May 9, 2009

Dear fellow Google shareholders:

This is a letter to inform you that the May 7, 2009 Google shareholders meeting is invalid.

I went to Google shareholders meeting on May 7, 2009. The meeting was presided by Mr. David Drummond, Google's Senior VP and Chief Legal Officer.

After Mr. Drummond read instructions on rule of conduct and procedure, I raised my hand and went to the front microphone to request the right to ask a question about the procedure. He denied my request, and continued to next agenda of proposals. I went back to my seat silently.

There are six proposals and every one is very important to the company. However, only ten minutes between 2:05-2:15 p.m. were allotted to these proposals. We, as shareholders voting our shares in person at the meeting, have the right to ask information about the candidates and proposals. Our right was denied.

After No. 5 proposal of Internet Censorship was presented by Mr. Tony Cruz, I went to the microphone and raised my hand to request the right to speak, again. Mr. Drummond denied my request, again. I coughed. Mr. Drummond accused me of disrupting the meeting. I replied: “I have a question about the meeting procedure.” He answered: “You can do that after the vote in the Q&A session.” This is violation against even the “Rules of Conduct and Procedure” made by himself, because the “Rules of Conduct and Procedure” do not dictate that shareholders have to speak after voting.

There is no meaning of this shareholders meeting. This is dictatorship and censorship. This meeting is invalid. I left the meeting silently.

Mr. Cruz contacted me next day and informed me that a shareholder raised this invalidation issue and defended me when Mr. Drummond granted shareholders permission to speak after voting. You can hear at Another shareholder posted this issue at his/her web site at with the following observation: “Google's procedures do not allow ordinary shareholders to make comments on proposals prior to voting. … Thus, Google acts as a partial censor at its annual meeting--at least with respect to comments that may impact how shareholders vote on stockholder proposals. … Many shareholders vote their shares in person at the meeting and may be influenced by shareholder comments. Allowing ordinary shareholders to comment on proposals only after voting is closed is tantamount to the American government banning CNN from making political comments until after national election polls are closed.”

I attended Google shareholders meeting last year too. That time I could speak two minutes after a proposal presentation before voting. If we allow this year’s dictatorship and censorship at Google shareholders meeting, next year, Mr. Drummond will take away another minute (to be zero) to permit shareholders to speak.

American has the constitution, and Google has not moved out of the United States of America. I have requested SEC investigate this Google shareholders meeting.

Jing Zhao