Google’s Sergey Brin was in speaking in front of a group of Congressmen in Washington D.C. yesterday. According to an AP report, he explained that Google decided to accommodate the same censorship demands from the Chinese government as its rivals had done.
Their rationale, according to Brin, was pragmatic: compromise our principles on complete access to information, but make a difference by providing more information than existed previously.
When the search engines first decided to limit their results, I understood the rationale behind the business decision. Better to make it possible to access some information, than to have all access denied. Human curiousity, and ingenuity will always ensure that people find ways to get to the information. The censorship just makes it more difficult.
I don’t believe that a foreign business / corporation should have a role in public policy decisions in a foreign country. I understood their decision, but do not agree with it – I find any form of censorship abhorrent. As Voltaire said “I may not believe in what you say, but I will die for your right to do so.”
It’s kind of ironic that this explanation comes just days after the anniversary of Tiananmen Square. Personally, I find it hard to believe the protests & massacre occured 17 years ago. It seems like yesterday.
Unfortunately, in China, local companies don’t have the ability to speak as freely as our organizations do, and local Rights organizations are non-existent, or handcuffed. Our ability to stand up for others is both remarkable and laudable.
Google’s (et al) decision to censor results may be a smart business decision when looking at the Chinese market, but it doesn’t earn them any respect elsewhere. Going further, it actually damages their reputation. What else will they compromise on? What other principles are not held dear?
Have a question and need quick answers? 
