Unit V Case Study: “Google: Don’t Be Evil Unless….
By: Fasoro Adepitan, Columbia Southern University, USA MBA 6301, Business Ethics Assessment. The article focus on the evolution of Google from starting operations in a garage in Silicon Valley in 1998 to become one of the most powerful technology-driven companies in the world. Google’s philosophy is to offer everyone in the world free access to all information around the world; however, various ethical issues were raised from different quarters against Google’s operations. The first issue raised is the privacy of Gmail provided by Google. Customers complained of Google searching the contents of e-mails and design “customized” ads based on the contents. Another concern is the legal use of keeping information that is sent through Gmail without user being protected by the right given by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.(Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014). The Privacy of Individuals, is the second issue raised against Google, a reporter from CNETNews.com in just 30 minutes obtained and published as much relevant background information on Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt and leads to Google sanctioning CNET for a year, this reaction contradict the goal of Google to organize information in the World. Google and the Chinese government is another major issue raised, where Google censored internet search results in China to suit the Communist government in China , by filtered out and restricted Chinese populace from having access to some major websites, this is seen as a violation of right, whereas the same Google resisted the request of US Justice Department to make available all the websites to aid defending the Child Online Protection Act of 1998, this request was said to violate Google’ customers privacy. (Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick S.D.2014)

In addition, scanning copyrighted material and other copyright issues was also raised against Google, when in December 2004; Google announced that it would scan the pages of the books located in various libraries across the world. Critics were quick to point out that this program was an attempt to violate copyright laws by having copyrighted materials without the consent of the authors, Google faces various lawsuits for this violation and Google acquisition of You Tube for $1.65 billion, also come with additional copyright issues. Besides, the role of click fraud, which generate ninety-nine percent of Google’s revenue from advertisers who pay Google every time a user clicks on the ad that are displayed within the Google results, also raised question from Google’s critics, who complained that Google is not responsive to the concerns of its advertisers on Google’s AdSense click frauds. (Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014) Lastly, the issue on Google’s sting of buzz, which is a combination of the features of Facebook and Twitter, buzz was linked to Gmail and whenever a user open Gmail account , they were automatically given network of friends that were selected by Google. The users were not impressed, as they complained that this was an invasion of privacy. Google executives also faced six-month suspended sentences for violation of Italian Privacy laws. Other European countries also accused Google of violating their Privacy laws by illegally tapping into private networks to obtain information. Google invasion of privacy with its Android smartphones, which transmit their locations back to Google, was also criticized. (Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014)

1. No, Google is not supposed to censor searches in China based on its mission to offer everyone in the world free access to all of the information in the world but Google compromised to the pressure of Chinese government to altered internet search results in China. Google has adjusted its search process to comply with the strict censorship and security laws imposed by the Communist Party in China, this action contradict the mission of Google and also violate Chinese people right of access to all information. (Stanwick P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014) 2. Google was adamant about not wanting to supply information requested by the government concerning the Child Online Protection Act, despite the fact that this request was to aid the Department of Justice in defending the Child Online Protection Act of 1998, the purpose of which was to protect minors from being exposed to sexually explicit material available on the web. I supported Google stance on this issue that this request would imply that Google would be willing to reveals information pertaining to its users, which was unacceptable. I also agree with Google that this request is too vague, burdensome, and a form of harassment to Google’s customers.( Stanwick P.A. & Stanwick S.D.2014) 3. Google’s rationale for starting its Google Books Library Project was to give Google’s users access to online copies of out-of-copyright books for no charge as well as copyrighted-protected works, this project could have enhances Google’s Mission on making all world information available for everyone to have access to but this project violate copyright laws and very detrimental to authors and publishers who raised various lawsuits against this project.(Stanwick P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014).

4. The most disconcerting issue to me among various other issues raised against Google is that of “The Role of Click Fraud’. Imagine the fact that Ninety-nine percent of Google’s revenue comes from these advertisers who pay Google every time a user clicks on the ads that are displayed within Google results. It is disheartened that Google is not responsive to the concerns its advertisers who complained of click frauds. It is very possible for a competitors to use this avenue to increase the overhead cost to take a competitive advantage and Google needs to pay close attention to this. ( Stanwick P.A. & Stanwick S.D. 2014) Ref: Stanwick, P.A. & Stanwick S.D. (2014), Understanding Business Ethics (2nd Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.