Google.com is a multi-billion dollar corporation that sprung out of nowhere and became both a tightly packaged conglomeration technology and a capillary-like network lighting the international stage. There are versions of Google in German, Estonian and Swahili among other internationally spoken languages, and there’s even a language tool for all the “pirates” in the world. Such a simple yet holistic setup has enchanted human methods and mindsets to the point that Google.com is more than just a default homepage - it’s a part of the family itself. What was once a domestic invention has opened up browsers around the globe, including China.
China’s five-year relationship with Google, like any relationship lacking in mutual understanding and respect, has had its headaches. Evan Osnos of The New Yorker says its origins were an “awkward” shade away from Google’s ubiquitously American idea of free speech and company motto “Don’t Be Evil.” An article by Lee Gomes in a January post on Forbes.com states that in order to make a deal that is going to cost Goggle a hefty portion of its revenue, the company had to make some compromises that would allow the Chinese government to sift out dicey search terms such as “human rights” and “Tiananmen.”
It’s ironic that Google’s unique humanistic tenements are precisely what China’s Web version (google.cn) block out. Here in the United States, Google gets the label of being more than “another search engine” due to its attractive layout and trendy concessions (YouTube ownership), but in China, Google is on par with the nationalist Web index (baidu.cn) because its options are not anything new. China’s use of Google as a suppressor of free speech was an itching uncertainty for the company, and it wasn’t until perpetration that Google issued a radical ultimatum.
What did it take for Google to wake up and smell something rotten? Hacked e-mail accounts. In December, several counts of violated e-mail accounts of China-concerned activists began popping up around Google’s servers. Until recent reverse engineering, the hackings’ origins had been cloudy; however, researchers publishing their findings to The New York Times have found “jumping patterns” that point in one direction: the Chinese state.
In the reports, a claim of stolen intellectual property snaps back and forth, potentially rousing an issue beyond privacy. It appears that control-hungry China has crossed the line. The attacks were all Google needed to realize its dealing can’t be one-sided and that it can “no longer be willing to continue censoring [its] results on Google.cn,” according to its blog (googleblog.blogspot.com).
Google’s formal declaration is influential in a time of hyper-connected but ethically shady Internet behavior, and it references America’s chief insecurity with Chinese media. With Google being such a principal American business whose daily stock ascensions set a precedent for all other companies, such a resolved statement will have contagious effects on other companies’ tolerance of Chinese media controls.
I can only hope that other businesses will follow Google’s example and stand up to China’s tyrannical stance. Perhaps the opposition from foreign companies will have China realize information’s true value.  Why else would the state have hacked the accounts? The state’s crucial shortcomings cannot be ignored, and the days of the United States turning a blind eye toward the civil disregard are hopefully over. Politicians now can be more focused on fostering free speech.
While some critics might retort that the new decision is an economic concern masquerading as a social concern, Google’s reports are more than just money. Such a critique is oversimplification. Yes, the stakes are high (according to The Wall Street Journal’s online blog, MarketBeat, China’s copycat Baidu is a preferred giant and by 2014, Google’s choice could cost the company $5-6 billion), but Google’s words build a much larger and symbolic image of our nation’s values. This is a price we should and must pay to give a sign on the international stage. With available means, China has unfortunately designed its own alternatives and shrugged off our protests, just like it has disregarded its own dissenters.
Political pressure from U.S. officials, such as President Barack Obama’s censored statement while in Asia and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton looking to the Chinese government for an “explanation,” but it is pressure from a social standpoint that will cause the “Great Firewall of China,” as Gomes of Forbes calls it, to crumble more than its fragile Google relationship has.
Google is taking the forefront of the issue, but the rest of the affected and infected companies must follow the lead of America’s leading business and leading social phenomenon. The Internet has brought worldwide social positivity, and we must let its optimistic objectives continue to grow, even if it may cost us economically.
The seeds of dissent have been germinating in China, and with the brightly colored support bouquets outside of Google’s Beijing office, it is safe to say a positive social influence has blossomed, and the Chinese government cannot weed out protest for long.