1. I. Name:
Justin Andrews
ACSG 575
Essay #1 – Analyzing Google’s censorship in China
II. Introduction
The issue at hand concerns censorship, but more specifically the moves made by Google
in order to gain access to China, as such actions bring out what some would argue are
very clear negatives to the idea of censoring something like the internet. Whether or not
Google’s actions should be deemed as unethical will be clarified by performing both a
Utilitarian and Deontological analysis on the actions, while keeping all stakeholders in
mind. The technology involved, along with virtues, vices, and morals will all be brought
in to help ensure the arguments made consider as many aspects as possible. Even if they
are not enough to offer a complete and irrefutable argument, enough information should
be presented to honor both types of analysis as they are put to use. The analysis’ will in
particular cover the idea of a censored search engine, along with the lack of certain
services and the special selections of news that were specified as being government-
driven. Without even specifying any facts it is clear that an issue such as this is difficult
to see in a localized setting, as the internet is something that is used globally, resulting in
everything being interconnected in at least some shape and form.
III. Stakeholders
One of the primary stakeholders is Google, as it is their services and actions which will
be the major focus of this paper. The values Google has at stake include integrity,
reliability, strength, respect, and privacy, all of which are interrelated when it comes to
this issue. China as a whole is an obvious stakeholder, but specifically concerned parties
include the government and the country’s citizens, both for similar reasons. Both have

2. values related to privacy, freedom, and justice at stake, while the government in
particular also has the value of honesty at stake. Outside of these groups, one may look
outward and consider observers as stakeholders as well, such as the media watchdog
group mentioned in the article that mentions the issue. What these people could have at
stake are values relative to those they see as equals, the Chinese citizens, whom they feel
should deserve the same amount of freedom that they have, or at the very least not have
anyone aid in restricting such freedoms, such as Google.
IV. The technology issues to be disclosed
One such issue concerns why Google’s motives for such actions were enough for them to
have decided what they had. The entire issue of censoring the Internet, using technology,
factors into the analysis’ as it’s not just a matter of not enacting some type of technology,
but structuring it in a certain way, as deemed by a government such as China’s.
V. The moral issues to be considered
The most important moral issue that should be considered is the right to free speech. The
reason I say this is because the Chinese citizens will be unable to access certain
information and have no choice in receiving other information from their government.
Google’s concern regarding offering an e-mail service underlines the issue as well, since
it doesn’t wish to hand over its users’ private information to the Chinese government,
which is a very likely outcome. Despite the fact the right to freedom of speech does not
apply to China as it does to other countries such as the United States, it’s important to
highlight due to the fact that the internet’s purpose is to connect people to many parts of
the world. Issues specific to Google include the concept of honesty and trust regarding
Google’s deal with the Chinese government. Such a fact may leave users hesitant in

3. continuing to use its products, compared to having used them without issue in the past.
The hypocrisy in Google’s “don’t be evil” slogan in relation to these actions may have a
far more reaching impact on customers and other competitors as well, leading to
unforeseen consequences. The moral issues that concern the Chinese government are
almost identical to some that relate to Google, with it showing a lack of trust in its
citizens, which in turn may lead to those citizens further distrusting their government.
The moral issues concerning the Chinese citizens in particular are mostly those that are
not in their favor and restrictive, such as a potential lack of privacy, along with a lack of
freedom in using the internet to its fullest capabilities. The issue of justice is also to be
considered, as third party observers feel it is one that is being pushed aside in favor of
profit.
VI. Utilitarian analysis
Despite the clear obstructions toward freedom of speech occurring due to Google’s
actions, there are a lot of facts to consider, as well as the consequences of these acts.
While it is true that the people of China will encounter restrictions, Google’s presence
will make it easier for those who were familiar with its products, especially concerning
the search engine. Seeing how its engine was on occasion inaccessible, it can prove to be
very helpful and convenient to many citizens of China. Google’s contributions may
prove to help the nation as a whole, along with its people, in being able to provide its
services. While this can be seen as a surplus of happiness, there’s also the negative
feelings to consider. Google itself states how uncomfortable it is with its decision,
meaning that the employees may possibly not be in favor of the work put before them.
There are also the feelings of the people to consider in a broader sense. Even though the

4. Chinese people may be happy to be receiving these services, they may be aware of the
lack of freedom that will continue to come with it, making them feel some relief, but not
total in regards to what they can talk about and learn. Those living outside of the country
have also taken an interest in this issue. Such observers are very likely to feel displeased
with these actions due to their own origins, with exceptions likely being insignificant in
number. Considering the feeling’s of only people in China, the argument would lead one
to believe this is a morally sound decision. Yet with the whole world also having an
interest, and in turn being affected by unforeseen consequences, it is not as likely nor as
clear how much happiness and unhappiness is being delivered. In the end, it is easier to
decide that it is a morally alright decision however, as the amount of unhappiness is not
exactly measurable, and very likely to be outweighed by the satisfaction of an enhanced,
secure search engine.
VII. Deontological Analysis
While many different groups were looked into regarding the utilitarian analysis, Google
becomes the focal point here as the actions are primarily being taken upon by them, with
the others having not initialized anything on their part before the company’s involvement.
With that in mind, it is important to point out Google’s apparent conflict in having made
such a decision, meaning they do not necessarily see it as ethically sound in their own
eyes. The aspect of it being a duty is that it is to serve the needs of Chinese citizens, yet
the intent behind it is arguably not only to serve these people, but to also increase their
own profits. With one of the potential motivations, if not the primary, involving a drive
for profits and customers, the actions taken may not so much be a duty to others as it is to
the company’s own desires, making it one to appropriately criticize. It does not help that

5. the facts shared regard the move as one that will offer Google access to over 100,000 new
customers. An argument to be made in Google making a questionable move regards the
fact that they withheld other services they feel they would also have the Chinese
government monitoring. If the company knows their services can and would suffer such
restrictions and control, the question lies in why they would offer them, leaving the
actions to appear less right than before.
VIII. Virtue and Vices
The most important vice that can be seen here is that of greed, which the facts imply is
one of the reasons Google has decided to cooperate with the Chinese government, in
order to get to the potential customers of that nation. Ideas of greed and pride also exist
in part with the Chinese government due to their demands in regards to censorship, yet
this is something that has been in practice since before Google decided to branch out into
the nation. The reason they are important is because of how they play into the actions
and demands forced onto Google, demands that Google complied with in turn. Google’s
possible greed can theoretically also apply to the idea of pride, as the company wishes to
continue growing in both size and strength, and be seen by others as a reputable force. A
virtue that there would seem to be a lack of is indicated by Google’s compliance with
Chinese laws, instead of trying to negotiate any kind of deal that allows the company to
follow its own moral mindset. A virtue of dependability is also enacted here, due to the
fact that Google as a company is, through its actions, saying it cannot be dependable in
China, due to its restricted service. The lack of virtues in comparison to the amount of
vices that can be identified warrant this analysis as well as the criticizing being done by
observant groups and people, in a very decisive manner.

6. IX. Conclusion
In conclusion, I can say that both analysis’ that were taken offered a better understanding
in regards to the issue, either clarifying how I felt or helping to bring the other factors
into focus that I had not yet considered. Regarding the utilitarian approach, using it led
me to a different conclusion than the one I would have gone with, and I still feel it is not
one I can fully accept. Despite this, I was able to understand that what Google is doing
will be helping the Chinese citizens in the long run, despite the censorship that’s been put
in place, and I also understand that such restrictions may one day be removable. Also
thanks to the utilitarian analysis, I was able to think about the manner in a way that
allowed me to realize that Google, while uncomfortable with the censorship, was able to
provide a very efficient service that could only increase several aspects of life to internet
users in China. Such a service may have given such users greater access than what may
have been unavailable or an entirely large hassle to use in the past. With the
deontological analysis, I was able to structure my own feelings regarding the issue in a
more definitive way than I could have without it, as it highlighted many of the issues and
concerns I had regarding the company’s choice to go along with the Chinese
government’s regulations. Instead of just feeling that I knew something was wrong with
it, I could see why and even discover other issues I had with the deal than I would have
otherwise noticed. Whether or not I agree to either line of thinking, I can see from this
example that they help lead me to thoughts that would have otherwise not been
conceived. If I had to choose a theory that was more useful to me, however, it would
have to be in regards to deontology.