YAHOO This is for you...Why did you provide info to china which landed a journalist in jail for 10 years?

Question

thats a minus 10,000 points for you

Answer 1

I don't think they will delete it because it is a fair question in the public sphere. They show news reports on the issue, so why care if it is here?

I spend the dot-com era as an International Product Manager in Silicon Valley and weighing these kinds of decisions was part of my job. I had some role as a vendor in setting up international operations for eBay and yahoo's international customer service groups (among many others you know and love :)

I have colleagues in similar positions at Yahoo right now, although I don't speak for them and I don't know if they were involved in this decision.

These are very difficult issues, and they can involve the opinions of everyone from marketing to legal to senior management and even the Board of Directors.

Ultimately, the call is simple - by law, management's only responsibility is a fiduciary one to their stockholders, no one else.

In practice, it is not that simple. Yahoo HQ obviously decided that having subsidiaries in China was a good opportunity to pursue. this is an easy call - huge market, huge upside potential, relatively low investment.

The risks were surely known to be political.

Once in place, there is almost continuous pressure, both subtle and not so subtle, covert and overt from the powers that be in China.

In the mean time, Yahoo can realize that by being there, spreading information, they are doing good every single day. Information and discussion that would not otherwise be available takes place in huge volume.

That subversiveness *does* generate some karma points, and it accumulates.

Then, when faced with the loss of an operating license in the difficult case you refer to (I am not familiar with the specifics, but it most likely went down like that), top level management in China and HQ alike, and maybe even worldwide, must decide how to proceed.

Again, the default call is to protect the shareholders - to do otherwise would expose Yahoo to liability that would deflect, weaken, and ultimately destroy it.

But it is not that simple again - consideration is given to whether the overall good being done outweigh a single act, regardless of how regrettable it is and regardless of how one's arm is twisted.

The alternatives are not good. Withdraw from China, and forgo the market, or commit an act that can be rectified and even publicized in order to reduce the likelihood of it happening again.

The latter choice can be chosen and even decided on the basis that it is actually subversive in the long run, while protecting the shareholder's interests.

I would bet dollars to donuts that is how it went down, at very senior levels in Sunnyvale. Were I working there, it could well have been up to me to manage and facilitate the discussion, and that is how I would have guided the decision makers.

The only thing I might add is that I might have at least suggested bringing senior Department Of Commerce and possibly State Department officials in on the matter, as matters like this at a company as large and important as Yahoo may require input to those groups, and it may be important to let them know what is happening ahead too so they can manage expectations. Only top management and the Board can decide to do that but I would recommend they consider it.

This is a highly distasteful decision, but it is very complex and with luck, the result will be remembered as "one step back, two steps forward" for all involved.

Hope this helps :)

Answer 2

That's what I'm wondering. They're not the first. Google and Microsoft have also both aided the communist regime, presumably for a larger share of the booming internet market over there.

Answer 3

Yet we continue supporting them all. Google, Yahoo, MSN and the communists.

How short are memories are.

Answer 4

They're so gonna delete this.