Corporate Social Responsibility: An Analysis of Google
Corporate Social Responsibility: An Analysis of Google
Introduction
The concept of social responsibility began in the 1950s, along with the study of its relationship with business (Archie 1999; Frank, Peter 2005). Although the discussion between social responsibility and commence appeared early, it is attached much or more attention today, especially when we come into an era where globalization has become an heated topic. In other words, the global furious competitive market environment has far-reaching influence on the theory of CSR (Scherer and Palazzo 2008). However, the clear definition of CRS lacks coherence due to various literature (Scherer and Palazzo, 2011). For instance, Chinese may consider a company having corporate conscience by producing healthy and quality guaranteed goods; Germans treat it as employment safety; and in South Africa business responsibility is expected to meet the demand of medical service or education (Knox, Simon 2007). Although aspects of social responsibility are multiple, public goods can play a leading role or be a definition in terms of the theory (Abagail, Donald and Patrick 2006; Timothy , Maitreesh 2007; Markus, Jay 2012). For multinational companies who have much power in many areas such as Google, earning over one billion unique visitors in 2011 (Google 2011) and US$50 billion in 2012 (Fiegerman, Seth 2013), was expected highly by the public in social responsibility, which means that people pay much more attention to Google events that contribute to public goods or bads. This essay will focus on the theory of CSR, referring to public bads Google bring over human rights such as copyright and privacy, and goods in the field of public health, involving medical care, environment and employment.
The Case against Google
As we all know, Google takes the phrase “Don’t Be Evil” as a code of conduct, which set itself to a higher moral standard (Swift, Mike 2012). And with this slogan, Google try to convince their customers
Introduction
The concept of social responsibility began in the 1950s, along with the study of its relationship with business (Archie 1999; Frank, Peter 2005). Although the discussion between social responsibility and commence appeared early, it is attached much or more attention today, especially when we come into an era where globalization has become an heated topic. In other words, the global furious competitive market environment has far-reaching influence on the theory of CSR (Scherer and Palazzo 2008). However, the clear definition of CRS lacks coherence due to various literature (Scherer and Palazzo, 2011). For instance, Chinese may consider a company having corporate conscience by producing healthy and quality guaranteed goods; Germans treat it as employment safety; and in South Africa business responsibility is expected to meet the demand of medical service or education (Knox, Simon 2007). Although aspects of social responsibility are multiple, public goods can play a leading role or be a definition in terms of the theory (Abagail, Donald and Patrick 2006; Timothy , Maitreesh 2007; Markus, Jay 2012). For multinational companies who have much power in many areas such as Google, earning over one billion unique visitors in 2011 (Google 2011) and US$50 billion in 2012 (Fiegerman, Seth 2013), was expected highly by the public in social responsibility, which means that people pay much more attention to Google events that contribute to public goods or bads. This essay will focus on the theory of CSR, referring to public bads Google bring over human rights such as copyright and privacy, and goods in the field of public health, involving medical care, environment and employment.
The Case against Google
As we all know, Google takes the phrase “Don’t Be Evil” as a code of conduct, which set itself to a higher moral standard (Swift, Mike 2012). And with this slogan, Google try to convince their customers
References: Abagail McWilliams, Donald S. Siegel, and Patrick M. Wright. 2007. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic Implications.” Management Studies 43(1): 1-18. Weekly News (Atlanta), Jun 11, 2010: 313. Archie B. Carroll. 1999. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct.” Business & Society 38(3): 268-295 Entertainment Close - Up. 2012.“Consumer Watchdog Urges Veto of Google 's Driverless Car Bill.” Entertainment Close - Up (Jacksonville),September 16. Frank G. A. De Bakker, Peter Groenewegen, Frank Den Hond. 2005. “A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research and Theory on Corporation Social Ganley, Paul. 2006.”GOOGLE BOOK SEARCH: FAIR USE, FAIR DEALING AND THE CASE FOR INTERMEDIARY COPYING.” Journal of Internet Law Google. 2011. "Google 's new record, 1 billion visitors in May | It 's All Tech". Nerlich B. 2010. “Climategate: paradoxical metaphors and political paralysis.” Environ Values 19:419–442. PR Newswire. 2005. “Authors Guild Sues Google, Citing ‘Massive Copyright Infringement’.” PR Newswire (New York), Sep 16,1. Scherer, Andreas Georg and Palazzo, “Guido, Globalization and Corporate Social Responsibility (2008).” THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF CORPORATE Swift, Mike. 2012. “Google 's moves raise questions about 'don 't be evil ' motto.” Oakland Tribune (Oakland, Calif), March 12 Timothy Besley, Maitreesh Ghatak. 2007. “Retailing public goods: The economics of corporate social responsibility.” Public Economics 91(9): 1645-1663 Yang AC, Huang NE, Peng CK, Tsai SJ. 2010. “Do seasons have an influence on the incidence of depression?” The use of an internet search engine query data as a