Case summary: Google runs a company that offers internet-related products and services.

Its
search engine is the most widely frequented in the world, and its major source of revenue results
from the advertisement business it constructed along with its search engine. However, it is not
just the high quality of products and services what has owned Google a unique distinction among
competitors, but also the firm’s central message of “Don’t be evil”. In other words, Google had a
firm determination to never restrict the freedom of accessibility to all information. Nevertheless,
Google faltered in its resolve when it started to consider taking advantage of the huge
opportunity that offered the Chinese market. Instead of a server run from the head office located
in the United States, Google envisaged its own computer servers and a Chinese homepage inside
the country. To do so, Google was obliged to be subject to Chinese government suppression and
censorship. And thus, it was going against its long-standing ideal of democratizing information.
Finally, in 2005 Google decided to directly establish operations in China, with the condition of
engaging in self-censorship; the firm was to exclude information on political topics. As a result,

m
Google changed the firm’s original mission of offering access to all information to offering

er as
access to the greatest amount of information possible.

co
eH w
1) After Google’s managers decided to enter the Chinese market and provide the Chinese

o.
services established inside the country, it immediately contradicted the firm’s most
rs e
representative principle that had helped shape the company’s name into that of prestige
ou urc
and integrity: never compromise the content of search results and prioritize accessibility
to all information. Creating a Chinese homepage, however, implied that the national
o

government could censor what content was adequate or not for the Chinese population.
aC s

Because the potential of the Chinese market could not be easily ignored, and its major
vi y re

competitors were already establishing operations in China, Google concluded that its
firms could certainly not be left behind and dismiss a future major source of revenue.
Thus, Google officially initiated its launch in China, but with a slight alteration on its
ed d

slogan: through self-censorship, they promised to provide “the greatest amount of

ar stu

information”, different from their original “access to all information” trade-mark. By

doing so, Google adapted its philosophical principle in accordance with the restrictive
conditions imposed by Chinese government. Now, Google’s philosophical principle
is

cannot be seen as the importance of content integrity. Instead, its new principle could be
stated as the flexibility and adaptability that allows the firm to go through radical changes
Th

that contribute to the firm’s expansion in market dominance, no matter if it goes against
the firm’s founding principles.
sh

2) We believe that Google’s decision to enter the Chinese market and contradict its
principles should be criticized. We can only think that its decision to provide the “greatest
amount of information” instead of none, is a realistic one, having taken into consideration
the Chinese government’s unmoving position and the prospect of big profits to be made

This study source was downloaded by 100000783215020 from CourseHero.com on 04-20-2021 14:15:44 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/9915784/Google-in-China-case/
 in China. Contrary to its original stance, Google has not stood up for the benefits of its
users and has, in fact, compromised the integrity of its search results.

However, we cannot ignore that after all, Google is a private entity, and as any other
profit-prioritizing firm, its ultimate goal is to increase market share and earn the highest
possible amount of revenue. Currently, the extensive range of opportunities offered by the
Chinese market cannot be substituted by any in the world. Of course, in doing so, it is
contradicting its long-standing mantra that has greatly influenced the company’s actions
up until now. However, that contradiction has not stopped consumers all over the world
from using Google’s services. It is not Google’s ethical values that make consumers
choose Google. It is the high quality of products and services it consistently offers.
Although Google’s move into the Chinese market might have irritated some human rights
activists, it certainly had no substantial effect in its number of users around the globe.

m
er as
As for the second question, we believe that self-censorship and government censorship

co
are objectionable. Either way, freedom of information becomes limited. Both,

eH w
government censorship and self-censorship dictate what should be read or not. However,

o.
we believe that it is better to be engaged in self-censorship than have the government
rs e
censor for you. Without government regulation, one will be able to provide information
ou urc
from a more neutral and objective point of view, analyzing from an external perspective
the country’s sensitivity to certain political topics. However, with government
intervention, political subjectivity would take place. And censorship could be used as a
o

media of imposing a political ideology.

aC s
vi y re

3) If all foreign companies declined to invest in China, the Chinese government would not
have to face concerns about people getting external influence and potentially getting
rebellious ideas against the government. Also, since it is the foreign companies who
ed d

voluntarily decided to stop their investments, the government would receive less
ar stu

international censure and hence less pressure to legitimize their actions. Consequently,
without the intervention of international search engines, the Chinese government would
primarily make use of its domestic search engines, such as Baidu, to distort and distribute
is

information that is most advantageous to cementing its own political agenda.

Th

From the perspective of foreign companies, it would be a great loss for them since they
would be stripped the opportunity of investing in the most lucrative market as of now.
However, Google would not be the only company affected. It would be a collective loss
sh

shared by other multinational search engines, such as Yahoo or Microsoft. The greatest
loss would be suffered by the Chinese people who deserve to have access to whole,
unfiltered information. Without freedom of information the population has no sources to
develop their own independent thinking.

This study source was downloaded by 100000783215020 from CourseHero.com on 04-20-2021 14:15:44 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/9915784/Google-in-China-case/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)