PDA

View Full Version : Google v China


The Atheist
17th January 2010, 11:50 AM
Lovely little undeclared war on at the moment; Google, taking a line that few - or no - others would dare, is standing up to the totalitarian regime in charge of China and has decided that their policy of censorship isn't at all reasonable, so they won't partake any more.

On a commercial basis, this is an immense decision by Google - it is throwing away billions of yuan in income for a principle. This is especially amazing when no government around the world will do no more than pay lip-service to the fact that China is still highly repressed with little freedom of speech or action outside of everyday life.

Why is Google doing this? Clearly, of all institutions in the world, it can afford to, but it's unique in my memory that a public company has made this kind of stand.

There being no rational reason why private hackers would attack Google (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a8z7lS85s.Ws), it seems an inescapable conclusion that the Chinese regime was the instigator of the attacks which caused Google's rethink.

China's defence of its policies have been taken to extremes for many years, with dissenters being tortured and killed within China as it uses the weight of the yuan to silence dissent outside where governments do not speak of human rights abuses, but instead of free trade agreements.

Google. redefining social commitment for corporates.

lionking
17th January 2010, 12:55 PM
Yes, well done Google. Perhaps they think that China will come back to them given their market dominance. I wonder what Microsoft's position on China is?

laca
17th January 2010, 01:30 PM
Yes, well done Google. Perhaps they think that China will come back to them given their market dominance. I wonder what Microsoft's position on China is?

I think Bill's still trying to collect, so they'll stay for the moment... :rolleyes:

dasmiller
17th January 2010, 01:31 PM
I consider this to be a sort of acid test of Google's "Don't Be Evil" code-of-conduct.

It's easy to adhere to noble principles when there's nobody's offering you money to be ignoble.

And it's not too tough to adhere to noble principles when there may be severe legal repercussions for being ignoble.

And, as history frequently demonstrates, it's usually not too tough to redefine the situation so that your profitable deeds aren't technically ignoble, by your updated definition of evil.

Google, on the other hand, seems to be honestly sticking to "Don't Be Evil." It's likely to cost them a lot of lost business, and there wouldn't be any legal repercussions for cooperating with the Chinese govt. It would have been easy enough for them to say that it's not Google's place to meddle in other countries' internal affairs. But they didn't.

So based on my (admittedly limited) knowledge of this story, I applaud Google.

casebro
17th January 2010, 03:23 PM
From the OP: "it is throwing away billions of yuan in income for a principle." :

Hmmm, really? Is the Chinese consumer advertising market mature enough that businesses advertise via Google? Are there so many import restrictions that furriners can't sell imports, so there are not many outside advertisers? Anybody quote any revenue estimates for Google in China?

Alan
17th January 2010, 03:50 PM
They made an estimated $300 million US last year ($22b was their global revenue).
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/world/asia/15google.html

That's over two billion yuan.
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=300000000+USD+in+CNY&btnG=Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=

He was correct, it seems, about it being billions of yuan.

The Atheist
17th January 2010, 05:32 PM
He was correct, it seems, about it being billions of yuan.

Thanks for that, saved me a job.

With 300+ million users, I'm surprised it's not a lot more. Bloomberg felt about double the NYT @ ~600 mio in the next year.

Ausmerican
17th January 2010, 07:32 PM
TA I think the reason they are doing this is simple. They can. They aren't a country that has to worry about diplomatic backlash.
As you point out they can afford to.
And while it is costing them coin there, it is likely picking them up coin at home and elsewhere because it is a genius stroke of good PR.

Bottom line is it is a gamble, but they are gambling with what they can afford.
China calls their bluff and they are no worse off, and likely better off, than when they went into China a couple of years ago.
If China folds? Damn they just made legendary status.