Slashdot Mirror
Google Admits Compromising Principles in China
muellerr1 writes "Google co-founder Sergey Brin admitted that it had adopted 'a set of rules that we weren't comfortable with' in their Chinese activities. Though it doesn't yet sound like they're admitting to actually doing evil, it does appear that they are thinking about pulling out of China rather than compromise their 'do no evil' motto."
If Google is not evil and China is, then it's just logical that they'd pull out. We wouldn't want a rift in the space-time continuum now, would we?
The China censorship issue was a very difficult decision and, no matter how you look at it, they chose the less moral option... If they truly follow up and reverse their policy on China I will have to cease my usual cynicism and admit that Google may truly be a _moral_ company!
Go Brin! Go Google!
Speaking in Washington, Sergey Brin, Google's billionaire co-founder, said the company, which operates under the motto "do no evil", had adopted "a set of rules that we weren't comfortable with".
In a hint that Google could adjust its stance in China in the future, he added: "Perhaps now [emphasis mine] the principled approach makes more sense."
So what took you so long Sergey? Why now? Why couldn't you see this was a bad idea from the start? Talk about coming to the party late!
Just how much back-pedalling Google does now should be interesting, as this is no doubt going to cause revenue problems in the long run and a bit of a publicity flap in the short run, though if Google decides to finally stand on its principles and other companies like Microsoft and Yahoo don't follow along, it should regain a lot of standing in many people's eyes. Well, except for the Chinese government's anyway...
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
From their FAQ: I thought everyone on Slashdot hated the RIAA, the MPAA, and Microsoft. Why do you keep hyping CDs, movies, and Windows games?
Big corporations are what they are. They sell us cool stuff with one hand and tighten the screws on our freedoms with the other. We hate them every morning and love them every afternoon, and vice versa. This is part of living in the modern world: you take your yin with your yang and try to figure out how to do what's right the best you can. If you think it has to be all one way or the other, that's cool, share your opinions, but don't expect everyone else to think the same.
Nobody is perfect, not even Google.
I certainly hope that other companies, particularly Yahoo, which has been implicated in providing information to Chinese authorities leading to the arrest of political dissidents, will feel pressured by Google's recent announcement to be more candid about their own policies regarding operations in China. If our big Internet players were to stand up for what is right, it'd be a powerful statement for human rights.
How will the shareholders feel if they pull out of China? Would that be acting in the shareholders' best interests? I'm not sure if ignoring a possible 1.3 billion people would be the best for them in the long run.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
It sounds like you're saying that since greed is universal, it's acceptable to help an oppressive regime in the name of profit.
I know I'm going from zero to Godwin in only ten seconds, but the Nazis were just doing their jobs, too. Obviously there is a huge difference between filtering search results and gassing people and putting them in mass graves, but the logic doesn't improve any as the severity decreases.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Googlasia went public today sporting a motto "Do As Little Evil As Possible". Stocks soared from the opening price.
It will be interesting to see how this holds against their primary competitor, Microsoft which has embraced the Chinese market. They do not stand to lose their image or their corporate motto of "Screw Everyone."
Google complies with the DMCA, which requires it censor certain search results (for example, "kazaalite" http://www.google.com/search?q=kazaalite will display a notice at the bottom indicating search results were removed).
Admittedly, it doesn't go as far as China's censorship, but this is a slippery slope. Why is censorship there "evil", but censorship here is not? Google is complying with the law. Yes, I think it's a bad law. But since when is obeying the law evil? Why is it up to Google to crusade against government policy? Are they some kind of political super-hero?
Google has employees in China. I can imagine how the treatment of these employees might be used to the advantage of the Chinese government if Google is weighing whether to pull out. It would be truly dirty for the government to threaten the welfare of former google employees in discussions with the management, and it would lead to quite an international conundrum. At the same time, it is possible. China isn't exactly known for protecting human rights. Thoughts?
After making such statements, they have no choice but to pull out now.
Many companies are starting to follow Google's lead in many ways and on many things. If they say they are considering pulling out and then fail to do it, the disappointment in Google will be enormous. If Google lived and prospered everywhere EXCEPT China, that could only serve to make Google look good and China look bad.
I feel pretty much the same about IP and DRM issues in the world where if the world refuses and legislates against IP and DRM leaving only the US with such restrictive laws, it will really make the US look bad and evil.
No, there is this third option.
C) Don't bow to the Chinese government, they will not allow the site. They are the ones denying the Chinese people access to Google, not Google. Which means Google is doing no evil, but the Chinese government is.
You can't sugarcoat "Agree to censor" enough to make it not evil, sorry.
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
I've never in my life seen a corporate head admit wrongdoing so quickly without being forced to by a court. This is simply amazing.
San Francisco Photographers
As far as I can tell Google continued its "Do no evil" policy in China. They didn't take anything away from Chinese users- they merely offered a new Chinese service that openly filters results. How many Chinese search engines mention that they filter results? When your alternatives are to let the Chinese filter Google for you (making your search engine slow and unusable, and hiding that results are filtered) or filter it yourself (so people actually use your search engine, and tell people you are censoring data), what would you do? Google isn't hurting the Chinese- (Unlike Yahoo!, which gives the Chinese government personal data) it just can't help them much.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
I don't understand why there's anger at Google for obeying Chinese laws. Do I agree with those laws? Hell no. But business is business. Google doesn't make money from fostering democracy in foreign lands. They make money from selling ads. China is potentially a very large market, and so Google is doing what it has to as a profit-oriented venture.
If you feel the need to blame anyone, blame the dictators. Google is just doing business.
And before this discussion degenerates into WWII analogies, remember that Google is just a damn search engine and what's being repressed are just frigging web pages. No human is being abused or tortured by Google's actions.
The reaction I've seen on this site on others to Google's decision is way out of line to what was done.
I have no doubt that China will need to liberalize their government. If they want to be an effective technological power, they will need smart people and that means increasingly free access to information.
of why I still refuse to trust Google with my information. "Do no evil" - except when it hurts the shareholder's bottom line. Google is still a public corporation and no matter what the employees profess to strive for the company exists to create profits. I am pretty surprised that Google does not have a 10 year policy of erring on the side of morality to prove to skeptics like me that their motto is more than just marketing hype. To me it appears that having a stock price over $300.00 / share is the real priority.
-SmR
If Google is not evil and China is, then it's just logical that they'd pull out. We wouldn't want a rift in the space-time continuum now, would we?
I don't know about that.
The thing is, uncomfortable engagement can be more effective than complete, self-satisfied and puritanical shunning. There's no end to what people will do to push back against those who shun them. In fact it becomes a useful explanation for every failure: the bad guys are out to get us. Think Castro.
Most of the time advocates of "constructive engagement" are just hypocrites who want to pay lip service to right and wrong. Google is not like that, I think, but it puts them in a sticky position. Some will fight them on moral grounds. Others will waffle in between. It's a messy and uncomfortable situation, whereas boycott is very clean and simple. The good thing about it is that it has the effect of making the party in question deal with the messiness, to explain and justify itself over and over. They'll spin, adjust, tweak and struggle to find some kind of comprimse that will square the circle. It's never enough to make them decide to take their ball and go home, but it never ends either. It'll be a continual embarassment. When the elite travel overseas, there'll always be a moment of uncomfortable silence when they talk to somebody while that person tries to figure out a way to navigate around the proverbial elephant in the room. Eventually, they may just decide it's eaasier to change than to put up with it. Think South Africa.
So, what I'm saying is it's a good thing that Google is involved with China, although it is not necessarily "good" in a moral sense. And at the same time it's also a good thing that China and Google are getting a PR hiding by people. If Google is forced out, let's hope it's after a long struggle. Then China and the paladins of human rights can start struggling over choice #2. Then #3, #4 etc.
It's an unappealing situation for the people involved, because it's messy. But messy is sometimes good. Keep it very nearly unbearably messy, but not quite. That's the ticket. Turn it into a tub of pig shit with a pot of gold at the bottom. Sooner or later they'll decide to quick trying to fish the pot out with a stick and muck out the shit.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I'm a Chinese. I actually have relative live in china at that time who were heavily effected by the Massacre, I remember staying up 3 days straight watching the new hoping the sitution would improve. It did not, phone call were recieved that leave our family sob for months.
And you know what? Today, I ask myself which one I prefer. If I'm still in China, would I rather shows my child a website where the seach of that event simply returns no result, or would I want some prove that government still leave much work to be done, by pointing at the note in a google search page that shows me they are forced to censor something.
Which way to better let my child about the importances of freedom and the price we paid just to get make progress.
I fails to find any alternative to shows easily show prove, and easily be aware of what we are being hidden from.
I choose google.