Netflix’s Bow to Saudi Censors Comes at a Cost to Free Speech

It is somewhat refreshing to know that there exist countries that still have rules and that they hold true, right or wrong but not skewed by the almighty dollar. As much as tech has advanced the global economies, their ultimate effects remain untested. What the Saudi experience has shown us is that managing the breadth and nature of tech can impact the very essence of a country's present and future. While one may not agree with how other countries manage the new world, I myself have feelings of melancholy for those days when things were simpler, times when we made decisions, managed our lives without the benefit of buttons and smartphones. What our future portends can be as exciting as it can be stifling.

If an American business wants to promote freedom of speech abroad, O.K.; more power to it. But if it wants to go with the flow I wouldn't fault it. The U.S. leads the world in freedom of speech. But it's asking too much of American business to carry the torch for the principle. Instead, there are numerous ways that philanthropy can do that.

Like all other companies, Netflix is required to follow the law. The author may take issue with the law, but the problem is with the law in Saudi Arabia, not with a company that is obligated to follow the law. This is the same principle that prevented the NY times from running stories about a prominent Australian involved in a criminal trial last month. (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/world/australia/australia-gag-order-court.html). In essence, Netflix funded and aired a program worldwide that called out problems with the MBS regime. When they were notified that this violated local laws in Saudi Arabia, they complied with local legal requirements and pulled the program locally. It is still available everywhere else in the world (and, as this column points out, still available in Saudi Arabia on youtube). Describing this as "supine compliance" is heavy-handed and hypocritical, particularly when the NY times made a similar editorial decision to pull a story from their international website in order to comply with a legal directive from Australia. We are fortunate to have First Amendment protections in the United States. However Netflix (and any of its employees based in Saudi Arabia) do not have these Constitutional protections beyond our sovereign borders. I would argue that Netflix's decision to create this program and give it an international platform does far more to protect free speech than the author acknowledges.

It’s so pathetic to watch global corporations birthed in the US, operating under US law getting away with violating the US constitution for greed. This is why Trump mock the power of a Democratic government. The hypocrisy we continue tolerate ensures that the US Oligarchies are birthed and reign as the only power, not the people...that is until the people wake up.

Every freedom-loving person on the planet should be insulted and fearful of such Saudi dictates! I will not invest in netflix as long as it collaborates with this repressive regime. And ‘doing business with’ equals collaboration in my opinion.

If Netflix cannot continue to support the U.S. Constitution worldwide it should not be in those countries that ban freedom of the press and free speech. Netflix should stop offering its services in Saudi Arabia, if they don't and they bend to the Saudi rules they are guilty of supporting suppression of free speech and supporting the killing of Khashoggi. Netflix must champion human rights throughout the world.

Any company still have to comply with local laws. When the Saudi's murdered Jamal Khashoggi, a US citizen. US government wasn't able to do anything (not even send any official harsh words), you expect a private small company to do anything?

I would not blame Netflix in this case. The blame falls squarely on our capitalistic culture that places premium on greed over good. This is a fact of life in America. We deal with it every day. Get over it.

i don't understand why everyone is so harsh on dictatorships and their love of censorship. have you never put your hands over your ears and said, "nah nah nah!"? dictatorship just provides this service free of charge. dictatorships are the wave of the future. after all, how can we possibly manage 10 billion people, all staring into their smartphone and aping for their selfies, unless you tell them what to do? dictators make life so much easier: shut up, accept life as it is given to you, stare into your phone, and smile for the selfie! selfies and dictatorship -- has no one seen the parallel before? always smiling like the dictator's image, always in a memorable place or doing a memorable thing ... selfies are really dictatorship made tiny. who wants to look outward at the world when you can close the borders, look inward, and make selfie your breakfast newspaper? why harsh on the dictator for selecting content for us? amazon selects books for us, netflix selects films, etsy selects whatever it is that etsy sells ... "i'll select for you" is the wave of the future of crowd control, consumption management and product promotion. besides, why waste your precious life "selecting" when you can just focus on yourself, the prime product, thanks to the dictator's desire to make life simple. ten billion people! it's the future, it's prosperous, it's full of joy, and it's all thanks to the dictatorship!

Netflix, unfortunately, is thinking logically here. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Starz are all competing with each other in the Middle East market. If Netflix does not pull the episode, then it loses market share in this region to its competitors. Netflix’s shareholders are harmed as a result. While Netflix’s competitors profit. In a nutshell, this is the problem with a profit maximizing corporation: it has no obligation to stand against morally bankrupt country’s. But it has every obligation to make more money when it can.

I cancelled my DVD option because of this. That's $120 less per year that they'll get from me. I think others should too. If everyone did this, I wonder what will happen to their stock price?

Free speech is an American value and is not universally accepted. Much of Europe has anti-hate speech laws which are, by definition, not free speech. It is pure arrogance to think that American values are values that should be exported to everyone and everywhere, and the hate speech difference is a good example of this. I think it is too bad that Saudi Arabia has overly strict laws but I also think that they have a right to self determination which takes priority over what we think. We here in America really need to get off our high horse and quit thinking that everyone else should live like us.

This action actually shows Netflix being a good citizen. When a company operates in a country, they should be held to the laws of that country. Netflix is doing so. They are not removing the episode from anywhere except Saudi Arabia, they are not punishing the producers for the episode, they are simply following a legally permissible requirement in a foreign country. Albania has no laws concerning child pornography. Should an Albanian company be permitted to distribute it in the US, just because it is legal there? There is no real difference except for whose ox is being gored.

Really there are still people out there that still thinks that there is hope that the tech giants will take a stand for HUMANITY? It will NEVER happen. They already have too much money and influence. Does anyone believe that the US governments at every level from village to President couldn't be bought by these (someone coin a new and pertinent name please, to describe these ______

The internet and the enabling of a tidal wave of free thinking and unfettered information was supposed to strike fear into the hearts of authoritarians and enable the free flow of ideas which would promote democracy globally. But what we now see is that companies that enable this "free" flow are more dedicated to stock options than ideas, and they're more amenable to cozying up to tyrants while turning a blind eye to the tearing down of communities via trolling and state sponsored e-attacks on democratic institutions. So in fact, the internet seems to better serve the autocrats than the democrats. Who would have thunk it?

Do not think for a moment that "hi-tech", the darlings of the information age, are out for anything other than their founder's aggrandizement of wealth in virtual monopolies. The robber barons of the 1800's pale in comparison to these company's riches and influence in the world. Stand for freedom? Hah! No, it's mo' money, mo' money, mo' money selling your private data.

It would be interesting to see the reaction to the “government” if Netflix were to pull out of Saudi Arabia completely.

So how far does “even when we disagree with them” go re: authoritarian laws? Jim Crow laws were often met with the same response by national companies.

This is such a trivial issue when the president of our country supports this repressive and murderous government for his personal gain. We all know that Saudi Arabia has an authoritarian government that suppresses women, women's right, any kind of opposing speech, and human rights in general. Who cares about Netflix? There are so many other significant examples of Saudi oppression.

This doesn’t prove that U.S. companies are “their own borderless governments” but rather the opposite—that they are willing to submit to the dictates of foreign governments in order to do business in those countries. The question becomes: If not this, then whose principles should they follow? The U.S. government? Does Mr. Rutenberg really want companies to follow Trump’s lead, including his anti-immigrant and quasi-racist stances? If not, then the alternative is for companies to truly become borderless governments and follow their own principles—which means giving Zuckerberg et al the power to dictate what he thinks is wrong or right, heedless of the wishes of individual governments or their populations. I don’t know the answer, but this issue is more complicated than is presented here and I wish these articles would better reflect this.

Netflix is an entertainment company, not a free speech organization. I would have more concern on google's government imposed censorship in China than this.

While traveling in Europe, I watched TV programming and advertisements that would have many Americans, especially members of the religious right, up in arms. We don't see that material here because our government won't permit it. So, how is this any different from Netflix honoring the Saudi cultural norms? I would prefer that all sides drop their censorial positions, but that will never happen as long as there are people who think they have a divine right to dictate morality. The thought police of Saudi Arabia and America's religious right are cut from the same cloth, and we're stuck with them. Free speech exists only as a concept, not as a reality.

Fact: Netflix doesn't need Saudi but their sheer greed won't allow them to stop. Very emblematic of our entire crisis in the country; big biz dictating policy and compromising us all for their personal gain.

I just cancelled Netflix

I do not care about Saudis,but the cliche"freedom of expression"needs some tune up!

It's quite easy to get around the Saudi censors, so Netflix's accommodation to the Saudi father figures is a formality. The Saudi authorities are unable to control the ubiquitous VPNs. I used one all the time to subscribe to the US version of Netflix and Amazon Prime, and so did colleagues of mine. My students, who were Saudi Army helicopter pilots, all used VPNs to watch the latest American movies and TV shows such as The Americans.