Example Of Essay On Current Ethical Issue

Determine the Facts

Google is the most popular web search engine provider, and it is has developed into a multi-billion dollar company. The company has rejected any request to remove harmful content from internet search results that may be destructive to persons or company’s profile. Surprisingly, Google Inc. does not automatically remove the content even if it’s ordered via a legal notice. It forwards the legal request to the Chilling Effects project that determines whether or not to remove the particular content.
In this scenario, Mario Costeja González went to court to protest against the defamation that Google caused unto him. The internet search result had information that tainted his name since it illustrated how Costeja had experienced bankruptcy. The Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia had published the information, and when they objected to removing the information, Costeja presented a case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to protect the right to be forgotten.

Ethical issue involved

Google Inc.as a search engine has been ethically challenged of mishandling personal information of one of it user’s, Costeja Gonzalez. The complainant claimed that after searching his personal information, the research showed his “home-foreclosure notice from 1998 when he was in temporary financial trouble” (Powless and Enrique 2015). Google controversially claimed that it removed the link only under European Google Domains that include google.uk, google.fr and google.de. However, this removal of personal information in limited cases has been termed as stepping stone for Google to proliferate and aggregate personal information that is publicly accessible. As a result, Google has created a platform for media to create a false impression of the people.

Identifying all stakeholders

Both CEOs of the Google Inc. and the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia are held accountable for the ethical issue revolving around their companies. They are in charge of the day to day activities of the company and should have avoided such a scenario to protect the reputation of the company. The other stakeholder involved is the users or the customers, and shareholders of the Google Inc. customers are usually associated with a common behavior of transacting with a business that has a good reputation. Therefore, anything involving the image of the company is anticipated to affect the customers/users and hence the shareholders, whose goal is to minimize profit. Advocacy groups are also involved, in this case, to ensure that the company is going in the right direction in terms of political and social responsibilities. Similarly, the government through European Commission is involved to regulate the business practices and to safeguard the right of the consumers

Delineate Alternative Courses of Action

Google must come up with policies and regulations that will act accordingly to all information found in the search results. It must empower its advisory council and give them the responsibility to ensure that the authenticity of the information is determined, and it maintains high levels of respectability. There is a growing concern of how Google will ensure that it eliminates content that is “irrelevant, outdated or otherwise objectionable” to avoid destroying the image of an individual. The governing law must address the best way to do away with the incorrect and misleading information that continues to tarnish the reputation of persons.
It is regrettable how Google has failed to establish a legal platform that will control any information published on the internet search results. Even after the European Court of Justice made a ruling in favor of Costeja, Google was disappointed with the ruling. It failed to analyze critically where the problem came and ignored to take advice from the regulators.

Assess How the Alternatives will affect stakeholders

Based on the alternative course of action in step four, establishing policy and guidelines will ensure that Google posts the right information on the internet search results. Also, when the Advisory Council is empowered, it will ensure that the authenticity of the information is safe and secure.
The probability of arising conflicts between Google Inc. and the stakeholders will reduce because the harmful content will not be available in the Search engine. If the actions had earlier been taken into action, The Spanish newspaper would not have published information that caused harm to Mario Costeja González reputation.

Seek guidance

I have decided to consult two of the professors that have vast experience in the business arena, and to be specific in the online business and marketing. The two individuals have adequate skills that can guide me through to make effective and reasonable decision about the presented scenario.

Making decision

As mentioned, Google is the most popular search engine and web company that have a reputable image across the globe. However, I believe that it should in the frontline to balance the protection and transparency of all its stakeholders especially the users to continue winning their trust. As indicated in the alternative section, the company should effective policies and sophisticated process to ensure that data is handled in a sensitive manner. As a result, this is anticipated to ensure that the data processors and search engines comply with the data protection principle. Significantly, Google Inc. should avoid any instance that contradicts with the consumer protection principle in order to remain the leading web company and search engine in the world.

Works Cited

Powless, Julia, and Enrique Chapparo. "How Google determined our right to be forgotten." The Guardian 18 Feb. 2015: n. pag. Print.
"Company – Google." Google. Google, 2014. Web. 18 Feb. 2015. <http://www.google.com/about/company/>.