QUIZ #1

Name: HAMZA IFTIKHAR BHATTI

Registration # 2011285

Q1. What is at issue from your reading of this case?

Ans. After reading the case the first thing that comes to mind is that there is conflict of interest or
struggle between China’s views of how society should get information vs Google’s core
objective which is to “provide all sorts of information on any given topic or subject at any given
time without any kinds of barriers or restrictions”.

Secondly, another thing that comes to mind is that a company in this Google trying to find the
best way possible to go about or find some sort of loop hole in their already well defined and
well know statement or philosophy which is “You can make money without doing evil”. To be
successful in a hostile business environment where there are restrictions placed upon them by the
Chinese government which are censorship on certain topics such as freedom movements,
religions etc. along with any and all sorts of content that destabilise the current government or
would indirectly harm the country.

Furthermore, due the above mentioned censorship on content people or critics have been quick to
punish Google as they believe that Google has violated basic right for the average person which
has caused Google re-evaluate its approach on how to conduct business in china as well as how
to keep the other side happy ( the critics).
Q2. Do you agree or disagree with Google in this case? Explain.

Ans. In the mentioned case I would opt for agreeing with Google because Google isn’t doing
anything that is out of this world or is considered to be un natural as it wants to conduct business
in a foreign environment along with making a profit in order to do this it has to critically analyse
every let regulation that is in place in the foreign country meanings its laws on how information
is transmitted and viewed.

Then secondly, to reinforce my point on why I am agreeing I would like to add that Google has
made an effort to seem as ethically close to their statement as possible “You can money without
doing evil”. In its most recent attempt to tackle online censorship in China, Google has
reluctantly accepted defeat after a year of behind-the-scenes wrangling over delicate issues.
Official search keywords that are forbidden. The search engine silently discontinued a warning
notice that appeared to Chinese users when they searched for in May 2012 with delicate
language, following Beijing's discovery of new methods to isolate them from using the internet.
Chinese authorities turned off the feature 24 hours after it went live. Google changed the
notification's format a few days later, in June 2012.would show up for user but it too led to
another obstruction. As tensions rose in November 2012, Google's English- and Chinese-
language services were shut down for a whole day. Google decided to stop sending the
notification. Features in the first few days of December after users kept reporting issues with
particular queries. On this matter, Google is still at odds with the Chinese authorities.

Lastly, I would say that how can a business operate ethically along with also making a profit
while staying true to its philosophy without adapting to what needs to be done in this case to be
successful in the Chinese market ahead of its competitors such as yahoo and Myspace.
Q3. What is your reaction or response now to this statement made by a Google?

Spokesperson in 2006? “While removing search results is inconsistent with

Google’s mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user

Experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our

Mission.” Is this still Google’s position?

Ans. My response or reaction to this statement is that as a consumer who uses Google on a daily
basis for a variety of information on certain topics I would say that I would not expect anything
less than perfection from Google and would say that I have right as member of this society or
rather as a member of the internet community to be able to access information without
restrictions. However, it is also mentioned in the case study that how we are witnessing the price
that companies are willing to pay to enter china. Moreover, this statement combined with the
above mentioned statement gives an honest picture of how Google has forfeited the view of free
flow of information to be successful in the Chinese markets by introducing censorship on to their
content, this move clearly shows Google has moved from freedom to the people to making a
profit in china.

Q4. (a) Defend Google’s argument(s) in accepting to do business in China.

(b) Defend the critics who argue that Google betrayed its values when

Entering China.

Ans. (a) The main objective or purpose of creation of a business is to do business activity and
generate profit hence, in light of this statement I would argue that Google in accepting to do
business in china is the right move because it’s a new market with new business opportunities
along with new ways to imply different types of technologies. This would enable Google to
provide its already existing customers a better experience in other countries such as America by
taking knowledge about new software’s and other things and implying them to their already
existing system.
(b). Right to free flow of information without any restrictions is in my opinion the basic right of
any average given person. Thus to argue that Google has betrayed its value I would say that it
has given people a cause to be concerned because if they start to doubt the source of where they
are getting their information then how could we say that we have a right to free flow of
information. As it is mentioned censorship means putting only those things that in this case the
government of china deems to be alright for the people in its opinion not the average person’s
opinion. One thing I would like to point out is that how can a government know “What is right or
Wrong” basically when it is made up of people same as someone outside the government. We as
human beings have different perspectives about a lot of different things but in the end we are
creatures of habits such as our emotions, our greediness and our own Morales. In the end I would
like to say that a government is made from the people we choose but how can we know that their
Morales and values don’t change once they are seated in the government.

Q5. (a) What ethical principle(s) did Google use (and is now using) to do business

In China with its censorship policy? Has anything changed on Google’s part?

Explain. (b) What ethical principle(s) are Google’s critics in the case using in

Not accepting Google’s presence in China?

Ans. (a) Google’s ethical principle was centered on an agreement that the business would
provide a self-censored version of its search engine (Google.cn) as the government requested.
Which goes against its statement of providing the people with free flow of information due to
this Google’s ethical principle has moved towards a different direction that is to satisfy itself as a
business entity rather than keeping in line with what people want because of the acceptance of
the censorship law. In today’s world being ethical is important but it also comes at a cost so in
order adapt the have changed the peoples view on how much more important it is to conduct
business in another country rather looking and listening what people think about them.

(b). first of all right to information is not being allowed in china thus critics are asking the
question that doesn’t everyone have a right to know about something if they are smart enough to
think about it, in light of this people are not willing to accept Google’s presence in china as if
this type of behaviour of censorship is allowed than it could be seen as an example by other
nations and would lead to suppression of information by others as well thinking it as a positive
way to control or run countries population.

Q6 what effects will Google’s recent lack of censorship have on Chinese Relations with the
United States?

Ans. Google’s recent lack of censorship would affect firstly, the way the Chinese government
wants to control the flow of information and in terms of relationship it would be seen as an threat
to the whole Chinese economy as it would allow information such as mentioned in the case about
freedom movements, protests and other activities to flow freely due to the way of living of the
people living in china might be put up for risk as for example some kind of information is leaked
because of which the people start a revolt in terms of protests against the government hence it
would bad for the US to not respect the others view point

Then in terms of business china may retaliate to ban or suspend of the US companies working in
China which would result in a loss for them and in terms of relations it may spell trouble for both
the US and China in the long run as both our competing with one another to be the one that is the
best in the world in terms of leading country for others as an example.