本帖最后由 下个月 于 2010-4-2 10:22 编辑
【中文标题】寒蝉效应
【原文标题】Chilling Effects
【登载媒体】纽约客
【来源地址】http://www.newyorker.com/online/ ... illing-effects.html
【译者】和解团结
【翻译方式】人工
【声明】本翻译供Anti-CNN使用,未经AC或译者许可,不得转载。
【原文库链接】http://bbs.m4.cn/thread-235146-1-1.html
【译者说明】
这是《纽约客》驻华记者埃文·奥斯诺斯3月29日的一篇文章。主要是就3月23日CCTV4《今日关注》节目《别了,麻烦谷歌》中提到的“寒蝉效应”计划进行了讨论。作者认为CCTV节目中提到的“寒蝉效应”计划和事实是不符的。以下文章就是他对此事的看法。红色部分是我加的译注,另外原文中给出相关的链接我也附上了。
【译文】
One of the centralarguments offered by China’s official technologists is that Google is beinghypocritical:in the U.S. and other countries, they say, Google routinelycoöperates with the government to censor objectionable material, and they citeas examples child pornography in the U.S. and Nazi rhetoric in Germany.But somekey details seem to be getting muddled. For instance, Professor Fang Binxing, the president of Beijing University of Post and Telecommunications and atop technology-policy adviser, made the following point on state televisionlast week:
中国的官方技术专家提出的核心论点之一是谷歌现在(的这种做法)是伪善的:他们说,在美国和其他国家,谷歌与政府合作审查不良内容是例行公事,他们引用的例子有美国的儿童色情,德国的纳粹言论。但是一些关键的细节似乎正变地越来越令人困惑。例如,方滨兴教授,北京邮电大学的校长和高级技术政策顾问,上周在国家电视台上说了下面这些话:【2010年3月23日CCTV4《今日关注》,《别了,麻烦谷歌》从5分20秒开始,地址是http://space.tv.cctv.com/video/VIDE1269355265427885 --译注】
Internet censorship actually exists all over the world.Google conducts a program [in the U.S.] called “Chilling Effects”… What is the program? Every organization, including government agencies,can complain to the “Chilling Effects” group by identifying information that is hazardous, saying you can not allow it to appear again, such as child pornography or racial hatred or defamation…. Then this organization, with universities and organizations involved to help judge, will put it in a database and submit that to Google. If they think you are right, then Googlewill filter out that information.And if you search for it again, you will find some of the search results—thanks to the “Chilling Effects” program—will not be displayed.
互联网审查其实全世界都有。谷歌执行了一个chilling effects计划……这个计划干什么呢?就说是所有的当事人,包括管理部门,都可以向chilling effects组织投诉,说:某某信息是一个有害信息,你不能够让他再出现。你可以说这是色情信息,比方说是儿童色情,也可能这是个种族仇恨,大屠杀,或者你可以说这攻击我个人名誉了……他这个组织有很多大学,法律界(人士)帮你研判,说的对还是不对,如果他认为你说的对,就放在数据库里提交给google。google就自动过滤。而且这样的话你就会发现在你搜索完了之后后面就提示,根据chilling effects计划,你的搜索结果有部分不予显示。表明了过滤。
(Thanks to Biganzi for tipping me off to the show.) So, what is the “Chilling Effects”program that he is talking about? From what I can tell, it is precisely the opposite of the description above. The “Chilling Effect Clearinghouse” is a Web site developed at Harvard and supported by a consortium of law schools, with the expressed intent to protect online free speech by studying how cease-and-desist letters can have a “chilling effect” on online expression.As the site puts it, their aim is to“educate C&D [cease and desist] recipients about their legal rights”—todeter censorship, not encourage it.
(感谢笔杆子事先告诉我这个节目。)那么,他说的这个“寒蝉效应”计划究竟是什么呢?就我所知,它和上面描述的正好相反。“寒蝉效应票据交换所”是一个由哈佛开发,得到众多法学院支持的,意图明确的要通过研究“结束和终止信”(cease-and-desist letters)是如何对网上言论造成“寒蝉效应”(的情况)来保护网络言论自由的网站。就如这个网站说的:他们的目标是“教育那些收到结束和终止信的人,他们所拥有的法律权利”—这是在阻止审查,而不是鼓励审查。【Cease-and-desist我翻译成了“结束和终止信”。这可以是一个命令,或者一个要求对方停止某一行动的警告信,如果不遵从,则会面临法律后果。简单的说就是由一方向另一方发出的针对某种行为的责令改过的警告。更详细的解释可以参考维基百科:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cease_and_desist;爱词霸上也有很多这个词的例句: http://dj.iciba.com/cease-and-desist%20order/。需要说明的是,在这里,发信人可以是法人,个人也可以是政府机构】
So what’s the point? Fact-checking a state-television show would hardly seem worth the time if the effects of this counterfactual narrative were not so far-reaching.A reasonable Chinese viewer—exactly the kind of person who is defining Chinese public opinion—would watch this and come away convinced that the American“Chilling Effects” program described in the show is a close cousin of China’s censorship practices. In other words, it would chill any effort to oppose them.Moreover, I wonder what this says about the decision-making apparatus. Do some of China’s top technology-policy planners really misunderstand the state of play in the West? Probably not, but, frankly, I don’t know, and I welcome thoughts on this question.
那么谈这些有什么意义呢?如果这个不实叙述的影响没有那么大,这样求证事实的检查一个国家电视台的节目看上去简直就是不值得花费时间的。一个理性的中国观众,正是决定了中国的公众舆论的那种人,假如看过这个的话,会在节目结束时信服的认为节目中描述的美国“寒蝉效应”计划是中国实行的审查行为的近亲。换句话说,这样会让任何反对他们的努力变得噤若寒蝉。另外,我想知道这能透露给我们什么样的关于决策机构的信息。中国一些最高层的技术政策计划者是否真的误解了西方的发展情况?恐怕不是,但是,坦率地说,我不知道,我欢迎你们对这个问题的看法【作者的电子邮箱是osnosnyer@gmail.com,文章最后他留下了这个邮箱地址 – 译注】。 |