An interesting coalition has formed to monitor technology vendors' willingness to play ball with repressive regimes that seek to limit their citizens' ability to speak their minds on the Internet and, presumably, elsewhere.The alliance is made up of a reporters' watchdog group, called Reporters Without Borders, dedicated to the notion that people who make their living with words should be able to write and say exactly what they wish, without any government interference. The group's Web site tracks members of the press around the world who are jailed or even killed for doing their job.

There have long been human-rights groups, of course, ranging from Amnesty International to Human Rights Watch and others. But what makes this one different is the addition of another major component: investors. Some 25 investment groups, representing about $21 billion in assets in the United States, Europe, and Australia, have signed a "statement on freedom of expression and the Internet."

Sparking this were several recent incidents where Microsoft and Google were accused of helping the Chinese government censor blogs and other kinds of Internet-based communications. Reporters Without Borders recently criticized Yahoo for playing a role in getting a Chinese journalist arrested and, ultimately, imprisoned. Yahoo's response: the company was served with a legal request from the government, which wanted to monitor the journalist's e-mail, and Yahoo felt it had no choice but to comply.

The notion of socially responsible investing isn't new, but it will be fascinating to see how much pull this coalition has on a group of technology vendors that has traditionally been rather free-wheeling. Sure, most every tech vendor has donated to various good causes, and many rose to the occasion with helping out in disasters including Hurricane Katrina. But that's a very different matter than having one's feet held to the fire for decisions made by the board, or the corporate counsel, whatever the motivation for those decisions.

Culturally, the mantra of most tech firms--at least for the past decade since the Web has really taken hold--has been 'hey, we're just a bunch of geeks out to have fun, change the world through the application of technology, and make some money along the way.' Now they're going to be asked to rationalize what they're doing from an ethical perspective, a different type of filter indeed than that of profit and loss.

That's one measure of how much computers already have changed the world, it seems to me.

Now that electronics have become as pervasive as, say, cars, similar demands are being made on tech suppliers as on sellers of other consumer products. Procter and Gamble, for one, has long been under a microscope from groups all over the political map, and now it appears it's the computer vendors' turns to be similarly examined.

We'll see what happens, and if the coalition can claim any policy or directional change because of their existence. In the meantime, it's going to be an interesting ride as those of us who work in this industry may also be called upon to examine our own consciences in the broader scheme of things.Now that electronics have become as pervasive as, say, cars, similar demands are being made on tech suppliers as on sellers of other consumer products. Procter and Gamble, for one, has long been under a microscope from groups all over the political map, and now it appears it's the computer vendors' turn to be similarly examined.