Google urges shareholders to permit censorship

Google Inc.'s board of directors has recommended shareholders next week vote down a proposal that would require the company to legally resist government censorship efforts and to notify users when the company is required by governments to censor search results.

The proposal was submitted by New York City's Office of the Comptroller, which helps oversee the New York City Employees' Retirement System, the New York City Teachers' Retirement System, the New York City Police Pension Fund, and the New York City Fire Department Pension Fund, and is a custodian of the New York City Board of Education Retirement System.

Combined, these funds hold 486,617 shares of Google stock, a stake worth about US$228.2 million.

Censorship has been a sore point for Google. The company -- which uses "don't be evil" as its corporate mantra -- was widely criticized last year for launching a Chinese search engine that censored results. In defense of the company's decision to launch the Google.cn search engine, Chairman and CEO Eric Schmidt said the company had weighed the pros and cons of censorship.

"We concluded that although we weren't wild about the restrictions, it was even worse to not try to serve those users at all," Schmidt said, speaking at the 2006 World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. "We actually did an evil scale and decided not to serve at all was worse evil."

The Office of the Comptroller's proposal argues that the freedom to access information on the Internet is guaranteed by the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

"Technology companies in the United States such as Google, that operate in countries controlled by authoritarian governments have an obligation to comply with the principles of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights," the proposal said, naming Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam as countries where governments restrict access to Internet content.

What’s wrong? The new clean desk test
Join the discussion
Be the first to comment on this article. Our Commenting Policies