Google?s threat last week to quit China if its Chinese language edition of the world?s most popular Internet search engine continues to be censored has triggered a storm with great ramifications for corporate social responsibility, international diplomacy and business competition. With no firm exit date set by Google, uncertainty about whether or when the final shut down of Google.cn will occur adds to the mix by leaving the door open for political intervention and rapprochement.
Google?s protest move against intrusive Chinese censorship and relentless hacking into Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists, American experts on China and US government officials has been interpreted by some as primarily a smart business decision to cut loose and run from a cursed investment.
Indeed, Google.cn has struggled to make big inroads into the 384-million-user Chinese Internet market despite trying for over three years. Due to the disadvantages of late entry in 2006 and early mistakes in understanding the culturally distinct idiosyncrasies of Chinese Internet consumers, Google.cn could not defeat the local state-affiliated market leader in search engines, Baidu. With a market share of only 31% to Baidu?s 64%, and China-derived revenues of only $300 million out of annual global earnings of $22 billion, Google.cn was going nowhere and the decision to leave can be viewed as rational downsizing for cost reduction. Baidu?s chief architect alleged exactly so by arguing in a blog post that Google was cooking up excuses for failure in China.
Has Google indeed made a virtue out of necessity or is its warning to China actually a long range image-saving business strategy? Since its inception in 1996, Google Inc has projected itself as a company with a soul and philosophy that sets it apart from other IT corporations. Its motto of promoting knowledge and freedom through technology is one of the factors why Internet users across the world made it their default search engine.
Technical superiority is the core reason most web surfers choose Google, but some portion of consumer satisfaction also stems from the public perception that Google is different and ethically committed to its motto of not being ?evil?. Moral consumerism is especially prevalent in the West, from where Google draws the bulk of its profits.
With over 60% of overall earnings concentrated in the US and the UK, whose consumer consciousness about the corporate social responsibility of corporations is very high, Google had to think about the negative fallouts of supping with the devil in China. That Google compromised with the Chinese communist state in 2006 by agreeing to filter its engine?s contents in exchange for permission to tap the fastest growing Internet market in the world had tarnished its reputation.
Google?s current bold gauntlet thrown at the doorstep of a Chinese government that is progressively less amenable to foreign pressures is thus an act of redemption and a brand-burnishing tactic. That this strategy is paying off is evident from reportage that consumers and political forces of all persuasions? Right, Left and Centre?in the US and the UK are applauding Google?s tough talking with the obstreperous Chinese state.
Google?s decision to frontally take on China places it within the tailwind of Western public and political opinion that is sour towards the dragon. Most New Year columns assessing US-China relations and comments by politicians like British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have indicated that China?s domestic and external behaviour on a range of issues is troubling. Washington and London have both signalled that they are contemplating harder lines to counter Beijing?s beggar and bully the world policies.
It is no coincidence that the counter-intelligence operation that Google?s techies performed to trace the deadly cyber attack on over 40 corporate communication systems in mid-December to masterminds in mainland China was launched with American intelligence and law enforcement assistance. The US government was also consulted in advance of Google firing a salvo at Beijing by demanding an end to censorship and violation of Gmail?s privacy.
According to the New York Times, the Barack Obama administration will issue a stern ?d?marche in coming days? to the Chinese government, condemning the last big wave of cyber attacks on Google, Juniper, Yahoo! et al, which set off the current fracas. The Obama administration has already privately cautioned Chinese officials that hacking into the American national security leadership?s sensitive networks ?would not be tolerated?. Google?s ultimatum to Beijing is thus one element of the broader cyber warfare horizon that pits the US against China.
Some critics of Google?s impending closure of China operations are arguing that it would leave Baidu with a virtual monopoly and further constrict access to information for truth-starved Chinese netizens. But this presumes that Google.cn had until now been gradually opening up Chinese cyberspace for greater social good. The reality is that it never managed to change China?s totalitarian information control system in the three years of its edgy existence. In a rigged and state-doctored marketplace like China, competition does not bring all its theoretically predicted benefits.
The response of Microsoft, Google?s arch rival, to the latter?s ongoing brush with China?s censorship laws is therefore disingenuous. Its CEO, Steve Ballmer, refused to back Google?s prospective boycott and instead claimed that his company intended to ?help China? by staying there. With Google?s possible departure, Microsoft scents a chance for its Bing search engine, which has struggled to notch even a single percentage point of market share in China up till now.
Google?s competitors plan to lie low by sidelining the current controversy as a ?Google problem?, while the fact remains that it is really a China problem. In the long run, such opportunism could backfire as a worldwide ethical consumerist backlash against colluding with Chinese censorship kicks in.
The author is associate professor of world politics at the OP Jindal Global University
