Although countries across the world exercise internet censorship in some form, the main attention is undoubtedly geared towards China.

And rightly so, say human rights organisations.

Amnesty stated on its website: “China operates an extensive censorship policy which includes filtering specific key words and politically sensitive subjects, which result in the blocking of specific internet results, as well as the complete blocking of a large number of websites, including human rights websites such as Amnesty International’s, considered politically sensitive by the authorities.”

Thrilled by Google’s recent statement, Roseann Rife, Amnesty International’s Deputy Asia-Pacific Director hoped that more international companies would follow its example.

She said: “It is important that internet search engine companies recognize the censorship measures adopted in China are not in the best interests of their customers and do not help promote freedom of expression or the right to information.”

But is it really that black and white? We asked Newcastle University Professor Feng Li to join in the debate.

Professor Li reminded New Media Monthly that censorship takes place all over the world, including both the UK and the US, and is needed for reasons such as security, safety and child protection.

Professor Li, who is specialised in foreign investment in China as well as information systems, doesn’t believe that Google’s actions will influence China’s approach in any significant way.

He said: “For the Chinese authority, maintaining economic, social and most of all, political stability is of paramount importance and censorship on the Internet is regarded as playing a very important role in achieving that.”

Professor Li believes that there is a delicate balance that needs to be struck between freedom of speech and censorship. And while individual countries play a key role in the process, international organisations need to be involved as well..

He said: “Because of the pervasive influence of the Internet and the huge number of stakeholders involved at many different levels, it would be a tall order to expect one single body to address all the issues involved in this domain. Any censorship needs to be adequately monitored by other independent bodies.”

China has, among other things, been accused of using information provided by the search engines to arrest human rights activists. BBC listed at least three occasions where search engine giant Yahoo was linked to these incidents.

But even with introducing new ways of monitoring and restricting the internet usage of its citizens, China has taken steps towards openness as well. In the run-up to the Olympics sites such as Wikipedia, Blogger and YouTube were unblocked – however, not left uncensored. In June 2009, on the anniversary of the Tianenmen Square protests, YouTube was blocked once again, together with Flickr and social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook, to keep the images of the tragedy out of sight.

Professor Li reminds that despite everything, a change for the better can be seen.

He said: “In recent years China has shown to be far more pragmatic than previously in addressing international concerns but it will be a slow, gradual process. The internet has already contributed significantly to China’s opening up to the outside world, so the continued engagement of global companies such as Google – rather than running away from it – has to be a positive thing for all.”