Google's Problems in China: Perceptions of a Chinese Internet User in Guiyang

In the latest chapter of Google's challenges in China, Google has accused the Chinese Government of interfering with its Gmail service (see here).  That an American company would face "special" problems in China is not surprising.  Recent reports indicate that a growing number of American companies are listing "bureaucracy" as their main concern and complaining that they are discriminated against (see here).  

I certainly have my own thoughts on these topics, but first I'd like to share the thoughts of someone else -- a 26 year old female in Guiyang, Guizhou.  She recently completed a Masters degree and is working full time in the real estate domain.  I will refer to her as Rui Rui, not her real name.  I've selected her for a variety of reasons:  her comments were made recently, she lives in one of the numerous regions important to fully understanding China yet often ignored in research, she was completely comfortable with me sharing her thoughts in this manner, and what she said reflected much of the spirit I've heard from many other Chinese on a variety of subjects.

I asked Rui Rui if she was aware of any events this or last year involving Google in China.  She first commented that she was extremely concerned last year that Google would pull out of China.  Because she was concerned about censorship on the Internet?  No.  Because she wanted to see Google stand up to China?  No again.  The main reason for her concern was that she was writing a thesis for her Masters and needed to seek information sources outside of China.  Without Google she felt that her research efforts would be seriously hampered.

Rui Rui said she uses both Google and Baidu, Google's main competitor in China.  However, she does not use them similarly.  She uses Baidu to search for material within China and Google for material outside of China because she feels Baidu is very poor for searching non-China based information.  In the research I've done across China, I have found this pattern of usage is common for people who desire to access web sites based inside China and web sites based outside China.  For example, here is a photo of the computer screen of a college student in Harbin, Heilongjiang, Dalian, Liaoning, a very different part of China, who also uses Google and Baidu in a similar fashion:

The tool depicted above allows quick access to user-selected web sites.  Baidu is in the upper left rectangle and Google is next to it.

Rui Rui also said that she didn't care that Google "moved its search" to Hong Kong because it didn't impact her search needs and she noticed no obvious differences (technically speaking, Google directed its search services in China to its servers in Hong Kong).

Her thoughts about why Google was having its various problems with the Chinese Government were particularly intriguing.  Was it because Google refused to censor its search results?  No.  Instead, she believed the source of Google's problems was that "Google was taking others' profits".  In this case, "others" meant Chinese companies.  She accepted it as being obvious that the Chinese Government would get involved in business matters to help or hinder companies.  Especially in her new field of work, she often sees examples of how government officials, often influenced by who is most connected to them, can "unfairly" make or break crucial aspects of getting business done in China.

That Rui Rui's thoughts regarding many aspects of Google's situation in China appeared to be primarily influenced by her day to day needs, desires, and experiences is typical for what I've seen across China.  Rui Rui remains pragmatic on such matters even with exposure to non-Chinese media and some negative feelings toward the Chinese Government and some of its policies.  For example, she readily shared that during the Cultural Revolution some of her family fled from Shanghai to Guiyang to avoid expected persecution from Communist Party members.  Regardless, her primary concerns today revolve around her immediate desires to improve her quality of life and gain new experiences -- goals she seems to be effectively achieving in her own way.

For now, I'd like to close with one of Rui Rui's related thoughts on fairness and the legal system in China since it sheds further light on how she now views the predicament not only faced by American companies such as Google but also faced by Chinese who aren't well connected in China.

A colleague of Rui Rui recently introduced a saying to her that she has found to be true in her everyday work.

Rui Rui emphatically said, "In China, everyone is equal in front of the law."

She then looked at me in silence.  After a long pause she continued, "The differences are behind the law..."

Google's Reply to the Chinese Media's Accusation of "Meddling"

In my recent post "Google Accused in China of 'Meddling' in Egypt" I wrote that part of the goal of Google's detractors in China is to link Google with the US Government.

Recently, Bloomberg received this email reply from Google regarding the Chinese article:

“Contrary to assertions made by the Chinese media, every decision we have made regarding China has been made by Google alone.”

However, convincing the Chinese people that Google is independent of the US Government is not going to be solved by an email to Bloomberg News.  I'm pretty sure Google did not have such far reaching hopes for the email, but it raises an important issue to consider.

How do you convince the Chinese people you're not "against" them when the Chinese Government supported media is actively saying otherwise?  That's a million dollar (actually, much more than that) question.

Much of my research in user experience design in China has touched on this and similar issues.  After all, my work has been to help companies design technology that is not only useful and usable for consumers but that is also desirable.  Being viewed as a company aiding the causes of foreign governments doesn't likely aid in increasing the desirability of your products or services.  And just as understanding people's needs, desires, concerns, etc. are key to designing a successful product or service, they are also a key component for understanding how to best navigate situations such as the one Google faces.

Based on my research, I have thoughts about how companies such as Google could increase their chances of success in China with particular groups of consumers.  Some of these directly relate to Google's current predicament.  I will share some of these thoughts in future posts.

Google Accused in China of "Meddling" in Egypt

David Bandurski for the China Media Project comments on a recent article about Google circulating in China in his piece "Opium Wars and the perfidy of Google":

"As “web user” Zheng Yan (郑岩) wrote in an article posted Friday on People’s Daily Online, a website operated by the CCP’s official People’s Daily, “[Google] is not just a search engine tool — it is a tool to extend American hegemony.” The Mountain View, CA, based company is, says Zheng, “America’s British East India Company.”

The article was cross-posted on more than 300 websites in China, including Xinhua Online, QQ.com, China Youth Daily Online and Sina.com.

And since this is a story about good guys and bad guys, you should know that Chinese search engine provider Baidu is a national hero that “strongly blocked” Google in China."

Bandurski's piece also provides an English version of the the article by Zheng Yan that is worth reading.  It makes numerous claims including:

"The facts have shown that Google is not purely a company, that it seeks not only to make the money of other nations, but also meddles in the political affairs of other countries. It is not just a search engine tool — it is a tool to extend American hegemony"

This claim is key for those who wish to "block" Google in China.  It is to the advantage of Google's detractors, whether competitors or other "forces", for Chinese people to believe that Google is not a potential vehicle for what they may want but for what the US Government wants.  Many Chinese already believe that if the US & Chinese Governments disagree on something, what the US wants must be detrimental to China.  So, any association of Google's interests with the US Government's is viewed poorly.

As I wrote earlier, some of Google's supporters in China had a change of heart after Hillary Clinton gave a speech last year that specifically referenced Google's situation in China.  The speech provided an opportunity to associate Google with the US Government.  Zheng Yan's article is yet another attempt to fuel the perception that Google is "political".  Ironically and brilliantly, it may cause many in China to not only further dismiss the power that could be provided to them with services such as Google's, but to also not see that they have many goals in common with the people in places such as Egypt.

[Added note:  Post about Google's reply]

Google Hotel in Vietnam

Recently, I arrived in Hue, Vietnam - the former imperial capital of the Nguyễn Dynasty.  I was excited to explore both its rich historical sites and its delicious local food.  However, something else also caught my attention.  Yesterday, while I was walking down a street I noticed this sign:

I had never heard of a Google Hotel, so I walked around the corner to see if it really existed.  Indeed, not far away I found the Google Hotel:

Later that night, I discovered the hotel appeared to have its own web site -- of course, it's the Google Hotel!  I was particularly intrigued to find that under "Our services" they listed "Nerd water" as a drink for sale.

Well, I knew I had to try some nerd water so I stopped by the next day.  The menu was a bit different from the online version.  The drinks page is here:

Instead of "nerd water" they had "nerd bird can".  I wasn't totally sure I wanted a nerd bird can so I ordered this instead:

After a few sips of the decent 50 cent local beer I asked the Google Hotel staff about the nerd bird can.  They insisted it was very healthy so I decided to give it a try.  Out came this:

It actually had a good taste.  I don't know how to describe it other than that it was completely not like how I'd expect a white fungus bird's nest drink to taste.  Or nerd water.  Regardless, "bird's nest" appears to be a much better English translation for the Vietnamese listings on their menus.  The people I spoke to weren't aware of the meaning of "nerd".  Maybe someone else had a sense of humor...

After finishing the drinks, I took a look around the lobby and saw this:

All those clocks for different cities around the world and no Mountain View clock?  I suspect Google Headquarters would not be pleased.

At least they were providing free internet:

They were also selling Google Hotel raincoats & hats for less than $1 each:

I finally asked why they named their hotel the "Google Hotel".  One replied, "It's a good name!"  Indeed it is.  After some further questioning they pointed to a lady, who I assumed was the manager or owner, and said she really liked Google so she decided to use its name.

That was the end of my visit to the Google Hotel.  I saw no point in staying longer since there weren't any free meals.

Just one more thing...  If you visit the Google Hotel web site you can find this at the bottom of the pages:

"Copy right @ 2010 by Googlee Hotel"

That's priceless.

The Importance of Understanding Others: How a Single Speech Impacted College Students' Perceptions of Google in China

[Note:  Recently, I wrote some posts regarding Google in China on James Fallows' blog.  After adding some additional thoughts and clarifications I decided I wanted to write a shorter version of the posts to more effectively highlight a key part of what I wanted to share and to allow a quicker read.  Here it is...]

Last year, I spent a significant amount of time speaking to college students across China about a variety of topics to better understand their needs, desires, and concerns.  One of the topics I explored was students' impressions of the events which surrounded Google in China last year (for a review, a series of posts by James Fallows here covers many key moments).  I would like to share some of what I found from conversations with Chinese students who had a positive opinion about Google as I think it can highlight how a single event can be perceived very differently between two groups of people -- even when they share some similar goals.

Before discussing those students, for context it's important to note that many Chinese students lacked any awareness of news related to Google or were not interested in the news because they believed the situation impacted their lives very little.  For example, many students expressed little concern over any potential chance of Google leaving China.  They either already used another company's services, such as Baidu, or they felt they could switch to another company's services without much hassle.   Also, Google's refusal to continue censoring its results per government requirements mattered little to them.  They either saw value in censorship or didn't feel such censorship impacted any of their needs for information.

However, some students I spoke to did believe that the events of last year mattered and many such students held Google in high regard.  As in the words of one student:

"The people in Google always think 'We are Google' and that they can do anything they want. They think they are great.  They have their own ideas.  They can go their own ways.  They can choose what to do...

I trust them because Google was the first search engine and it was their own idea and their own method.  Baidu copied Google."

In addition to having a very positive image of Google, often these students felt that Google was "on their side".  Like many students I spoke to across China, they readily criticized their government as corrupt.  While most students felt powerless or first wanted their country to progress in other areas, some students believed Google might be one of the forces that could help bring about change in their government in the near future.  When Google first announced its review of the feasibility of its operations in China, the students wondered if some of their hopes would soon be realized.

However, much changed after an event that shortly followed Google’s announcement -- a speech by Hillary Clinton which addressed topics such as censorship in China and cyber intrusions apparently supported by the Chinese government.  Hillary Clinton's reference to Google in her speech particularly impacted the views of many students who had previously supported Google.  The US government's public alignment of itself with Google helped fuel a perception that they were a single unit acting towards a single set of goals.  Chinese students could readily accept the existence of such a close partnership due to the blurry line, if any, between government and much business in their own country.

Many Chinese students I spoke to often assumed that for any disagreement between the US and Chinese governments whatever the US advocated must be detrimental to China in some way.  The students did not consider it a likely possibility that under such a circumstance the US could be advocating something it genuinely believed to be good for both the US and China.  Due to it now be associated with the US government, Google and its actions were now viewed with more suspicion and it lost support amongst the students.

Hillary Clinton's speech may have actually been a gift to the Chinese government since it ended up distancing many of Google’s strongest supporters in China -- a group with many who also hoped for more reform.  The students who had been impacted by the speech may in fact be a minority in China but a) there are likely non-students with similar views and b) they may represent a key block of citizens who would lead any effort for change in China.  Although it's not clear whether Google had any control over the issue, based on what I learned if the US government wanted to maintain/strengthen Chinese citizens' support of Google and the ideals it represented to them then the speech was a mistake (at least in the short term) -- better had the speech never occurred or not so directly referred to the incidents surrounding Google in China.

However, many of the people in the US who wanted to see more reform in China saw Hillary Clinton’s speech as a strong step in the right direction or even as not strong enough. That many in the US apparently did not foresee the Chinese students' reactions shows the importance of having an understanding of the people you ultimately want to see influenced -- a particularly valuable lesson both for those who are trying to bring about change in environments around the world and for those who are trying to appreciate and evaluate such actions.

Additional thoughts/clarifications on "Google, China, and Chinese College Students"

I've received some comments and questions on my series of articles "Google, China, and Chinese College Students".  I'd like to address some of them and clarify several related issues.

Am I saying Google didn't/doesn't know the points I am raising?

Not at all.  I simply don't know what research Google has conducted or collected.  I don't know whether Google was or is now aware of the dynamics I described in my posts (or even if they believe what I've found is "real").  It is entirely possible they were fully aware and due to other concerns felt what they did was in their best interests -- whether short or long term.  My concluding comments on the value of knowing your audience were not intended to necessarily mean Google did not know its audience in China.  It was intended for any of those who make or evaluate similar decisions, whether business, political, etc., without enough understanding of key audiences.  For example, I believe there are many people in the US who cheered on Hillary Clinton's speech who may have felt otherwise if they had understood how it would likely be received by many in China.  I think you can find similar misunderstandings for many other international events as well.

I should also add that based on what I know I do think that Hillary Clinton's speech was a mistake for the US government if one of their goals was "reaching" the Chinese people (or not pushing them away).  However, I have no idea if Google advocated for or welcomed the speech.

Am I saying Google could have done more "damage control" after Hillary Clinton's speech?

In the piece it was not my intent to say anything about this one way or another.

Assuming Google recognized the impact of the speech and desired to quickly repair any damage to its image, Google faced a daunting situation since not only did Google need to manage its image in China but also in the US where its every move received much press.  It would have been difficult for Google to distance itself from the speech without contradicting itself and/or raising eyebrows in the US.  Furthermore, since at the time of the speech they hadn't yet committed to staying in China, it may have been difficult for them to directly or indirectly send the message, "We're still on your side" to the Chinese students who were turned off by the speech.  Finally, any such message sent may have confused people who were unaware of the issue or who had never thought of themselves as being aligned with Google in any significant fashion.  Regardless, once Google established it would continue offering services tailored for users in China I believe opportunities existed for Google to effectively communicate their continued commitment in a way that would be positively received by many in China.  If fact, the continued availability of services itself may play a role in doing so. 

Do I think the students who perceived Google as having "left China" still feel that way?

That's an excellent question and something I've been exploring.  It is not something I feel ready to address.

When I wrote that Google "will need to take particular care to mend and expand the previous relationships it had with its users in China" was I implying it had damaged relationships with all of its users?

No.  The statement was intended to apply to the students who had become disillusioned with Google.  There are other users of Google who this does not apply to.  For example, many were unaware or unconcerned about Google's actions in China last year.  While Google likely hopes to "expand" relationships with any such users it does not necessarily have any need to "mend" those relationships.

Are the two specific possibilities I highlighted for potentially explaining Google's reported decline relative to Baidu the most important or most likely reasons?

As I mentioned in the piece I believe there are several possibilities.  To refresh, the two possibilities I focused on were a) remaining committed users dropped off after not seeing any (or enough) significant action from Google and b) students' changed impressions of Google may have had an effect on the perceived usability/usefulness of Google's services.

I chose to focus on these two possibilities because they related to my previous discussion of the impact of the United States' and Google's actions on students.  However, I think there are almost certainly other reasons that play a critical role in fully understanding any change in Google's performance in China.  As I mentioned in the piece, many students were not concerned about or aware of the dispute between Google and China.  Any role such users played in any decline of Google relative to Baidu is less likely to be explained by the two possibilities I presented, and it is possible such users account for a large amount of any decline.  Also, Google's users in China certainly are not limited to college students.  However, any impact of such users was outside the scope of my piece.

An example of a possible contributing factor I did not discuss is users' perceptions of Baidu's services.  However, this was a not a topic I felt I had explored sufficiently to comfortably address and it did not appear to directly relate to the key issues of the piece.

Given the above points, I simply make no claim as to how much of the decline could be accounted for by the two possibilities I raised.

And finally...

I realize my posts could lead to some impressions I did not want to convey.  I hope I've now been able to clarify and add to some key points regarding what I think is a very important and fascinating topic.

[Additional Note:  I've since written a briefer version of the posts which focuses on the impact of Hillary Clinton's speech.]