Yahoo! Roundly Criticized in Congress

In a congressional hearing on Yahoo's activities in China, Committee Chairman Lantos hammers the Internet giant for what he calls "misleading" statements

Statement of Representative Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Nov. 6, 2007

When the news broke in August that this committee was investigating officials at Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO) in connection with repression in China, CNN International carried the story—but nobody in China saw it. As soon as the anchor started discussing this case, the screen faded to black. And that is typical. State control over media in China—from the printing presses to the airwaves to the Internet—is practically absolute.

Those who manage occasionally to pierce the veil of secrecy pay a heavy price. Such is the case with a young journalist named Shi Tao, who is languishing in a Chinese dungeon on a 10-year sentence because he pierced the veil, and a huge, U.S.-based multinational company practically led the police to his door.

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre three years ago, the Chinese government issued a directive forbidding journalists from covering anything related to this anniversary.

In a brief second that would have a momentous impact on the rest of his life, Shi Tao hit the "forward" button on his Yahoo! email account, and sent the government's message to a NGO overseas advocating for democratic change in China.

When the Chinese government set out to unlock the mystery of who had publicly disclosed this document, they went to the offices of Yahoo! China to provide the key. The flagship American company represented by our two witnesses today—Chief Executive Officer Jerry Yang and General Counsel Michael Callahan—complied with the request from the Chinese political suppression apparatus and provided the necessary identifying information to track down Shi Tao.

If you think our witnesses today are uncomfortable sitting in this climate-controlled room and accounting for their company's spineless and irresponsible actions, imagine how life is for Shi Tao, spending ten long years in a Chinese dungeon for exchanging information publicly—exactly what Yahoo! claims to support in places like China.

In February 2006, under the then-Republican majority, this Committee convened a hearing on, and I quote, "The Internet in China: A Tool for Freedom or Suppression?" The hearing was chaired by my good friend and distinguished colleague, Representative Chris Smith. Witnesses included representatives from the State Department, Yahoo!, Microsoft, Google, Cisco Systems, and several NGOs. Yahoo! had been invited to testify specifically to address the facts of the Shi Tao case. They did so under oath, swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Michael Callahan, the General Counsel of Yahoo, gave sworn testimony about the case and Yahoo!'s operations in China. Mr. Callahan has not been accused of perjury—that would be the willful violation of an oath either by swearing to what is untrue or by deliberately omitting information that is material. But as General Counsel for Yahoo! he did provide false information to this Committee in this critically-important hearing eighteen months ago.

In an effort to convince this Committee that Yahoo! was not a knowing agent of Chinese government repression, Mr. Callahan testified that Yahoo! had no knowledge of the facts surrounding the Shi Tao case at the time the company provided information to the Chinese authorities. Let me quote from what Mr. Callahan said:

"When Yahoo! China in Beijing was required to provide information about the user, who we later learned was Shi Tao, we had no information about the nature of the investigation. Indeed, we were unaware of the particular facts surrounding the case until the news story emerged."

Based upon a thorough investigation by the staff of this Committee, we now know that while Mr. Callahan may not have known the relevant facts personally, other Yahoo! employees, in fact, did know the nature of the Chinese investigation against Shi Tao prior to our committee hearing. Specifically, the document provided to Yahoo! China on April 22, 2004 by the Beijing State Security Bureau stated, "Your office is in possession of the following items relating to a case of suspected illegal provision of state secrets to foreign entities…"