Stop Google's War Business. Essay.

Discuss why Google's march to the business of war must be stopped.

Summary of the arguments and background

Google has been a pioneer in information technologies for last many years (Google, 2018). Recently a new business deal between US Defense Department and Google has come to light where Google is going to provide artificial intelligence (AI) technology to the defense department to power its Project Maven for drone surveillance and target attacks (The Guardian, 2018) Google will also provide experts and engineers for the purpose.

The ethical question arising from this business decision is whether a multinational company with access to personal data of billions of people around the world be a part of military operations of any one country (The Guardian, 2018). The question is about the moral correctness of the decision of the company to use its state of the art technology of artificial intelligence, cloud computing, its experts and its engineers for military offensive of single country (The Guardian, 2018). A large section of employees of Google, media and academicians are against this business decision (Gray, 2018). Therefore, the arguments given in the article are explained and ethical decision making is sought in the subsequent analyses.

The article strongly supports termination of contract under which Google is going to supply artificial intelligence technology to US Defense Department (Gray, 2018). Project Maven is a military operation of the US in which it intends to use artificial intelligence for drone surveillance to take out images of complete towns. (The NewYork Times, 2018)  There are concerns that operation may also use AI for attacking targets at remote locations.

 Google employees and a section of the media are of the view that Google has a huge data base of people around the world (The Guardian, 2018). It has long organised people’s personal data like their personal email, calendars, location data, private photos etc. (Google, 2018) Therefore, has a huge access to people’s personal life including their location (Google, 2018) Hence, Google has the responsibility to protect this data.

Some who support this business decision say that earlier advancement in computing technology was funded by the military; hence, it is not wrong for the companies to help the military (The Guardian, 2018). However, this argument does not hold light when compared with Google compromising or sharing its data through artificial intelligence for statistically targeted surveillance and killings (The Guardian, 2018). The project is for rooting out terrorism or anti-social forces. However, this can also compromise civilian’s data (The NewYork Times, 2018). However, terminating the contract may entail heavy penalty for Goggle. It could suffer huge financial losses (Gray, 2018). Additionally, it could be taken to court for breach of contract.

Major ethical issues raised in the article

Corporate governance consists of the policies, rules and the procedures which direct an organisation (Tricker, 2012). Corporate social responsibility is an initiative by an organisation to take responsibility of its actions on environment and people (Mason & Simmons, 2014). Through corporate social responsibility a firm tries to conduct its functions ethically and discharge its work in a socially responsible manner (Schwartz, 2011). The issue of Google collaborating with the defense department can hinder Google’s corporate governance as well as it corporate social responsibility.

Major ethical issue raised in the article is whether an international company like Google which has access to massive personal data join hands in defense offensive of a single company (The Guardian, 2018). This action by Goole is not in line with its privacy policy and its corporate social responsibility to the environment in which it operates; which includes the whole globe. Google states that it is dedicated to the privacy of its customers and the data will not be misused (Google, 2018). However, through this contract personal data is on the verge of getting compromised. This is because this personal data will be used in AI techniques for drone surveillance (The Guardian, 2018). Therefore, Google’s decision is not in conformity with its corporate social responsibility policy.

Another ethical issue raised in the article is whether a company like Google with operations around the world involve itself in using its AI technology to operate autonomous camera and weapons (The Guardian, 2018). Google’s AI chief had recently said that he opposed use of AI for making autonomous weapons.  This contract can be deemed unethical because there is move at the United Nations to ban use of autonomous weapons (Bergen, 2018). There are many employees of Google who are opposing this contract as they find working for defense of one country immoral (The Mediapost, 2018). It would be morally wrong and disrespectful of Google to force its employees to do something which they deem as wrong.

Most ethical decision in this case is for Google to terminate the contract. Google has not yet taken any decision on the demand of termination of the contract (The Guardian, 2018). This is because of financial and political implications. However, employees have shown their resentment through a petition to the CEO (The NewYork Times, 2018). A dozen employees have decided to leave the company as they deem working on warfare technology, morally incorrect (The Guardian, 2018). Google has not yet make any official announcement of its stand but the company has stated that the contract is only a test and non-classified images will be used (Gray, 2018). This is a very high profile contract and it is not easy for Google to take a hurried decision.

Ethical decision

However, employees concern and decision to oppose it is correct as Google is an international company and has accesses to extremely large amount of classified information of its users (The Guardian, 2018). Additionally, a global firm like Google should not involve in actions which may lead to breach of privacy and even killings  (The Guardian, 2018). The company should not involve itself in warfare and take a decision on cancellation of this project

There have been instances in past where companies had to recall their products or abandon their ambitious projects due to ethical issues involving human life (Stanwick, 2013).

Samsung had to announce a mass recall of its ambitious Note 7 smartphone on account of bursting batteries issue that endangers human life. (D'Souza, 2018) Volkswagen had to recall around 281 thousand cars due to faulty fuel pipe which posed a threat to human life (D'Souza, 2018). In a similar case Kraft’s foods had to recall 6.5 million boxes of macaroni and cheese when it was found that some of these boxes contained metal (D'Souza, 2018). These companies recalled their products on ethical grounds as they endangered human life. They had to face a lot of financial loss due to this recall; however as a CSR initiative they did so (D'Souza, 2018). Similarly, Google should also not indulge in an activity which could possibly endanger human life.in a mass way. The firm should not indulge in warfare techniques as it is a consumer services company.

Moral philosophy is an understanding of ethics and psychology (Wolff, 2018). It tries to understand what conduct is moral and ethical.  A person’s ethical decision making process depends on his own moral philosophy of right and wrong (Ferell, et al., 2012). Various theorists have propounded seven schools of moral philosophy based on people’s sense of right and wrong.

Teleology considers an action as morally right if it produces a desired result or acceptable behaviour (Ferell, et al., 2012). Egoism considers an act which maximises self-interest as acceptable.  Utilitarianism on the other hand, is the school of thought which considers acceptable behaviour as one which maximises utility for all concerned. On the other hand, deontology is a normative philosophy which makes judgement on right and wrong based on people’s rights (Ferell, et al., 2012). That is, if an action hinders a person’s rights like right to speak, right to live etc. then that action is morally incorrect.

Relativist school of thought considered that there is no absolute right or wrong (Ferell, et al., 2012). Persons of this thought and opinion   judge ethical behaviour subjectively based on individual principles. Such people try to evaluate all views regarding a particular action and then try to emerge at a conclusion (Ferell, et al., 2012). If a consensus cannot be reached then such a person would look for industry practices and a solution which conforms to maximum views (Ferell, et al., 2012).

Personal Ethical Decision and Moral Philosophy

Virtue ethics is another moral philosophy which believes good or bad is what is conventionally believed along with what a mature person with a good moral character considers as right (Ferell, et al., 2012). Virtues like honesty, truthfulness, trust etc. are considered as good in a situation. Moral philosophy of justice advocates fairness as a measure of right and wrong (Ferell, et al., 2012). It talks of distributive justice, procedural justice and interactional juices. In other words, fair treatment in distribution, processes and interactions.

If I was given the power to make a decision in the given case of Google and the business of war, I would decide on the basis of Deontology school of thought. This school of thought talks of moral behaviour as one which protects people’s rights and adheres to moral and social duties (Ferell, et al., 2012). Google is a Global company with billions of customers around the world. Additionally, Google has access to personal data of its customers (Google, 2018). In this light if Google shares any information with department of defense, it would be a breach of right to privacy of these millions of people.

Additionally, helping the military with AI for surveillance camera is another breach of right to privacy. Furthermore, as a global company, Google has the responsibility of being, truthful and honest with all its customers. By joining hands with one country’s military, the company is forsaking its duty of honesty with its global customer against whom this AI technology might be used. Also there are fears that AI enabled autonomous weapons may also be used for attacking targets (The Guardian, 2018). This hinder people’s right to live. Therefore, Google should terminate its contract with department of defense and make a policy of never using its technology for warfare.

Conclusion

A multinational company with a global customer base and access to huge personal data must refrain from letting its resources to be used for purposes like military offensive. A multinational company has a responsibility to the global customers and must treat them equally. Hence, Google should refrain from using its technology for warfare purposes

References

Bergen, M., (2018) Inside Google, a Debate Rages: Should It Sell Artificial Intelligence to the Military?. Bloombberg, 14 May, pp. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-14/inside-google-a-debate-rages-should-it-sell-artificial-intelligence-to-the-military.

D'Souza, M., (2018) 10 times companies had to recall their products. [Online]
Available at: https://edgardaily.com/en/life/2016/10-times-companies-had-to-recall-their-products-33189
[Accessed 24 May 2018].

Ferell, O., Fraedrich, J. & Ferell, (2012) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases. New York: Cengage Learning.

Google, (2018) Our Company. [Online]
Available at: https://www.google.com/about/

Gray, S., (2018) Report: Google Employees Resigning Over Controversial Pentagon Contract. Fortune, 14 May.

Mason, C. & Simmons, J., (2014) Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Systems Approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(77), pp. 0615-1699.

Schwartz, M. S., (2011) Corporate Social Responsibility: An Ethical Approac. Calgary: Broadview Press.

Stanwick, P., (2013) Understanding Business Ethics. London: SAGE Publications.

The NewYork Times, (2018) The Business of War’: Google Employees Protest Work for the Pentagon. The NewYork Times, 4 April.

The Guardian, (2018) Google's march to the business of war must be stopped. The Guardian, 15 May, pp. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/16/google-business-war-project-maven.

The Mediapost, (2018) Google Employees Oppose Pentagon Partnership. The MediaPost, 4 April.

Tricker, B., (2012) Corporate Governance: Principles, Policies and Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wolff, J., (2018) Understanding Business Ethics. New York City: W. W. Norton & Company.