Discussion Analysis
The Case Study on Google: The Drive to Balance Privacy with Profit, is an awesome example of a company with seemingly good intentions that is and will constantly be challenged ethically. Contrasting their operating values and their strive to continually expand and offer the world access to knowledge globally, the case study highlighted all of the many ventures that Google has led. Many met with success, and some met with failure, but all met with their challenges. Along the way Google has been challenged numerous times by competitors, customers, stakeholders, governments, etc. who were concerned primarily with risks against privacy among other things. (Fraedrich, Ferrell, & Ferrell, 2019) For which I too am very concerned. I found the topic on Google’s efforts to expand into China extremely interesting, because my son and I recently had a conversation about this same topic.
My son is majoring in business in college right now and one night at the dinner table we began talking about ethics. In that conversation, we began to talk about how China censors free speech and free press. Had I known what I read in this case study; I think perhaps I would have had more to offer to the conversation. Although, it was still a great conversation to have with one’s son. I think I will return to the conversation, because I want to share with him the information we learned about Googles efforts to expand their search engine into China and how they were challenged to make a choices; (1) to violate or remain sound in their corporate values or (2) allow themselves to be censored to continually reach and expect knowledge to the public. Though Google very much wanted to capitalize on connecting with the over 1 billion citizens of China, they ultimately chose to back away, because they felt that allowing their company to only offer censored information would be “doing evil”. For which, they knew would go against their corporate mantra, “Don’t Be Evil”. (Fraedrich, Ferrell, & Ferrell, 2019) For their decision, I respect Googles corporate leadership. Though they could have made a lot of money, they opted to do what was right in relation to their beliefs.
I understand that Google has made mistakes along the way. Providing the world, the worlds information must be a very difficult venture, but this decision at least tells me they are operating with the best of intentions. In the Journal of Business Ethics, I came across a journal titled Business Under Threat, Technology Under Attack, Ethics Under Fire: The Experience of Google in China written by two scholars (Anna and Just Tan) in China who wrote of the case of Google’s attempted expansion into China with applause. They used the scenario as an example of proper corporate social responsibility (CSR) in which they highlighted Googles principle, “You can make money without doing evil,” and they used that to emphasize that even when they wanted to make information universally acceptable and useful, Google could not accept the Chinese governments perverse and sophisticated filtering on what the Chinese government classified as “offensive” internet content. In support, Tan and Tan gave numerous examples of content that was to be censored that was in no way “offensive”, but enlightening for the oppressed peoples of China. (Tan, J., & Tan, A., 2012)
It is unfortunate to me that in today’s society there are still people who are limited to knowledge, but it I am optimistic that as long as Google holds themselves accountable to their failures, and they will fail, and that they stick to their principles, we will be okay. I look forward to this week’s conversation and everyone’s comments.
Have a great weekend.
Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. (2019). Business ethics: ethical decision making and cases (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Tan, J., & Tan, A. (2012). Business Under Threat, Technology Under Attack, Ethics Under Fire: The Experience of Google in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 469–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1494-0
This week case study explores the dilemma between a company’s social responsibility to
safe guard its customers privacy versus increasing its revenue. At first glance, Google is
presented as a company with an innovative and empowering ethical culture. Its
decentralized business approach encourages its employees to become pioneers and seek
initiatives that support environmental, communal, and charitable endeavors. For example
its charitable branch, Google.org has contributed millions in grant money to provide
disaster relief . The company is also known to encourage its employees to volunteer in
their communities, especially during its annual GoogleServe event in June. Due to its
contributions to communities, ethics, and the environment, Google has been ranked
among Ethisphere’s World’s Most Ethical Companies on multiple occasions.
Despite their achievements, Google has exploited privacy loopholes to generate profits
and expand their competitive dominance in the advertisement industry. This resulted in
intense antitrust and ethical privacy violations. Regardless of Google’s claims that they
were being transparent in regards to how, why, and when they collected and used
customers' data, they were found in numerous instances guilty of lying. One of their
biggest ethical criticisms is their tracking of users. Local and overseas complaints,
especially from European countries, erupted when it was discovered that Google had
been tracking its Android phone users and those who have used its Google web services
(Ferrell, 2016).
I don’t condemn Google's innovative means of making money through advertising.
However I oppose their unethical business practice of deception (Rosen,2013). As a
business, it is their corporate and social responsibility to be truthful; this implies acting on
their promises when they ensure the public that they have stopped collecting their personal
information. Regardless of the valuable services that they provide, if Google continues to
mislead customers losing their confidence, the company will eventually fall apart
(Schneider, 2014).
Resources:
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell. (2016). Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Cengage Learning.
Google In Hot Water Again Over Privacy Issues. (2012). CIO Insight, 1.
Pogue, D. (2013). Google’s Creep Factor. Scientific American, 308(6), 38. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0613-38
Rosen, J. (2013). Keeping Google Good: Remarks on Privacy Regulation and Free Speech.
George Mason Law Review, 20(4), 1003–1007.
Schneider, G. (2014). Electronic Commerce (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.