“Research without Google would be like life without electricity”

Francis Sedgemore, Wednesday 24 February 2010 at 18:36 UTC

It’s a strong statement, made by Nanjing ecologist Xiong Zhenqin, that defines the world’s most popular Internet search engine as one of a jobbing scientist’s bare necessities. But, if we are honest, many of us would have to admit our dependence on Google. There may be other options, but Google is the dominant player in the market, and the most powerful search engine with the infrastructure required for truly global reach.

A survey to be published tomorrow in Nature reveals that Chinese scientists would be royally screwed if Google was to follow through on its threat to pull out of China. Of the nearly 800 scientists who responded to the survey, over three quarters said that Google is their primary search engine. More than 80% use Google to find academic papers, around 60% to gather information on other research programmes, and a third for science policy and funding news.

If the same survey were carried out in Europe or North America, the results would likely be very similar. Western universities may have greater access to scientific journals, but from what I can see we are all turning to electronic searches, at least in the first instance. Web searches save time, and allow us to digest vast volumes of data. And for those without access to academic libraries, life without Google would be inconceivable.

The question of Google’s involvement in China, and its relationship with the Chinese state, is a difficult one. I tend to the view that Google should withdraw from China unless all content filtering by the authorities there is removed. At the same time, however, I realise that it’s not an easy call for the company to make, or one that would necessarily have the desired effect. This is a point emphasised by Guobin Yang, an Internet researcher at Barnard College in New York City:

“People have been largely focusing on how the filtered content has limited access to certain information. But Google’s presence has also helped the development of civil society in China.”

This is, says Yang, because Google equips citizens with the information they need to be more politically active. Where else are they to obtain this information, and how much of the Internet is beyond reach to most Chinese citizens?

That is also a difficult question to answer, as the so-called ‘Great Firewall of China’ is a software filter that must necessarily operate with minimal human intervention. In the not-so-distant past, for example, this website was blocked in China, yet today it appears to be uncensored, despite there being a number of comments critical of the Chinese state. Totalitarianism can never be total in the age of global electronic information.

As for Google’s moral and ethical responsibilities, doing no evil is not as simple as it sounds.

Further reading

Jane Qiu, “A land without Google?”, Nature 463, 1012 (2010)


  Feed the writer!   

Comments

  1. Martin Veart

    It is easy for the Western mind to underestimate the numbers of people involved in observation and reporting in authoritarian states. Last week an ex-Stasi general claimed one in twenty four East German citizens were involved in information gathering.
    When I used to appear on the Minekey site, I put up a question asking if there were any Chinese people there or whether Minekey was able to get through the Great Firewall? I recieved a reply a guy who called himself Napoleon Li (the relevence of the name Napoleon was not lost on me) who proceeded to accuse me of holding all kinds of anti-Chinese sentiments. When I pointed out that I was asking a question and not making a statement, I was then ascribed a level of deviousness that is usually reserved for the Mandelsons on this world. After that I was “befriended” by three Chinese individuals on the site. None of them were notable for their level of activity.

    Of course, this does not takes anything away from your central point the Google has become a vital tool. The nature of a free market means that where there is a demand, supply with strive to meet it. But do not expect a search engine to be the final straw on the back of authoritarianism.


  2. No Good Boyo

    I’m trying to remember journalistic research in the pre-Google era. I’m getting lots of trips to our office reference library – we have a good one – and phone calls to Wise Elders. I miss the opportunity for crafty fag breaks, though.


  3. Francis Sedgemore

    Loafing has evolved, dear Boyo.


  4. Francis Sedgemore

    Martin – It seems you became a victim of the “50c” brigade. Estimates as to the number of such state lackies on the Interwebs vary wildly, but I guess it’s safe to say that there are at least 100,000 of these 50c-ers. But then the ultra-left over here would say that there are legions of Mossad agents (me included) who spend their time planting favourable comments online about the Zionist Entity.

    Google withdrawing from China will not lead to the downfall of the “communist” superpower, but it would have a significant political impact. I don’t see Baidu filling the void left by Google, and becoming a global search engine for Chinese users


  5. Martin Veart

    Lol: I doubt if there are that many Mossad agents on the Net, but perhaps their supporters and sympathisers. Last year I spent a lot of time in Israel and very interesting it was too, albeit for some of the wrong reasons.


  6. Francis Sedgemore

    “I doubt if there are that many Mossad agents on the Net, but perhaps their supporters and sympathisers.”

    I neither concur with nor deny that statement.