1. What immediate and longer-term issues does Google’s censorship decision create?

2. Prior to the launch of Google.cn, what factors should Google have considered in reaching their decision to comply with Chinese government censorship laws?

3. Assess Dr. Schmidt’s statement “We actually did an evil scale and decided that not to serve at all was worse evil.” Was Google being evil?

4. Using Thomas Donaldson’s Ethical Algorithm, assess the censorship issue and determine whether Google could be said to have acted ethically based on this model. Is the Ethical Algorithm model adequate when making ethical decisions outside of the company’s home country?

5. It has been said that “[in the U.S. Constitution] the First Amendment does not reflect universal values. There is very little to say in favor of a single global standard of speech.” Do you agree/disagree with this statement, and how would you relate it to this case?

6. What should Google do?

This case involves an ethical dilemma involving Google’s philosophy of “Do No Evil” when they decided to censor search results in China. The case begins by discussing the birth of Google in 1998, and the subsequent launch of the Chinese version, Google.cn, in 2005. Google ran a “pay per click” business model to earn advertising revenue, and then offered supplemental products such as Google Earth & Maps, Blogs, and Gmail. 

In order to gain agreement from the Chinese Government to do business in the Chinese market, Google agreed to a self-censor feature of Google.cn, by which certain search results that were not approved by the Chinese government would be purged. Google faced a significant public backlash for their decision, including human rights groups and freedom activists. Google defended their position, insisting it served the greater advantage to the greatest number of people, but still were forced to question whether their motto of “Do No Evil” was still appropriate.