[국제경영] 구글의 중국진출(영문)
등록일 / 수정일- 페이지 / 형식
- 자료평가
- 구매가격
- 2011.01.26 / 2019.12.24
- 16페이지 /
docx (MS워드 2007이상) - 평가한 분이 없습니다. (구매금액의 3%지급)
- 1,400원
최대 20페이지까지 미리보기 서비스를 제공합니다.
자료평가하면 구매금액의 3%지급!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
추천 연관자료
- 목차
-
Contents
1. Case overview
1.1 Situation & issues
1.2 About Google
1.3 About China
2. Question 1: issues & philosophical principles
3. Question 2: self-censorship?
3.1 Google should have entered China and engaged in self-censorship
3.2 Google should not have entered China and engaged in self-censorship
4. Question 3: Winners & losers
4.1 The Chinese government
- Internal perspective
- External perspective
4.2 The search engine industry
- Local companies
- Foreign companies
Short-term
Long-term
4.3 Customers & related industries
4.4 Conclusion
5. Conclusion & recommendations
6. Appendix
7. References
- 본문내용
-
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.
3.1 Google 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?
3.2 Google 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?
- 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
자료평가
-
아직 평가한 내용이 없습니다.
오늘 본 자료
더보기
최근 판매 자료
- 분배적 정의
- [경영] P&G의 경영전략
- [국제경영]경영학에서 바라보는 국제경영의 정의와 중요성에 대해 설명하고, 국제경영과 국내경영의 차이점과 본인이 생각하는 국제경영의 필요성에 대해 서술
- 다이소 DAISO 경영전략과 SWOT분석 및 다이소 성공요인과 문제점 및 개선방안제시
- 국제경영의 개념과 필요성
- [보고서] 변혁적 리더십에 대해서 논하라(등장배경, 개념, 구성요인)
- 관광학 접근방법
- 문화대혁명에 관한 연구 문화대혁명 배경, 문화대혁명 진행 과정
- [목표원가 관리] 목표원가(target costing)
- 목표원가 시스템이 불러온 자동차산업의 원가절감 사례
저작권 관련 사항 정보 및 게시물 내용의 진실성에 대하여 레포트샵은 보증하지 아니하며, 해당 정보 및 게시물의 저작권과 기타 법적 책임은 자료 등록자에게 있습니다. 위 정보 및 게시물 내용의 불법적 이용, 무단 전재·배포는 금지됩니다. 저작권침해, 명예훼손 등 분쟁요소 발견시 고객센터에 신고해 주시기 바랍니다.
