1. Good points. I guess one has to wonder which way it will go though, I could very easily see things going the other way and the Chinese govt figuring out how to do more and more censorship, and by then Google may get a large amount of revenue from China, at which point they will have no choice but to comply (with investor pressure to do so).

Posted at 7:03PM on Jan 28th 2006 by Steve

2. Good and sensible observations. In the past 30 years, China has become a much more open society. A good deal of this change was driven by western companies who brought in their ideas of comparatively open management into the country, and helped create the education and wealth base for a new middle class. Google's effect will be the same. It is the height of political and cultural arrogance to try to tell another country that they must become "democratic" by a set of narrow subjective standards within a very short timeframe set by Americans who have not visited China and know nothing about the country and society. China is simply too big and important a country for such a strategy to work. China is becoming more open and yes, even "democratic", but the pace will be set by the Chinese government and people, not Americans or anyone else.

Posted at 9:44PM on Jan 28th 2006 by Paul Denlinger

3. Yours is a completely spineless and cynical viewpoint. Ask yourself if your opinions might have been different if you substituted "North Korea" for "China". Also, the following is conspicuously absent from your list of "limited choices": 3. Take a stand against censorship, human rights abuses, political imprisonment, and state-sponsored murder, by adopting the attitude that there are some issues more important than expanding your business.

Posted at 2:27AM on Jan 29th 2006 by Danny Burkes

4. "Google is in China because they want to promote positive change, and they've picked the most effective--but not popular--way to do that: engagement." Jason, Google's not in China to be engaged to to change the place. They are there to earn money. Let's not be silly or assign any greater motivations here. Google has been in China for years. People have been accessing Google. China has been blocking certain types of searches without Google's cooperation. Google could continue to operate that way. In fact, it is operating that way with Google.com. That's uncensored and apparently still blocked for many searches by China itself. The only difference is that by operating Google.cn with Google's own censorship, Chinese users are getting speedy unblocked access to that service. So they can search for all types of things -- entertainment, information, health news -- as long as it isn't something the Chinese government dislikes. That's engagement how? That's being present, but that's not changing anything. One plus is that if censorship happens, at least Google is telling people this is due to Chinese laws. But we haven't seen Google seem to have done anything in all of this to try and convince the Chinese government to pull back on the demands, to drop them over time or so on. You conclude: "If our goal is to spread democracy in China the quickest way to do that is to make some short-term compromises. Drawing a hard line is the easy, intellectual route to take, but it's hopelessly naive. Rolling up your sleeves and investing in a market that could collapse or kick you out is, in fact, the courageous route." It's not naive. To date, no major US company has seemed willing to say no to China, because they so want that market. Google doesn't need that market. Google will survive and thrive if it doesn't earn in China. Google will remain available to those in China as it was before, and they can complain to their government if an important service to them is being blocked. But a real major short term change would have been for Google to have said no to China. No, we won't do this censorship. We'd rather not enter the market. That would have put much more pressure on other US companies to make changes or pull out in the short term, which in turn might have put real short term pressure on the Chinese government to back off. Instead, by complying, Google helps ensure that change will be a nice, slow long-term process, if it really comes at all. Finally, as you note, it is Google that has the motto of "Don't Be Evil." They themselves set up that high moral ground. The type of censorship they are asked to do, they are actually doing, simply is evil to a wide number of people -- including yourself. So if you're going to do it, at least at the same time drop the motto.

Posted at 3:40AM on Jan 29th 2006 by Danny Sullivan

5. Google is doing what it must do to be in China. Someone once said "You can do more damage from inside the system." Google is not selling out, they are "Buying In". Google is strongly anti-censorship and right to privacy. We should all know that. They want free flow of information through Google worldwide. But when dealing with a country that is communist and controls all information flow, and has no right to privacy...then you do what you have to in order to do business, or you leave. I'm sure Google's not happy about it. The unfortunate thing here for Google and their PR department is that this China censorship thing and the US Dept. Of Justice search information request just happened to make news in the same week. It became a lighting rod for the Neo-Cons to say...well you're working with communist China to censor democratic thinking, so why can't you just ignore the right to privacy for us here in the US and give us what we want no questions asked? Well since we do have freedom and rights here in the US, Google is permitted to fully use the US legal system and constitution to protect their users privacy, as well as their search technology. There will be a legal battle over this, and Google is taking heat right now, but the US will not be putting Google out of business for it. China could just say: "we don't want you here...goodbye". Google's stock is targeted to possibly reach $600 or even $1000 in the foreseeable future. Do you think the investors would be happy if Google were to be kicked out of China because they stuck to American constitutional ideals in a communist country? Don't be silly, nobody wants them to leave the goldmine that is the new China. I really don't see the problem. Different governments have different laws, rights, and freedoms. Google can't question the Chinese government, but they have the right question the US government. I think Google is in fact being consistent and NOT hypocritical as they are being made out to be. It's not a black and white case here.

Posted at 4:48AM on Jan 29th 2006 by Jeff Lee

6. It's very fashionable to accuse big organizations of all the evil on earth but the reality is that by doing so we tend to forget who the real culprit is. Accusing Google juke like we do when we accuse Nike is not only unfair but counterproductive. As Fr?ric Bastiat would have said, it's as much about what you don't see as about what you do see. In the case of Nike and child labor, what you see is kids working for a pittance in terrible conditions. What you don't see is that without Nike they would probably die of hunger or be forced to prostitute themselves! In the case of Google, if you ask most Chinese people what they'd rather have, a world with a censored Google or no Google at all, you all know what the answer will be! If there is a market for a censored Google, it means that some people do find some value in it. Who are we, in the comfort of our free world to decide that they would be better off without work or tools that they freely choose to have?

Posted at 5:21AM on Jan 29th 2006 by franck

7. I agree. It is better for Google to be there with restrictions than to not be there as some kind of protest against them. I expect there will soon be multiple websites, and Google might even be able to have a hand in building them, which will show clearly exactly what is NOT in google.cn searches. The list itself would probably become the most popular web site in China and demonstrate to all how impossible it will be to control the flow of information without total isolation. The very act of censoring it will bring attention to it.

Posted at 10:53AM on Jan 29th 2006 by Peter Jennings

8. "As we all know--the Chinese government included--there is ultimately no way to hold back freedom of information in China." Chinese government whisper that in your ear? Stop being so naive. "Does it suck that folks in China will search Google and not get perfect results when they search for Tienanmen Square? Of course it does, but they will still be able to search for the Declaration of Human Rights or the latest anonymous surfing relay." Get a clue, if you search for "human rights" on google.cn you only see those results that the Chinese government wants you to see. Check for yourself: ??????????????????????

Posted at 5:28PM on Jan 29th 2006 by What For?

9. "government wants... to have *their* change be gradual" Nice gradual change: http://www.uploadfile.info/uploads/d3c8a64483.jpg I'm sure all the dead Tibetans would agree with you. ...oh, but then again, you've "been there" and "spoken to people" Just out of curiosity, did you speak to any relatives of the students slaughtered in Tienanmen square? or any Tibetans? or any Muslims? ...or did you just speak to a bunch of upper/middle class Han Chinese?

Posted at 8:22PM on Jan 29th 2006 by Eric

10. Nope. I have to disagree with you on this one, J. You cannot start down the slippery slope of supporting censorship, period. Or anything evil, for that matter. For any reason. No matter how lucid or 'strategic' it seems at the time. It's tempting to take this view, very tempting. I don't doubt that you have the best interests of the Chinese at heart, J. Or that you have the best interests of 'good' at heart. But we should be the beacon of What Is Right. This is also why we shouldn't torture. (I fully agreed with your post on that one, by the way). Let the Chinese feel the cold shoulder, I say, until they do the right thing. Don't send them a tolerant-of-evil-for-dollars message. MS, Google, Yahoo and others should show some spine on this issue. (And out of that bunch, at least Google showed a vertabrae resisting handing over search records to Bush, so props to them for that.)

Posted at 3:16AM on Jan 30th 2006 by Mark Jeffrey

11. Hmm. But once you've bought the "what's good for Google is good for democracy" line (which I think is pretty hard to substantiate with actual practical examples) would you be equally tolerant of Google putting its personalization and adSense technologies to work for the Chinese government in other ways? Eg. "find pages *like* this subversive blog". "Target users who like to read about freedom and democracy or Tibetan culture with pro-government progaganda". Once Google demonstrate themselves to be willing to play with the government on this, why on earth would anyone in China want to use the GoogleBar or other personalization services?

Posted at 8:30AM on Jan 30th 2006 by phil jones

12. #10 - Wonderfully off-topic, but the "cold shoulder" approach of reform only works when the person/group/country concerned feels the need to be part of the world. The Cultural Revolution in itself showed that China (or rather, the people who run it) is quite capable of isolating itself from the international community when it wants to. Hell, it didn't even bother taking its United Nations seat until the 1970s. Cold-shouldering China and lecturing it as a parent would lecture a child is not going to work, especially when the child is aware that it's bigger than you and only going to get bigger, and can't see why you should be lecturing it.

Posted at 9:07AM on Jan 30th 2006 by wonderful electric

13. Gee, they sure should have launched Google.iq (Iraq) instead of going to war...

Posted at 10:51AM on Jan 30th 2006 by Massimo Moruzzi

14. All is not relative. There are some things that are just plain wrong in this world, and censorship is one of those wrong things. It's wrong when Microsoft or Yahoo censor results or collaborate with the regime to identify and apprehend journalists who speak the truth. But Google gets special attention because their brand is built on trust and the Don't Be Evil principle. It's an obscene rationalization to say that some future good may come from today's evil actions. Don't Be Evil meant something because it didn't equivocate. Now it's an empty and cynical slogan that seems more like propaganda than a principle. It's not too late for Google to take a stand and reverse course. And the media coverage of such an action might shame other collaborators into getting a little backbone as well. If you're interested in ideas for communicating your displeasure over Google's actions, see http://ProtestGoogle.blogspot.com

Posted at 3:52PM on Jan 30th 2006 by Censorship Is Evil

15. I'm not expert on these issues, but Blogger.com use is heavy among the prominent bloggers here in Mumbai. I'd guess they understand a bit better than most Americans what is going on in China. A number of them are considering dropping Blogger due to Google's coddling of the CCP.

Posted at 3:11AM on Jan 31st 2006 by Scott Rafer in Mumbai this week

16. Well, i have lived in China for seven years, and never had satisfactory results from any of the Internet portals. So, what's another censorship battle? Google, you are lying to the World, when you say it is better to be on the inside. If you knew anything about China and the Chinese government you would know they really don't care what other people think about them. Niavete is not your problem. Just plain old fashioned greed. Good luck in making many more millions/billions of dollars and for single-handedly breaking the spine of other companies who dare to stand up to the government here. You should be ashamed to strike the moral tone. China has advanced quickly since Deng Xiao ping opened the place up, but to be a truly unoppressive regime, money talks. By adding the Google clout to the Chinese government it has made it easier for other money-grabbing companies to come here. Some other companies stopped doing business with China on principle. It would appear that the mighty Google has no principles, it just thinks of its principal. On a final point, I would like to state you have done more damage to the freedom of the Chinese minority peoples than anything else in the past twenty years, including Tianamin Square (deliberately spelled wrong to get past the censors). You disgust me, you should be ashamed to look in the mirror when you go home.

Posted at 4:03AM on Feb 7th 2006 by Richard Jones

17. Spread democracy, actually 2 party system. then today heading towards north, tomorrow heading to east, U.S. economy is declining as well as her political systems.

Posted at 3:39AM on Sep 18th 2007 by ruby9