【新唐人2011年11月5日讯】新浪网配合中共官方，对用户进行言论审查和封锁。多位专家、学者和作家等人近期联署公开信给新浪公司的投资者，希望投资者，减持或不持有新浪公司的股票，以降低新浪的审核成本投入，恢复对大陆网民的信息平台。对此，有关人士认为，批评新浪是应该的，更应该批评的是管新浪微博的人。
11月2号，互联网专业人士北风、经济学者夏业良、作家宋石男、旅居美国的民主人士杨建利等人，给新浪公司投资者，联署发表了中文和英文公开信。
信中就新浪网和新浪微博配合中共当局，对客户进行审查和封锁提出呼吁。希望投资者减持或不持有新浪公司的股票，以此给新浪网施加压力，使新浪网及新浪微博重回到明确的审查规则上来。
参与联署发表公开信之一、公民力量主席杨建利认为，作为一个上市公司，不应该和政府进行这样的合作。所以呼吁新浪上市公司的投资者，用自己的良心，作出决策。
杨建利：“信的内容实际上很简单，就是很多学者采取公民行动，对于言论进行箝制的新浪公司，提出我们的制裁。大家都知道，新浪的博客上，它配合政府在言论箝制的需求啊，对很多的自由言论进行删减、甚至限制、甚至关掉了很多的微博。这是对信息的控制和言论箝制的一个非常恶劣的做法。作为一个公司啊，不应该和政府进行这样子的合作。”
新浪网新闻中心主编陈彤在接受《德国之声》的专访时表示，新浪正在建立一些系统，通过技术手段来对所谓“谣言”内容进行技术处理。
杨建利：“这个谣言的定义是非常含糊的，反正你不喜欢的东西，都可以定义为谣言，言论自由的要义不在于说你应该说‘非谣言’，而是应该说，你愿意怎么说就怎么说，因为没有一个人可以规定哪些话可以讲，哪些话不可以讲，哪些属于谣言，哪些不属于谣言，哪些属于正确意见，哪些属于不正确意见。没有一个机构，没有一个个人，可以行使这样的权利，制定这样的标准。”
前中国改革杂志社新闻部主任赵岩表示，他曾经在新浪开过博客，是关于高铁的内容，结果很快就被删除了。
赵岩：“我说的问题就是，我刚放上20分钟这个文章就被拿下了。 那你说这能叫言论和思想自由吗？”
赵岩认为，批评新浪是应该的，更应该批评的是管理新浪微博的人。
赵岩：“在一党专制的前提下，在舆论和思想，包括信仰垄断的前提下，一旦要把这个互联网打开了，它（中共）就知道自己的权利可能受到威胁。那个新浪网，它也没有办法，它要吃官饭嘛!如果不那样做的话，明天就让它关门，如果它违背了中宣部所谓的规定，或者是违背了新闻出版署的规定，那就让它关门吧？”
去年，谷歌表明许多中国维权人士的个人账户受到攻击，而攻击的来源多数来自中共政府。之后谷歌因不满中共的审查制度，选择退出中国市场。
《维基解密》曝光的电文显示，下令攻击谷歌的决策，实际就是主管中共宣传任务的政治局常委李长春，而在具体实施上则由中共国务院新闻办协调。
新唐人记者常春、唐睿、周天采访报导。
*****************
Resisting Censorship, Scholars Send Letter to Sina Investors
Sina assists the authorities of Chinese Communist Party (CCP),
censoring and blocking users’ speech.
Some experts, scholars and writers recently jointly signed an
open letter to Sina investors, hoping the investors will reduce or not hold shares in Sina,
for reducing the cost investment of Sina’s censorship and
restoring the information plate of the netizens in mainland China.
In this regard, some related people believe that
Sina deserves Criticism.
The persons who are in charge of Sina micro blog
deserve even more criticism.
On the 2nd November, internet professionals Beifeng,
economist Xia Yeliang, writers Song Shinan,
democrat living in the U.S. Yang Jianli and so on,
wrote to the investors of Sina corporation,
publishing an open letter in Chinese and English
with joint signatures.
The letter points out and appeals that Sina and Sina micro blog
assist the CCP authorities in censoring and blocking users.
They hope the investors will reduce or not hold Sina stock.
In doing so, it will exert pressure on Sina, in order to make
Sina and Sina micro blog return to the rule of clear censorship.
Dr. Yang Jianli, Chairman of Civil Force organization, and
one of those who signed the open letter,
believes that as a listed company, Sina should not conduct
such cooperation with the government.
So he appeals to the investors of Sina to make decisions with
their own conscience.
Yang Jianli: “The contents of the letter
are actually very simple.
Many scholars take actions. According to Sina’s
suppress of expression, we make our sanctions.
We all know that Sina blog meets the governments
requirements to clamp down on expression.
They deleted a lot of free expression, even restraining and
shutting down many micro blogs.
This is a very bad practice of controlling information
and strangling expression.
As a company, it should not
conduct such cooperation with the government. “
Chen Tong, the chief editor of Sina news center, said to
“Deutsche Welle" in an interview that Sina is establishing some system,
carrying out technical processing
for the so-called “rumors" through technical means.
Yang Jianli: “This definition of rumor is very vague.
Anyway, whatever you don’t like can be defined as rumors.
The essence of freedom of speech is not that you should say
“non-rumor", but is that you will say whatever you want.
Because no one can specify which words can be said,
which words can not be said, which ones are rumors,
which are correct views, and which are incorrect rumors.
No organization or person can exercise such rights and
make such standards.
Zhao Yan, a former director of News department of China
reform magazine said that he once published one micro blog in Sina about high speed rail.
But this blog was deleted immediately.
Zhao Yan said :”The problem is, my article was deleted
after I put it on the internet for only 20 minutes.
How can you say this is freedom of speech and thought?”
Zhao Yan believes that Sina should be criticized,
but the people who supervised Sina should be criticized even more.
Zhaoyan : “Under the premise of one-party dictatorship and
under the premise of public opinion, ideas and faith monopoly,
once the internet is “widely opened", it (the CCP) will feel
a threat to its own power.
Sina has no solution about it
because it has to do business with the government.
If Sina does not follow the will of the CCP,
the CCP will shut it down immediately, maybe tomorrow.
If Sina violated the so-called provisions of CCP’ Propaganda
Department or violated the provisions of Press
and Publication Administration,
the CCP will just shut it down. “
Last year, Google suggested that many Chinese human rights
activists’ personal accounts were attacked.
The attack mostly came from the Chinese government.
After that, because of dissatisfaction with the CCP’s censorship,
Google chose to opt out of the Chinese market.
The exposure messages from “Wiki Leaks’ indicated that
the decision of the order to attack Google was actually made by Li Changchun,
who is in charge of the CCP Political Bureau Standing Committee.
And as to the specific implementation, it
was coordinated by the PRC State Council Information Office.
NTD reporters Changchun, Tang Rui, and Zhou Tian.
