1. I think that Google did have the ethical right to renege on its agreement with China. Google made the decision to direct its users to an uncensored Google search engine through Hong Kong. The agreement with the Chinese government involved Google censoring information from topics that had been banned by the government. Google had not agreed to have the Chinese government steal software codes. They were going to use the codes to break into the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. This can be considered to violate Google’s privacy policy since the government did not make a request through the legal department before attempting to access private user information. In order to protect the privacy and interests of its users, Google directed their users to Google.com.hk. The text discusses stakeholder’s desire for increased accountability and transparency from the companies. I feel that Google’s responsive action to the Chinese proved that they were being accountable and acting in the best interest of their users. This also shows that Google has moral sensitivity to the fairness and equitable treatment for all users no matter what country they are in.

2. No I do not think that Google should be concerned about the type of information that their users access. Advertising is where Google gets most of its revenue. It is for this reason, that Google has strict advertising policies. They want to provide their users with ads that are relevant to their searches without being obtrusive. Users can review these policies on the Google website. This is another way that Google can show accountability and transparency. They willing provide details of the advertising policies that which in turn guide how they make their revenue which would provide transparency that should not cloud the understanding of Google users. As for accountability, Google is constantly monitoring the ads that are shown to their users. They terminate thousands of publishers and advertisers that attempt to use ads containing malware, ads for counterfeit goods or that ones that try to misuse your personal information. The interest of Google users (stakeholders) are at the center of Googles policies and actions.

3. I think that if the for-profit businesses have an increased moral sensitivity to the fairness and equitable treatment of all social groups, then they do have an ethical responsibility to lobby for the human rights. If they want to be accountable for the interests of their stakeholders then they should act when those interests are being hindered by censorship or other human rights issues. Google proved that they would not stand for the censorship and violation of privacy in China by directing their users to another Google site that would allow them to search freely and without the censorship previously imposed on them. I think that if a business is going to lobby for these they needs to make their reasons very clear. I do not think that they should be lobbying just because the censorship or human rights issue is