Since its creation, the Internet has continuously grown in importance as a means to obtain information. This is due in part because it is not censored like the rest of America’s mainstream media, such as television, newspapers, and the radio. Nevertheless, the issue of censorship has raised many controversial issues, not only in the United States, but also throughout the world. In the debate by Intelligence2 (2008): Google Violates its Don’t be Evil Motto, it is argued that Google has violated its self declared motto that it wouldn’t be evil, thus putting people’s interest before their own corporate financial interests. While Google has committed certain questionable acts I do not believe they have violated their motto. Harry Lewis, Randal Picker, and Siva Vaidhyanathan argue that this violation is exposed in Goggle’s agreement to cooperate with the Chinese government in exchange of a larger monetary market and in its advertisement market (Intelligence2, 2008). Nevertheless, Esther Dyson, Jim Harper, and Jeff Jarvis argue that while such actions have occurred, the good it has brought to the over all population exemplifies their don’t be evil motto. To begin with, Harry Lewis, Randal Picker, and Siva Vaidhyanathan argue that the violation of the Google motto is demonstrated in their agreement to cooperate with the Chinese government in exchange of a larger monetary market (Intelligence2, 2008). They discuss that the Chinese government has allowed Google to enter their country with the condition that they censor much of the material on the Internet. Google, being an American company should have said no and upheld the first amendment of the United States Constitution. This is a reason that has led many people to classify Google as... ... middle of paper ... ...n argued that by Goggle’s agreement to collaborate with the Chinese government in censoring the Internet and in its advertisement market they are violating their “don’t be evil” motto (Intelligence2, 2008). Nevertheless I agree with Esther Dyson, Jim Harper, and Jeff Jarvis that while such actions have occurred Google seeks to improve the information of people throughout the world. Google is willingly to sacrifice its interests, in this case its reputation, for the over all good of the world upholding its don’t be evil motto. Works Cited Dye, T. R., Zeigler, H., & Schubert, L. (2012). The Irony of Democracy (15th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Group. Hill, Steven.(2006).10 Steps to Repair American Democracy.Sausalito, CA: PoliPointPress. Intelligence2 (2008).Google Violates its Don’t be Evil Motto.The Rosenkranz Foundation/ Intelligence Squared US
1. Janda, Kenneth. The Challenge of Democracy. Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA. 1999. (Chapter 3 & 4).
Deva, Surya. “Corporate Complicity in Internet Censorship in China: Who Cares for the Global Compact or the Global Online Freedom Act?” The George Washington International Law Review. Washington, DC: The George Washington Intl Law Review. 2007. Web. 31 Jan., 2011.
It is true that Google has contributed immensely to the development of America, but one must not remain sidetracked by the holistic effects, and should instead delve deeper into the true principles of Google in order to realize that the company is, on the contrary, run by “robber barons”. Recently, Google has posted about the principles that guide the company: “do what’s best for the user”, “provide the most relevant answers as quickly as possible”, “label advertisements clearly”, “be transparent”, and “loyalty, not lock-in” (Rosoff). During Larry Page and Sergey Brin’s time at Stanford together, they wrote an essay titled: The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine
Why should the reader care about the impact of technology on market morals? Rising prevalence of technological products raises a concern for the increasing power of technological corporations such as Google. It affects our life especially when the intensifying competition drives corporations to gain comparative advantage over their rivals by spying on their users. Although internet is still a relatively new field, internet-based companies have already experienced countless lawsuits regarding the intrusion of privacy. As consumers, our growing dependence on technology allows these corporations to know and control every move we take. The section about collecting users’ data under Google’s terms of service exemplifies privacy invasion, but the most alarming part is that we do not care about it for most of the times. We regard privacy less important than the technology we are able to use by simply agreeing to give the data away. It is time we ask ourselves whether technology companies have gone too far in their reach of market domination and whether it “reduce the capacity of democracy to respond to citizens’ concerns” (Reich
Barry, Brian. "Is Democracy Special?" in Philosophy, Politics, & Society, 5th Series, ed. Peter Laslett & James Fishkin. Hew Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.
Google’s search engine is the company’s greatest asset. Its search engine brings in its users as well as its large sums of the company’s revenue. Its users are constantly searching and browsing the web, and while they do this, Google is given access to all their information. Google has many software services such as Google+. Once a user decides to utilize one of these services, they are allowing the company access to publish or modify these outlets into its search engine. In other words the user’s information or search results can be viewed by a third party (8). This practice violates the ethical norm of privacy and is concerned in the eyes of many an unethical business
Christiano, Tom. "Democracy." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 27 July 2006. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
...oogle’s profits soar. By failing to ask Google, “What’s in it for you?” we demonstrate flawed reasoning ability.
This report will describe the history of government regulations and FTC. How that applied to Google search and personal privacy. The changes made from the settlement between Google and the FTC, the difference Google's practices and policies from before the settlement and after the settlement, and the current demands and expectations from current and vocal Google users. The report will also draw a conclusion from the findings and will determine if additional regulations are needed or if the regulations currently in place are sufficient.
Google is a public corporation that deals with Internet searching, advertising, and Web-based computing technology. All these have developed from an initial search engine and the company continues to advance even to date with partnerships and acquisition of other companies and products. All of these are due to its formulation and maintenance of a unique corporate culture that other organizations have to follow in order to be as successful (Rachet, B. 2014). What makes up Google 's strong culture are values that are widely accepted and strongly held (Rachet b. 2014). Google has topped the list of Fortune 100’s Best Companies to Work for 4 times (Kim, J. 2013). Although Google has many perks on their work campus, the real formula behind their
Despite existing laws and privacy enhancing technological methods, the US is progressively taking full advantage of its dominant position not just as the home of companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter but also acknowledging jurisdiction on all websites registered in the US. Therefore, countries such Brazil, Iran, Russia, India and China “are now challenging United States hegemony of the Internet and even calling for the creation of a new governing body to oversee Internet policy” (Brooke, 2012, p.245).
Levy, Steven, Brad Stone, and Peter Suciu. "All Eyes On Google. (Cover Story)." Newsweek 143.13 (2004):
Political, economic, and technological are three factors of the external environment that Google must identify with doing an external analysis. Political factor can profit Googles growth through different markets. Chinese’s and US government placed an obstacle for any growth that Google had in these markets. According to Google 2009, “They viewed Google as a monopoly and request authority to monitor its activities. The pressure of the government provides additional problems with copyright and privacy issues. As the technology expands, it offers more problems for Google. “New...
China, also, will be able to achieve economic and technological advantages by working with Google while still controlling public opinion. By restricting Google by censorship, with minimal compromises on some services, China will be able to affirm its status as an independent actor in the global marketplace as well. Work Cited:.. James S. O’Rourke IV, Brynn Harris, Allison Ogilvy: Google in China: government censorship and corporate reputation Journal of Business Strategy Vol. 28.
Is Google Making Us Stupid? - Magazine - The Atlantic. (n.d.). The Atlantic — News and analysis on politics, business, culture, technology, national, international, and life – TheAtlantic.com. Retrieved April 21, 2012, from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/