Summary of the author’s viewpoint
The author finds it ironical that Google safeguards privacy and freedom of its users in its home market and then readily accepts to alter its policy in other markets like China. Moreover, the use and existence of copyrighted material on Google websites services such as Google Books and YouTube expose the firm to copyright-related court battles.
Although ninety-nine per cent of Google’s revenue comes from advertising, the company continues to face complaints from advertisers about click fraud. Google has also been violating users’ trust and privacy by using personal details to recommend friends with its Buzz service. The service exposes a loophole in privacy security that governments can use to monitor private conversations.
On its Android service, Google collects mobile users’ location details even when they are not using location services on their smartphones.
While Google in 2012 explicitly stated how it would collect user information from various services to help enhance user experience, it failed to disclose the fact that it would also use other forms of identification to track users against their will. The problem becomes worrisome when Google bypasses users’ intentions and actions to block its monitoring activities (Stanwick & Stanwick, 2014).
Discussion of the ethical issues
Confidentiality and privacy of a customer’s information are critical elements of ethical conduct that service businesses should follow (Stanwick & Stanwick, 2014). In addition, a company like Google ought to be forthcoming with information about its activities concerning users’ private information.
Many users may not be aware of what Google does, even when the company claims that the unethical data collection eventually leads to better experiences for them and secure storage of their information from third-party access. Users have a right to demand Google to stop monitoring them.
They can do this by signing out of Google services. When this happens, Google should not have to use other background means to access information from such a user because the intention not to use Google’s services was explicitly demonstrated by the user’s actions.
Part of compliance with business ethics for Google comes through state regulations on privacy of users’ information. However, as a company claiming not to be evil, there should be no need to for investigation into wrongdoings in the first place.
The matter should be clear enough such that the company does not involve itself in any unethical practice. The best way forward is to give people a chance to make their own choices, rather than coerce them into making choices that are favorable to Google.
Responses to the questions
Google should not censor searches in China because that does not amount to giving information to the world.
Google was adamant about not wanting to provide information because it wanted to protect its trade secrets. Revelation of the search results findings and subsequent scrutiny by authorities would provide room for rival companies to understand technologies used by Google, which could allow them to launch rival products.
Google’s rationale for the Google Books Library project was to put information that was already available for public access for free on the Internet to extend the reach of public libraries beyond their physical addresses (Stanwick & Stanwick, 2014).
The issue of tracking users even when they are logged into Google services is the most disconcerting because it just shows the way the company puts its interest before those of users that it claims to serve. It is a complete violation of trust.
Reference
Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick, S. D. (2014). Understanding business ethics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.