"Swampy Reed Weed" Disclaiming of Translations Smacks of Ethics Problem

In January 2005, Tom Braman of GovTech News blog pointed out that, for its website, Seattle was paying "a California company, Systran, about $6,000 a year for use of [machine] translation software that takes the English version and currently allows people to view it in Russian, Japanese, French, German, Spanish and Italian."

Nonetheless, on the official state website for Seattle Secretary of State Sam Reed, his name was "Swampy Weed Reed" in a bungled Chinese translation. The line "Reed proposes statewide mandates to restore public trust" was translated into Chinese as "Swampy weed suggests whole state order recover open trust." The same line in Korean: "A plant reed proposes national mandate to recover public property trust."

Ethics Breach?
More than a year later, the site still carries a "translation disclaimer" written in legalese jargon meaning that the state can't vouch for the accuracy of Web translations.

Translation Disclaimer Translations of the Secretary of State web site are made through an automated/computerized process powered by Systran. Neither the State of Washington nor any agency, officer, or employee of the State of Washington warrants the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information translated by this system and shall not be liable for any losses caused by such reliance on the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of such information. While every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of the translation, portions may be incorrect. Any person or entity who relies on information obtained from the system does so at his or her own risk.

If you would like to report a translation error or inaccuracy, please contact us.

At the least, the state should -- but won't -- pay for people to edit the errors of quirky automated programs.

Seattle Voting Rights Coalition (mandated by Section 203) member Debbie Hsu says "having no translation is better than having very bad translation."

Is it ethical for the state to continue to pay for a translation service that is clearly not able to provide certified, nuanced translations that even come close to the meaning of the content it translates?

Hat tip to Alice Marshall