Google says they're actually taking the less-evil course by censoring search results in China:

"While removing search results is inconsistent with Google's mission, providing no information -- or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information -- is more inconsistent with our mission," says Andrew McLaughlin, senior policy counsel at Google.

Sounds like the rationalization of a lawyer.

To its credit, Google plans to be up-front with users. Company officials say they'll place a disclosure on all pages where search results have been filtered out. Google makes similar disclosures on its non-Chinese sites, whether results are removed for copyright reasons or other local laws. Other search engines aren't providing such notification inside China at this time.

If the Chinese government allows Google to display these disclaimers, it truly will be to Google's credit. But it remains to be seen if they will, or if the disclaimers will be prominent enough to make a difference.

The beautiful thing about the Don't Be Evil ethic is that it cuts through all the twisted logic and machinations that people use to justify wrong actions.

Google's rationalization that their censored presence on Chinese soil is less evil than taking a moral stand for free and unbiased information not only rings hollow, but it's doublethink and it feels evil.

Well, clearly Google is now evil. Period. There are only two ways to run a large multinational corporation:

1) Decide up front on company ethics and policies. Where those company ethics and policies prevent business opportunity, the corporation simply declines the increased revenue, and is comfortable telling share-holders why.

2) Decide on what is ethical based on the fiscal opportunity and local laws permit. In other words "Don't be Evil unless it pays really well".

Google has clearly decided on #2. There is no middle ground. If a company does not choose its ethics ahead of time, it will always be slowly transformed into a company of type 2.

Multinational companies face this problem daily. Remember the Nike sweat shops? Just because a local government allows workers to slave 12 hrs days for a few pennies, does not mean that the multi-national corp should permit it. Similarly, even if a government allows toxic chemicals to be dumped into the ground or workers without safety equipment, a company does not have to lower its standards.

In the case of Google, the difference between good and evil is clear. The rationalization is lame.

Worse yet, it also opens up door for China to use Google as a state-sponsored spying system. How long before China asks Google "Please tell me all the cookies and IP addresses of those who have searched for both "democracy", "demonstration" and "Olympics"? Once Google has billions of dollars invested in China, and the Chinese government threatens to cut off their access unless their demands are met, what will happen? Google will be yet another arm of the Chinese security apparatus.

Yes virginia, Google is indeed evil. Being incredibly wealthy does not satiate greed, or its euphemism "opportunity".

Ethics depend on money, and some of the richest boys in the world have proven they will relax ethics for ever-larger slices of the pie