국제경영 구글의 중국진출(영문)
 [국제경영] 구글의 중국진출(영문).docx |
    
|
목차 Contents 1.Case overview 1.1Situation & issues 1.2About Google 1.3About China 2.Question 1: issues & philosophical principles 3.Question 2: self-censorship? 3.1Google should have entered China and engaged in self-censorship 3.2Google should not have entered China and engaged in self-censorship 4.Question 3: Winners & losers 4.1The Chinese government -Internal perspective -External perspective 4.2The search engine industry -Local companies -Foreign companies Short-term Long-term 4.3Customers & related industries 4.4Conclusion 5.Conclusion & recommendations 6.Appendix 7.References 본문 3. Google’s self-censorship: “the greatest amount of information possible” or “being evil?” All internet companies doing business in China adhere to government regulations under the ‘Golden Shield Project’. Chinese authorities intensified access control to certain IP addresses and politically sensitive information. It is opposed to Google’s long-standing mantra “Don’t be evil” which emphasizes integrity of information but Google entered China engaged in self- censorship. Regardless of legality, this can be justified or blamed by different aspects. 3.1Google should have entered China and engaged in self-censorship. Google made a decision to enter China according to the Utilitarian approach. While removing some search results is inconsistent with Google’s mantra, providing no information is more inconsistent with the mantra in terms of right to a free flow of information.Degradation of service was inevitable and self-censorship was the best way to advocate the right to know. Google made up for self-censorship by showing the censored results on the Google index itself. It is certainly a starting point for acquiring the right to know in communist nation. At first, Internet- based business might be established under strict censorship but it would, eventually, lead to a reduction in censorship for the future. The ‘integrity of information’ is also subjective. To some degree, censorship exists all over the world, not just in China. For example, South Korea requires ISP (Internet Service Provider) to self-police contents that could be deemed harmful to youth but much of it is contents sympathetic to North Korea or advocating Korean reunification. Also Iran and Denmark have filtering systems themselves.How can search engines operate their business without any kind of censorship? 3.2Google should not have entered China and engaged in self-censorship. “Providing some information is better than not providing anything”, claimed by Google, may only be considered a self-defense for giving up its mantra for the possible profit in China. Google’s decision is based on Utilitarian approaches to ethics. However, “the greatest good” is only measured by Google, diminishing the importance of right to be able to access all information with the others outside China. The “some” information excludes many important historical events and international issues such as the Tiananmen Square massacre. Moreover, according to right theories, firms “should not pursue actions that violate [the fundamental rights that transcend national boundaries and cultures]” . Living the information era, the right to get the equal information must be included as one of those ‘fundamental rights’. Google must also consider its role as the search engine giant in the global society. Hill, in Global Business Today, insists that the powerful multinational enterprises must “use their power to enhance social welfare in the communities where they do business”. (p.135), Google’s self-censorship policy certainly gave up such obligation. 4. If all foreign search engine companies declined to invest directly in China due to concerns over censorship, who would be winners and losers? 본문내용 a Question 1: issues & philosophical principles Question 2: self-censorship? Google should have entered China and engaged in self-censorship Google should not have entered China and engaged in self-censorship Question 3: Winners & losers The Chinese government Internal perspective External perspective The search engine industry Local companies Foreign companies Short-term Long-term Customers & rel 참고문헌 References 1.Glanville, Jo (17 November 2008). The big business of net censorship. London: The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/ 2.Goldsmith, Jack L.; Wu, Tim (2006). Who Controls the Internet?: Illusions of Borderless World. Oxford university press 3.Hartman, Laura; DesJardins, Joseph (2008). Business Ethics: Decision-Making for Personal Integrity and Social Responsibilty. McGraw-Hill 4.Hill, Charles W. L. Global Business Today. McGraw-Hill (2009) 5.Congressional testimony before the House Committee on International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, The Internet in China: A Tool for freedom or Suppression? (February 15, 2006) 6.Thompson, C. “Google’s China Problem (And China’s Google Problem)”. The New York Times Magazine. (April 23, 2006) 7.Martin, Kirsten E. Google, Inc., in China. 8.Duthel, Heinz. Google Inc, Services-Google Tools-What is Google? (2008) 9.Rugaber, Christopher S. Google fights global internet censorship |
