Google the Neo-Government

The internet has revolutionized how we access and share information, and with the introduction of websites like Google, the prevalence of online censorship has officially become a reality. Google is arguably the world's most powerful search engine, and its role in the implementation of blocking rights and other forms of censorship has raised important ethical issues about the company's level of involvement in the political and cultural landscapes of countries around the globe.

The ethical debate surrounding Google's censorship policies is largely divided into two camps: those who argue in favor of blocking rights, and those who argue in opposition to them as a form of censorship. Those who advocate for blocking rights generally argue that governments have the power to act in the public's best interests by denying access to certain websites or content deemed harmful or offensive. Supporters of this view often argue that the primary benefit of blocking rights is that it allows governments to protect citizens from various forms of harmful content, such as pornography and hate speech. Additionally, they argue that blocking rights also provide governments with a tool to maintain national security. 

On the other hand, those who oppose blocking rights often cite the fact that such policies can easily be abused in order to silence public criticism or restrict political speech. These critics argue that blocking rights threaten the fundamental freedom of expression, which is often seen as essential for democratic discourse and the functioning of a healthy political system. Others argue that blocking rights are an inherently hypocritical system that allows governments to deny citizens the very same rights it purports to protect. 

From a libertarian perspective, the issue of Google's censorship has been largely framed as one of government overreach. Many libertarian thinkers have argued that the implementation of blocking rights by Google is tantamount to excessive governmental control, and infringes on the freedoms of citizens to make meaningful and informed decisions about the content they consume. Libertarian philosopher Paul Dragos Aligica has gone so far as to call Google’s censorship policies “Big Brother on steroids” (Aligica, 2019). 

Whether or not one agrees with the ethical implications of Google's censorship policies, it is undeniable that they have a real and lasting impact on the lives of citizens around the world. As societies continue to grapple with the challenges posed by the internet and its various forms of censorship, it is more important than ever that such difficult questions are debated in a thoughtful and critical manner. 

References

Aligica, P.D. (2019). Blocking Rights, Free Speech, and by Default—Google. Retrieved from https://www.fee.org/articles/blocking-rights-free-speech-and-by-default-google/