rss feedLosing face, stating facts: Google in China
I don’t know whether all the online copy moving about Google’s possible exit from China is good - meaning that there’s plenty to read – or somewhere else on the charts – meaning that there’s plenty to read.
But a quick visit to the People’s Daily revealed an article about Google investigating whether its own employees in China had participated in what executives have described as sophisticated attacks on the Internet giant, including hacked Gmail accounts of activists critical of senior leaders in Beijing.
The article is from the Global Times, posted Tuesday in China, and includes a quote from a Chinese analyst who questioned Google’s motive and announcement.
Here are the key paragraphs, which refer to a Reuters article about Google’s investigation:
Li Zhi, a senior analyst with Analysys International, a leading market research firm, told the Global Times that the latest development appeared to be Google’s last-ditch effort to keep a grip on China’s huge Internet market. ‘Google’s decision to withdraw from China was hasty,’ she said. ‘Reuters’ report seems like a PR stunt by Google to manage the crisis. The company has realized how important China’s market is. It has worked hard to find a reason not to say goodbye to China.’
I am going to put stock, at least to an extent, into Li’s comments because she might have special insight into this issue that we in the West might lack.
For me, the noteworthy comment from her is this: “The company has realized how important China’s market is.”
I think businesses and governments around the world recognize the importance of China’s market in the 21st Century. There is no doubt about that.
The BBC reported that online spending in China soared nearly $11 billion last year. This year, online spending, including games, shopping and advertising, in the world’s most populous country – which is expected to become the globe’s second largest economy – could jump to nearly $16.5 billion.
On Friday, China told the world that its Internet users had grown to 384 million people. True market access for international companies has become an issue.
So, given that there’s probably widespread agreement that China’s market is hot – and hotter than the U.S. economy – Google’s announcement can be translated this way: Even though you’re the best right now, we still might leave.
Well, you know, when you’ve worked for years on earning the “best” title in any category – let alone organizing a 2008 Summer Olympics with dazzling opening and closing ceremonies and cultivating foreign investment with the promise of stability – you probably don’t want to hear that one of your high-profile guests might leave the table over something you might have done.
You probably hope it’s something small in the big picture, especially when companies in your country are buying brands such as Hummer and Volvo, as well as technology used in older Saabs.
Google and the Chinese government are discussing differences, including the issue of censorship on Google.cn.
But the Mountain View, Calif.’s transparent message about the reasons why they might leave sent a wake-up jolt to face-conscious Chinese leaders in Beijing.
In other words: If our economic market is so important, why do you want to leave? Just please keep in mind that we maintain our sovereignty.
Face is important to leaders in parts of Asia.
Recall in 2006 that there were two diplomatically-embarrassing occurences (description of the world’s most populous country and an outspoken person at a meeting) during President Hu Jintao’s state visit at the White House with President George Bush.
At the time, heads shook because, obviously, one party had made mistakes.
Here is the other part of that Global Times article worth noting:
Three days after threatening to withdraw from China, the company seemingly reversed its attitude. Google CEO Eric Schmidt told Newsweek on Friday that ‘we had come to the conclusion that operating in China was better for everyone – us, the Chinese people – than staying out of the country.’
This is noteworthy because sentence tense and context always can be tricky.
The question is this: At what point did Google executives come to the conclusion that “operating in China was better for everyone?”
The quote comes from an exclusive interview that Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria conducted with Google chief executive Eric Schimdt. Zakaria asked how Google came to its decision about possibly leaving.
Here’s Schimdt’s answer:
Google is a different kind of company than many others. The issue of operating in China was always complex for us. We were asked to accept a system of censorship that we were very uncomfortable with. But we had come to the conclusion that operating in China was better for everyone—us, the Chinese people—than staying out of the country. We have decided that we cannot participate in censorship anymore.
So, he used the past tense, indicating that executives had come to the conclusion around the time they were “asked to accept a system of censorship.”
I haven’t checked whether this Global Times article also was posted in Chinese. But the English version leaves the impression to the reader who skips the original Newsweek interview that the Internet giant’s attitude had somehow changed.
But the last sentence of Schimdt’s statement answers that question.
In the Newsweek interview, he also acknowledges a willingness to resolve differences with the Chinese government and his audience in the United States and China:
And please understand, we will still have engineers, programmers, and others in China. We love China and the Chinese people. This is not about them. It’s about our unwillingness to participate in censorship.
If anything, his comments certainly show keen market awareness.
UPDATE: Speaking of awareness, if you didn’t see these New York Times stories, Google is going to delay the release of its Android phones in China, Chinese film officials are going to limit the film Avatar and authorities there are going to begin scanning text messages.
