2 ms·
i think it comes to the bottom line, all the "causes" don't really mean anything. It's always the same 10,000 people protesting environmentalism, darfur, G20, c
by vaksel 17y ago
i think it comes to the bottom line, all the "causes" don't really mean anything. It's always the same 10,000 people protesting environmentalism, darfur, G20, care bears. And even those, majority will come back to Google a week later when the "boo Google" protests get boring and they'll switch to "boo Sponge Bob squarepants, a corrupt depiction of the scumbag capitalist anti-environmentalism"
The bottom line, is that Google doesn't want to lose a 1 billion person Chinese market over a bunch of hippies. Long term(20-30 years) it'll account for 70-80% of their revenue, turning the back on it now would be the dumbest thing for them to do.
- patio11 17y agoi think it comes to the bottom line, all the "causes" don't really mean anything. I disagree -- Google reacts to bad PR. It is about the only external factor they react to, since they've got a de-facto monopoly on the Internet's license to print money combined with essentially no regulatory oversight, anti-trust issues, etc. See, e.g., how quickly they killed their I-can't-believe-its-not-Campfire app when seven PR-savvy guys in a room in Chicago threatened them with being seen as the Goliath for a change.
- vaksel 17y agothey react to bad PR when it costs them nothing to fix it. The whole Chinese incident would have cost them billions, and it blew over after a few weeks