A virtual tug-of-war: A closer look at Google in China
Google™ announced in March 2010 that it was moving its Chinese site to an unfiltered Hong Kong site to avoid censorship and protect search engine users. In January 2010, Google reported a sophisticated cyber attack from within China that compromised the emails of human rights activists (Businessweek, March 2010). Considering China's human rights reputation, and noting tight Chinese censorship and business rules that favor national companies, Google had highly defensible reasons for its move.
Big business
Although Google never had the market dominance it enjoys in North America, it had a large business in China, with around 30% of Web search traffic at its height. However, it failed to conquer their direct competitor, Baidu, which enjoys over 60% of the business (New York Times, January 2010). This is partly because Baidu offered links to free music and movie downloads when they first launched. Although illegal under international law, this made Baidu the clear favorite with newly wired Chinese people at the time, establishing itself as the search engine of choice.
Surety on security
Unfortunately, no company can completely guarantee that nefarious parties, including their own governments, won't use their users' browsing history against them. The freedom to view and write whatever we desire is taken for granted in North America and most of Europe. In China, any act that might conceivably be seen as subversive can lead to apprehension and detention in a system that has a deeply questionable human rights record.
Free speech
North American companies are understandably appalled that people may have been endangered by the use of their software and cannot ethically expose their consumers to this kind of risk. Google is emerging as a leader in the debate on their responsibilities to their users when those users live in countries that wish to censor, monitor or otherwise control the privacy and freedom of speech of their citizens.
Evading censorship
As with all computer hackers or cyber-intelligence, it is a predator-prey situation, where every new evasion and security tactic from Google (the prey) will be either hacked or tightly controlled by the government (the predator). This playing field is tilted more in the government's favor, and continuing to play will increase frustration and waste resources. All of this is the perfect situation for controlling governments, who can point to their openness to foreign companies and decry their inability to adapt to local culture when they finally admit defeat.
Seeking solutions
A new group, Global Network Initiative, has the support of Google and other companies that are attempting to provide a template for Western companies wishing to do business in countries with unpredictable reactions to the choices their people make on the Internet. However, many commentators note that the lure of fat Internet profit opportunities from huge foreign markets can blind companies to the necessity of standing up for the rights of their consumers (New York Times, January 2010). Corporations and Western governments have to help protect those who cannot protect themselves, but it's up to us to urge a worldwide commitment to human rights.
Google is a trademark of Google Inc.
