Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Google Case Study

No description

Kelsey Gallo

on 30 January 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Google Case Study

Google Case Study Summary Google entered the Chinese market in 2006, but was forced to follow China's strict censorship guidelines
Google’s self-censorship “hurts those loyal users a lot,” wrote Isaac Mao, who said it was “high time to change (Google policy) back to the right track.” Mao was and still is a prominent Chinese blogger
Youtube was regularly blocked despite agreeing to China's guidelines
Google announced in 2010 that it would stop censoring results to its search engine
Google won’t lose much financially: Its Chinese business was on target for 2010 sales of $600 million, according to JPMorgan Chase. That’s a fraction of Google’s estimated overall sales this year of $26 billion. A Presentation By:
Kelsey, Jessica, and Dan Which internal and external stakeholders are
positively and negatively affected by Google’s decision to
oppose censorship of its search engine? Google’s internal and external stakeholders are positively affected by Google’s decision to
oppose Chinese censorship because the opposition still brings in $600 million in revenue a
year. This $600 million would not make its way into Google’s revenue stream had Google
folded to Chinese opposition and taken their search engine off of the Chinese internet.

Baidu’s internal and external stakeholders, the other major search engine in China, which accounts for 58.4% of searches, would suffer a negative impact from Google’s action. Unless there was a rise of another competitor, Baidu would account for a whopping 84% of online searches in China, which would increase their revenue dramatically. So due to Google’s persistent fighting of the Chinese government’s censorship, Baidu and their stakeholders are missing out on an enormous potential gain. Which of the six general environmental forces influenced
Google’s decision about censorship in China? Discuss. Of the six general environmental forces, Sociocultural forces affected Google’s decision about censorship in China the most. Sociocultural forces are influences and trends developing in a country, or new values that may affect the organization. In this case, internet users and the general public of China were searching for freedom to access banned information on certain subjects such as the Dali Lama or the Tienanmen Square incident, which in China is considered banned material. Use the four approaches to deciding ethical
dilemmas to evaluate whether Google made an ethical decision
regarding its position about censorship. From a utilitarian’s perspective Google’s actions were moral, and it brought the greatest good for the most people. From an individuals perspective, Google will be losing about $600 million for this so it was not the most beneficial decision. From a moral-rights position this is a very ethical decision because it respects the fundamental rights of the people of China. Finally, from the outlook of Justice, this is a very ethical decision by Google because it is guided by respect for the impartial standards of fairness and equity. To what extent did Google respond to the
Chinese government in a socially responsible manner? Explain Google responded to the Chinese government in a socially responsible manner by allowing their strict censorship rules take over the guidelines for their search engine when it first entered the Chinese Market. After the decision made in 2010 to remove the strict censorship on the search engine's results, they still inform the users that they are providing information that should be censored, but are not doing so. Do you think Google is making a good decision to fight censorship? Why not just accommodate the Chinese government and continue to make inroads into the lucrative Asian market? It is very clear that Google is making a very good, and ethical decision to fight censorship. Although accommodating the Chinese government would be an easier solution and keep them on good terms, when we use the four approaches to deciding an ethical dilemma it is clear Google is making the right decision.
Full transcript