Google Committed to Chinese Business

Snowgen writes "Despite this week's earlier story that hinted Google may consider pulling out of China over the topic of censorship, Reuters is now quoting Sergey Brin as saying that 'Google Inc. is committed to doing business in China despite criticism the company has faced for abiding by Chinese government censorship restrictions.'" More from the article: "Brin told a small group of invited journalists: 'I think it's perfectly reasonable to do something different. Say, OK, let's stand by the principle against censorship and we won't actually operate there ... That's an alternative path. It's not the one we've chosen to take right now'."

I don't blame him for staying in China

[Cixel Sid]

I don't think Brin has the foresight to think this, but I say, go for it. All the communication and business is going to destroy Chinese control and censorship in a few years anyway. PRofit-driven though they are, they're inadvertantly likely going to destroy censorship. On the other hand, they could be establishing a trend of censorship and further engraining it. But I doubt it.

Re:Typo in headline

[GPLDAN]

Google committed to share price. As somebody who rode a measly $5k up to $30k with Google shares, I happily have now stepped off the bandwagon of shareholders. The stock is overvalued. Google spreadhseet has showed that while AJAX Web apps have many neat features, they are not ready to take the place of OpenOffice.


What they think will gain from being in China will get offset by the corruption that will infiltrate the company. Pretty soon, the Chinese will want Google's research to start occuring over there, or they pull the plug. Anything they don't like, they'll pull the plug. Volunteering to work with them ultimately is far less profitable than working in a true free economy.

Re:Why is everyone amazed?

[casings]

So in other words, you're saying they won't compromise their beliefs when there is very little threat of losing money, but they will compromise their beliefs if the chances to lose out on revenue is very high.

The problem with this is that this isn't a "good" principle to live by, it is in fact evil and unethical, but since it seems to be the norm in this day and age, it's understandable to see why some would deem this practice as "ok".

Re:Principles? What're those?

[Irish_Samurai]

Wow. You are really off the mark.

If you were in China would you rather have a censored google or no google at all? Not living in China you could probably say no google, but I'm sure if you didn't have it, you would take the opposite opinion

This stance is so tired. Google is doing no good in China. Google doesn't have the ability to change a thing in China. Good search results (subjective) do not feed starving peoples, unseat oppresive leaders, or aid in revolts and protests. Especially if these results are pre-emptively censored.

I have yet to hear a Chinese citizen say "If only we had Google to search from we could change our nation."

As a search company, their job is to make as much content accessibly to as many people as possible.

Wrong.

1. Google isn't a search company. Google has a search engine. Google is an advertising company selling searchers to advertisers. Google presents itself as a "Search Company" to the public eye because its a better PR stance.
2. Thier job is to get as many searchers as possible to sell advertising to, not to get content to them. They attract these searchers by providing content, it is a means to an end - not the driving purpose.

Once you understand the fact that the searchers are the product, you will see that there is nothing positive about Google going into China. Its meerly a matter of making the largest Internet userbase in the world available to advertisers.