Asking Big Brother?

Google promotes a very positive attitude. They support an altruistic attitude towards the needs of the user, and avoid manipulating favoritism in the order of search results- a very powerful potential influence on the users. In this way, it would not be in my best interest to focus too much on purely profit-focused goals; an underhanded deal to advertise certain companies above other could be lucrative, but would undermine one of the aspects that makes Google a preferred engine.

On the other hand, a preference for individuals with strong personal integrity and ethics can create its own conflict. What if I managed to compose an algorithm that, based on certain searches, identified probable pedophiles. It would then be a simple matter to deliver their information to the authorities for further investigation. Morally, I would certainly not want to protect pedophiles. From a legal and ethical perspective, however, you can see the precarious position. Google has access to massive amounts of personal information. It would be easy, so very easy, to abuse that power, particularly in conjunction with a central authority. Where do you draw the lines to acceptable information to relay? 

I don’t know if they do monitor and flag certain patterns of searches. Privacy is not expressly covered in the Codes, which does makes me wonder.

An interesting side note is that they do actually have a way of promoting their own philosophical and ethical stance. On special occasions, the Google title page is dedicated to a special person or event. These choices will be related to famous scientists, artists, or humanitarians. Although small, this is a way to spread an appreciation for these traits.