Comment by sriku
6 years ago
Much of such discussions demonize the company, but we need to look broader. Google is a public company and its shareholders, since they share the company, are also to be pointed out. Discouraging such behaviour is better done by the shareholders by dumping shares since Google could very well argue that if it didn't work to maximize ad revenue, it would not be operating according to fiduciary responsibility principles. (IANAL .. just thinking out loud)
That is such short term thinking.
Doing unethical things because "We had to so the shareholders would make money" is such a cop-out. I see it just the opposite way. You have a duty to do things ethically so that in the long run customers continue to want to use your product. So that governments don't start going after you for the unethical things you do. So that other businesses will trust you and continue to work with you.
Here's an example: Huawei. They've reached out to me saying they'll pay me more than my employer and my commute will be shorter. No effing way. I'm sure I could make them a lot of money, but they're history of unethical behaviour is an instant deal-breaker for me. Others will, sure, but in the market of labor they're going to have a reduced supply because I'm surely not alone in this attitude.
I'm with you on the shareholders being complicit in the behaviour (through ignorance or inaction in a lot of cases), but unfortunately I'd guess 90% of said shareholders wouldn't be aware of the scummy tactics Google have undertaken, similar to Microsoft I'd say, outside of the IT/HN realm.
It's unfortunate. Profit of their shares is the only thing a lot of people look at (and willfully ignore anything else unless it slaps them in the face/becomes a major mainstream media event).