Google, the lesser of two evils?

Broerse considered the ethics of Google’s Internet censorship policies in the People’s Republic of China. 

How did you become interested in Internet censorship in China?

“I was interested in the influence of search engines on what we read and write. Because the censoring of the Internet in China is quite obvious, it’s a good example of the impact search engines can have on the information flow. Google has the reputation of being a very ethical company, more than comparable companies, so Google was a nice one to focus on.”

Do you think Google is living up to its slogan ‘Don’t be Evil’?

“They motivate their slogan with three sub-points, one of which is to support free information everywhere in the world. What they’re doing now is compromising this by not being totally clear to Chinese users about how objective certain search results really are. At least they’ve made a step to be less evil – at least less evil than comparable companies – but I think there’s still some evil left.”

What is Google doing that you consider ethically incorrect?

“They’re not transparent enough in what they’re doing, censoring certain topics on the Internet by omitting search results. They could be more precise, showing why they omit them, the amount of omitted pages, because removing one page from the first ten results is different from all ten, and that’s not visible at the moment; they just mention that they removed something, not how much.”

Why is it ethically incorrect to withhold information?

“It has to do with their motto, supporting free information, and that they’re not fulfilling that. They more or less pretend that they give a clear picture of what information exists on the Internet, but they don’t fully do that, so it’s actually deceiving, which is unethical.”

What can Google do to operate more ethically in China?

“To be more transparent in what they’re doing, obeying the laws in China, but publishing info somewhere else that tells people what pages were censored and why. They should also provide a link to the Chinese language version of the normal google.com search page in the cases where they have omitted results from the Chinese version. But that may prove ineffective if the Chinese government decides to completely block google.com with their firewall. In that case, Google should rethink their decision to start google.cn, but this will be difficult as they already have a department in China. I think Google assumes free speech in China will be possible in the long run, and that their presence can contribute to it, but what does Google do if this doesn’t happen?”

What is ‘ethical relativism’ and how does it relate to this situation?

“Ethical relativism is when you just go to another country that has other customs and morals, and you just comply with them and say that in that place they’re correct, and you forget your own morals. Wherever you go, at that specific place they’re correct, but this isn’t ethical, because there are some universal rights of people, including freedom of speech.”

What can westerners learn from this type of situation?

“It can be really difficult, with your own morals from the western world, to operate in another country where these morals aren’t really valid from that government’s point of view. So you need to consider this thoroughly before moving to that country. You must think of a consistent philosophy to be able to work in that country. Microsoft and Yahoo have also both gotten in trouble in China, because they didn’t do this and have put people’s lives in danger.”

So are we as Googlers partly responsible for Google’s actions?

“In some way we’re responsible, because we use their products. In this society it’s really difficult to check the actions of companies whose products we are using. So it’s difficult to say, because if I were to say yes, we would be guilty of a lot of things.”

What can Google (and Googlers) do to make their actions more ethical?

“As Kant says, you should make your intentions universal, that they could be asked of everybody. If that is true, you can say it’s ethical. So if Google gives as much information as they’re allowed to and they’re honest about what they’re not showing, and where you can find this censored information, then you may justify it. Although operating in China remains a tricky business.”

Do you use Google as your search engine and is there a way to make an ethical choice here?

“Yes, I use Google a lot. There are some comparable search engines, but we don’t know how they make the rankings. So as a user, we really can’t make ethical decisions based on whether they censor or not. Maybe they’re filtering their results for some subjective reasons, or for business reasons, but they aren’t open about this – nobody is. In China the filtering is obvious, but in Europe, although it’s denied, they may be filtering, we simply don’t know. We hear about censorship in Germany and France, but these topics are really extreme, for example neo-Nazi websites.”

Should we be able to make ethical choices when it comes to search engines?

“Yes, you could do that, but that depends on how ethical you see what Google is doing. If you don’t agree with them, you shouldn’t use Google, but you don’t have much choice, because maybe Yahoo or Microsoft is doing more evil in China, or elsewhere. Of course, you have some minor search engines, but they usually rely on Google in some way. I don’t think it’s ever really easy to be so ethical: if you want to avoid using goods or services from companies that you think are doing evil, you really have to know a lot. It’s too much, because everything is so global. It’s tough to trace every action, so it’s really difficult for consumers to make these decisions ethically.”

How did you become interested in Internet censorship in China?

“I was interested in the influence of search engines on what we read and write. Because the censoring of the Internet in China is quite obvious, it’s a good example of the impact search engines can have on the information flow. Google has the reputation of being a very ethical company, more than comparable companies, so Google was a nice one to focus on.”

Do you think Google is living up to its slogan ‘Don’t be Evil’?

“They motivate their slogan with three sub-points, one of which is to support free information everywhere in the world. What they’re doing now is compromising this by not being totally clear to Chinese users about how objective certain search results really are. At least they’ve made a step to be less evil – at least less evil than comparable companies – but I think there’s still some evil left.”

What is Google doing that you consider ethically incorrect?

“They’re not transparent enough in what they’re doing, censoring certain topics on the Internet by omitting search results. They could be more precise, showing why they omit them, the amount of omitted pages, because removing one page from the first ten results is different from all ten, and that’s not visible at the moment; they just mention that they removed something, not how much.”

Why is it ethically incorrect to withhold information?

“It has to do with their motto, supporting free information, and that they’re not fulfilling that. They more or less pretend that they give a clear picture of what information exists on the Internet, but they don’t fully do that, so it’s actually deceiving, which is unethical.”

What can Google do to operate more ethically in China?

“To be more transparent in what they’re doing, obeying the laws in China, but publishing info somewhere else that tells people what pages were censored and why. They should also provide a link to the Chinese language version of the normal google.com search page in the cases where they have omitted results from the Chinese version. But that may prove ineffective if the Chinese government decides to completely block google.com with their firewall. In that case, Google should rethink their decision to start google.cn, but this will be difficult as they already have a department in China. I think Google assumes free speech in China will be possible in the long run, and that their presence can contribute to it, but what does Google do if this doesn’t happen?”

What is ‘ethical relativism’ and how does it relate to this situation?

“Ethical relativism is when you just go to another country that has other customs and morals, and you just comply with them and say that in that place they’re correct, and you forget your own morals. Wherever you go, at that specific place they’re correct, but this isn’t ethical, because there are some universal rights of people, including freedom of speech.”

What can westerners learn from this type of situation?

“It can be really difficult, with your own morals from the western world, to operate in another country where these morals aren’t really valid from that government’s point of view. So you need to consider this thoroughly before moving to that country. You must think of a consistent philosophy to be able to work in that country. Microsoft and Yahoo have also both gotten in trouble in China, because they didn’t do this and have put people’s lives in danger.”

So are we as Googlers partly responsible for Google’s actions?

“In some way we’re responsible, because we use their products. In this society it’s really difficult to check the actions of companies whose products we are using. So it’s difficult to say, because if I were to say yes, we would be guilty of a lot of things.”

What can Google (and Googlers) do to make their actions more ethical?

“As Kant says, you should make your intentions universal, that they could be asked of everybody. If that is true, you can say it’s ethical. So if Google gives as much information as they’re allowed to and they’re honest about what they’re not showing, and where you can find this censored information, then you may justify it. Although operating in China remains a tricky business.”

Do you use Google as your search engine and is there a way to make an ethical choice here?

“Yes, I use Google a lot. There are some comparable search engines, but we don’t know how they make the rankings. So as a user, we really can’t make ethical decisions based on whether they censor or not. Maybe they’re filtering their results for some subjective reasons, or for business reasons, but they aren’t open about this – nobody is. In China the filtering is obvious, but in Europe, although it’s denied, they may be filtering, we simply don’t know. We hear about censorship in Germany and France, but these topics are really extreme, for example neo-Nazi websites.”

Should we be able to make ethical choices when it comes to search engines?

“Yes, you could do that, but that depends on how ethical you see what Google is doing. If you don’t agree with them, you shouldn’t use Google, but you don’t have much choice, because maybe Yahoo or Microsoft is doing more evil in China, or elsewhere. Of course, you have some minor search engines, but they usually rely on Google in some way. I don’t think it’s ever really easy to be so ethical: if you want to avoid using goods or services from companies that you think are doing evil, you really have to know a lot. It’s too much, because everything is so global. It’s tough to trace every action, so it’s really difficult for consumers to make these decisions ethically.”