineering, but his
experiences as a Red Guard changed his academic orientation …”. He explains that, “China
needs more engineers than philosophers, but it won’t do if one knows everything about
machines, but nothing about Plato or Kant, literature, or the Cultural Revolutions.” This type of
approach presents a great challenge to university curriculum leaders and government policy
makers in ensuring adequate time and resources for computer ethics instruction. We were
heartened by the fact that a number of Chinese academics were very interested in experimenting
with the inclusion of computer ethics within their courses.
Computer Ethics Issues in China
The urgent need for this curriculum update is illustrated by the fact that we discovered, by
reading just five issues of the newspaper China Daily, that the Chinese people already are
experiencing a wide range of complex computer ethics issues. The following examples clearly
illustrate this point:
1. In the China Business Weekly, April 2-8, 2007, page 9, Li Jing wrote, “China is
considering ways to establish its own intellectual property right (IPR) policies and
standards for information and communication technology (ICT), to strike a balance
between protecting patent-holder rights and encouraging interoperability among
‘islands’ of technologies.
“Though standards and IPR are both important for technological progress and
improving social welfare, there is an inherent conflict between the two when a patent
is integrated within standards, says Zhou Baoxin, Secretary General of China
Communications Standards Association (CCSA), which has been drafting IPR
strategies for standardization since 2003.”
In addition, China Daily, April 7-8, 2007, page 2, reported that “The Blue Book of
IPR in China (2005-06) has just been published.” It includes articles from over 30
renowned Chinese scholars who provide a multidisciplinary view of Chinese IPR.
2. In the China Business Weekly, April 2-8, 2007, page 9, it was reported that
“China’s Ministry of Public Security is urging police to step up the battle against
piracy in software, CDs and DVDs.
“A circular from the Ministry, released on March 23 [2007], said the fight against
piracy was still difficult and should be a priority for public security departments
nationwide”.
3. In the China Daily, March 31- April 1, 2007, page 9 (quoting the Oriental Daily), it was
reported that “The Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data is investigating a
blacklist of more than 100 foreign maids that was posted on a Hong Kong parenting web site.
“A post entitled ‘Come in if you want to blacklist a maid’ appeared on a forum of the
popular website Baby Kingdom and has been viewed more than 15,000 times. The
names, photos and passport numbers of the 100 maids who had been accused of
stealing, beating children, lying or being lazy had been added to the thread.
“The operator of Baby Kingdom has denied responsibility, saying it would be
impossible to monitor every one of the 10,000-plus messages left on the website’s
forums daily.”
4. In the China Daily, April 10, 2007, page 1, Wang Xing reported that, “The
government yesterday issued a regulation, which takes effect on April 15, demanding
online operators set up a ‘game fatigue system’ that encourages players under 18 to
play less that 3 hours a day.
“Online gamers will also be required to register using real names and identity card
numbers to indicate if they are younger that 18.
“Experts said the move reflects government fears over the social impact of popular
online games, which have been blamed for the rising numbers of school children
playing truant or even committing crimes.”
5. In the China Daily, April 12, 2007, page 10, Li Xing discusses Tim O’Reilly’s
proposal for a code of conduct for bloggers. She writes, “… I believe that such a code
is necessary in China, especially to avoid the spread of verbal violence on the
Internet.
“We Chinese should be familiar with what havoc verbal violence can wreak on
society.
“Some people may argue that a code of conduct not only deprives netizens of their
freedom of expression but also discourages criticism, which society needs for healthy
development.
“Indeed, criticism is like doses of bitter medicine to help treat the ills and wrongs in
society or offer advice for better creative arts and other works.
“But viciousness, slander and disrespect for people’s individual choices and private
lives are not criticism. They are poisons that harm the freedom of individuals and
society harmony, whether they appear on the Internet or in society.”
6. In the China Daily, March 31- April 1, 2007, page 4, the Beijing-based scholar A
Ying wrote that “In today’s world, the spread and retrieval of information no longer
suffer from the confines of class. The great mass of grassroots citizens receives
information almost at the same time as those in other social strata and therefore
enjoys the same opportunities and conditions for reaching their own conclusions,
hence the rising value and importance of their opinions and viewpoints.
“Thanks to the public and anonymous nature of the Internet, the political moods of
netizens inevitably reflect the overall mood of the society. What the blogs reflect is
one side of public opinion, popular culture and social interests, though the practice of
attracting visits with sensationalism and low taste is constantly targeted by many
netizens. In general, the rise of grassroots web users in China is undoubtedly an
important area closest to the world-wide trend in this country’s modernization process
and a new subject worth studying and close observation.” The ‘new subject’ referred
to here is computer ethics.
The Digital Divide
The growing dependence of society upon technology means that citizens who already are
disadvantaged, for whatever reason, are likely to become even more disadvantaged. This is what
Western scholars have named “the digital divide”. An excellent example of this in China was
described in the China Daily, April 2, 2007, page 1. There Wang Zhuoqiong reported that
illiteracy increased by 30 million between 2000 and 2005 despite government initiatives. Wang
noted that “The number of illiterates in China accounted for 11.3 percent of the world’s total in
2000 … and 15.01 percent in 2005.” One reason offered to explain why this happened was that
farmers can earn more money working as laborers in addition to farming, rather than going to
school. This explanation was suggested by “Gao Xuegui, director of the illiteracy eradication
office of the basic education department of the Ministry of Education”.
Being illiterate makes it difficult or impossible to use new technology. As a result a growing
number of illiterate citizens become more disadvantaged as society becomes more dependent
upon technology. The illiteracy problem in China, as reported in the China Daily, is likely to lead
to a wider and more challenging “digital divide”. When dealing with a country as large as China,
the problem is more complicated and more difficult to resolve.
Concluding Remarks
The above examples of computer ethics issues in China confirm the need for Chinese
technologists, business leaders, government officials and public policy makers, as well as
Chinese scholars, to be proactive in developing solutions to the complex, technology-generated
social and ethical challenges. We were inspired by our conversation with Buddhist Master Ke
Xiang, which clearly demonstrated that the ethical wherewithal and wisdom to deal with
computer ethics challenges already exist within Chinese society. Just as the social context in
which technology is deployed determines how that technology will be used, so also the wisdom
and social values of a community provide the wherewithal to address the computer ethics issues
that emerge. It is clear that the great traditions and teachings of Chinese philosophers and
thinkers will not only enable China to address technology-generated ethical issues within its
borders, they also will enable China to make a significant contribution globally.
The Authors: Professor Terrell Ward Bynum is Director of the Research Center on Computing
& Society at Southern Connecticut State University in New Haven, CT, USA
(bynumt2@southernct.edu) and Professor Simon Rogerson is Director of the Centre for
Computing and Social Responsibility at De Montfort University in Leicester, UK
(srog@dmu.ac.uk). Bynum and Rogerson are editors of the book Computer Ethics and
Professional Responsibility by Blackwell Publishers.
Translation: This paper was translated from English by Dr Xiaojian Wu, an international
Research Associate of CCSR. (x-jian.wu@unn.ac.uk)