QuoteGoogle 'may quit China'
Google said hackers tricked rights activists into exposing their email accounts to outsiders [Reuters]
Google has said it may shut down its China operations in protest against government censorship of its search results.
The announcement by the internet search giant, which represents a major shift in policy, follows a recent hacking incident that appeared to target the accounts of activists using its electronic mail system, Gmail.
Google has previously said it would obey Chinese internet laws requiring politically and socially sensitive issues to be blocked from search results, but now says that policy will be dropped.
In a statement on Tuesday Google officials said they planned to talk to the Chinese government about finding a way it can still provide unfiltered search results in the country, failing which it will leave China four years after opening an office there.
"It's impossible to imagine China backing down in any way"
Thomas Crampton,
Ogilvy public relations, Hong Kong
"The decision to review our business operations in China has been incredibly hard, and we know that it will have potentially far-reaching consequences," David Drummond, Google's top lawyer, wrote in a blog posting on Tuesday.
Thomas Crampton, an expert on digital media with Ogilvy public relations based in Hong Kong, said one had to wonder if Google's threats to leave China would have any sway over Chinese policy.
"It's impossible to imagine China backing down in any way," he told Al Jazeera.
"From the point of view of the Chinese government, there are much more important things than even a high-profile company such as Google."
Crampton noted that Chinese officials had nevertheless urged internet portals in the country to play down the news of Google's potential departure.
'Bold step'
Google's announcement has though been welcomed by free-speech and human rights groups who hope that the move will spur other companies to take a similar stand.
Analysts project Google's China revenue to total $600m this year [Reuters]
"Google has taken a bold and difficult step for internet freedom in support of fundamental human rights," Leslie Harris, the president of the Centre for Democracy & Technology, a civil-liberties group in Washington, told the Associated Press.
"No company should be forced to operate under government threat to its core values or to the rights and safety of its users."
Danny O'Brien, the international outreach co-ordinator at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an internet-rights group in San Francisco, told the Associated Press that it was "an incredibly significant move".
"This changes the game because the question won't be 'How can we work in China?' but 'How can we create services that Chinese people can use, from outside of China?'"
Google's changed stance on China was triggered by a sophisticated computer attack recently orchestrated from within the country, targeting the company and at least 20 others from the internet, financial services, technology, media and chemical industries.
'Don't be evil'
Google's previous pledge to obey Chinese censorship laws had outraged free-speech advocates and even some shareholders, who argued Google's co-operation with China violated the company's "don't be evil" motto.
The California-based company discussed the attacks with the US state department prior to its announcement.
Google said its Chinese operations accounted for an "immaterial" amount of its roughly $22bn in annual revenue, but some analysts say leaving the country could crimp its growth.
The internet audience in China has soared from 10 million to nearly 340 million in the past decade and analysts have forecast Google's China revenue will total about $600 million this year.
Phishing
As part of its investigation into the cyber attack, the company said it stumbled onto another more successful scam, in which dozens of activists in the US, Europe and China fighting the Chinese government's policies fell prey to ruses commonly known as "phishing" or malware.
Matt Furman, a Google spokesman, declined to say whether the company suspected the involvement of the Chinese government in the attacks.
"Phishing" involves malicious emails urging the recipients to open an attachment or visit a link that they're duped into believing comes from a friend or legitimate company.
Clicking on such a link installs malware, or malicious software, on to computers, which can be used as a surveillance tool to steal passwords and unlock email accounts.
I'm surprised by this. I doubt China will back down and allow them to have unfiltered searches; so I wonder if Google is really going to leave the lucrative Chinese market.
Is it really lucrative?
Quote from: Fate on January 13, 2010, 10:26:22 AM
Is it really lucrative?
Is $600 million lucrative? For Google, not really though there's a lot of potential in the market. However if your corporate motto is "Don't be evil", then maybe you shouldn't be acting hand in hand with China's thought police. Either that or get a new motto.
Baidu is already the dominant search engine there anyway
Could this be just a pretext?
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on January 13, 2010, 10:59:31 AM
Baidu is already the dominant search engine there anyway
Yeah. I figured Google doesn't really stand to lose all that much when there's a native brand name already dominating the market.
The Chinese will just invent their own, cheaper version and export it. This is the end of Google. :P
Quote from: Josephus on January 13, 2010, 11:10:26 AM
The Chinese will just invent their own, cheaper version and export it. This is the end of Google. :P
Cheaper than free? Will they pay me to use it?
Don't be evil is a stupid motto. Google is just as evil as any other large company.
Quote from: Josephus on January 13, 2010, 11:10:26 AM
The Chinese will just invent their own, cheaper version and export it. This is the end of Google. :P
http://www.baidu.com/
9 out of 10 PRC censors approve.
Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2010, 11:41:37 AM
Don't be evil is a stupid motto. Google is just as evil as any other large company.
So you are saying all big companies are equally evil? Or rather, if I interpret you correctly, morally ambiguos.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on January 13, 2010, 10:54:28 AM
Quote from: Fate on January 13, 2010, 10:26:22 AM
Is it really lucrative?
Is $600 million lucrative? For Google, not really though there's a lot of potential in the market. However if your corporate motto is "Don't be evil", then maybe you shouldn't be acting hand in hand with China's thought police. Either that or get a new motto.
Its not so simple as that though.
Google explained their going along with censorship in China as something that had to be done; its less evil to present censored results which clearly state "These results have been censored to fit in with local regulations" than to not give any service at all or give a service which the government would hack and slash censor anyway.
I read a paper a few months back about companies operating in China and the morals of it.
One comparison which was made was to foreign companies operating in apartheid South Africa- here foreign companies ignored local laws and hired and did business with whoever they wanted, South Africa had the option of tolerating it or having no foreign companies. The paper proposed taking the same approach with China.
But...the comparison isn't the same. A lot more money is there to be made in China and these kinds of soft internet services are far more easily copyable locally.
If companies don't play along with the Chinese government there are many other companies (local and foreign) who will.
Quote from: Fate on January 13, 2010, 11:47:20 AM
Quote from: Josephus on January 13, 2010, 11:10:26 AM
The Chinese will just invent their own, cheaper version and export it. This is the end of Google. :P
http://www.baidu.com/
9 out of 10 PRC censors approve.
Cool :rolleyes:
Quote from: Zanza on January 13, 2010, 12:02:38 PM
Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2010, 11:41:37 AM
Don't be evil is a stupid motto. Google is just as evil as any other large company.
So you are saying all big companies are equally evil? Or rather, if I interpret you correctly, morally ambiguos.
Yes. It's almost impossible to make statements about the moral blameworthiness of companies.
There are plenty of people who'd say google is 'evil'. How about Microsoft, after Google started giving out products that compete with MS, but doesn't charge for them? How about Apple, after having Eric Schmidt on their board of directors for years, only to announce an entry into smartphones and competing with iPhone? How about Big Media, who claim that google gets rich off of their product?
Google does what is good for Google.
Now, I am not saying that Google is evil or doing anything criminal. But I don't think you can't pass moral judgment on companies. My employer is currently sued for allegedly supporting the South African apartheid regime for example. That clearly has a moral dimension as it was most likely not illegal under South African law of the time.
Don't Be Evil is almost as good as Army Strong.
Quote from: Zanza on January 13, 2010, 03:41:16 PM
Now, I am not saying that Google is evil or doing anything criminal. But I don't think you can't pass moral judgment on companies. My employer is currently sued for allegedly supporting the South African apartheid regime for example. That clearly has a moral dimension as it was most likely not illegal under South African law of the time.
Well don't get me started on what I think about a lawsuit like that. :rolleyes:
But fine, I suppose you can occasionally pass moral judgment on some companies. In particular companies that either flout the law or run very close to it, companies that base their business strategy around preying on the most weak and vulnerable (payday loans stores, I'm looking at you). But it's the exception, not the rule.
The State Department Responds:
QuoteWe have been briefed by Google on these allegations, which raise very serious concerns and questions. We look to the Chinese government for an explanation. The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy. I will be giving an address next week on the centrality of internet freedom in the 21st century, and we will have further comment on this matter as the facts become clear.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/01/135105.htm
Quote from: Zanza on January 13, 2010, 03:41:16 PM
But I don't think you can't pass moral judgment on companies.
Well, none of you can. That is my job.
Quote from: Fate on January 13, 2010, 11:01:41 AM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on January 13, 2010, 10:59:31 AM
Baidu is already the dominant search engine there anyway
Yeah. I figured Google doesn't really stand to lose all that much when there's a native brand name already dominating the market.
I've seen quotes of their market share that range from 29-35% in a market as large as China, that's big enough to be worth something.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB30001424052748704675104575000772033650164.html