Critics Call For Probe Into Google Government Ties

bonch writes "The National Legal and Policy Center has written to the House Oversight Committee to investigate alleged ties between Google and the Obama administration, specifically with regards to the closure of an FTC probe into Google's Wi-Fi privacy breach, when the company admitted to having collected users' unencrypted information over the course of three years. The NLPC compares Google's relationship with the administration to that of Halliburton and cites the timing of a $30,000-a-head Democratic fundraiser at Google CEO Marissa Meyer's home less than a week before the FTC ended its inquiry, where Obama made a personal appearance, as well as the fact that US deputy chief technology officer Andrew McLaughlin is a former Google employee. The NLPC further alleges that the FTC is tougher on other companies, issuing fines to Twitter and Sears for their privacy violations while letting Google off the hook after the company promised to improve its privacy practices."

Comments

Agree ... but

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I am concerned, most big companies are in bed with US govt. Look at what Microsoft has gotten away with.
Haliburton anyone?

Why single out Google here?

AC

what

[Anonymous Coward]

The NLPC compares Google's relationship with the administration to that of Halliburton

Exactly how many unnecessary and costly (both in terms of money and lives) wars has Google profited off thus far?

Political Parties = "Which Industry"

[TaoPhoenix]

So it's big news if Google has ties with the administration but it's just fine for an army of ex-RIAA critters to be nominated to high posts?

Just another non-profit, I'm sure

[aGuyNamedJoe]

Let me guess, "The National Legal and Policy Center" is a non-profit organization able to accept donations without needing to reveal the donors, isn't it? Probably with absolutely no political agenda.

Re:Just another non-profit, I'm sure

[rev_sanchez]

This is just one of the first few calls for investigations by the likes of Darrell Issa who recently asked that the House have "7 hearings a week times 40 weeks" investigating the executive branch. It's just like Clinton/Whitewater thing but with even less merit.

Re:Just another non-profit, I'm sure

[euroq]

This is one of those cases which happen often in Slashdot conversations where one should read the article instead of speculating (the original post on the nlpc.org website). You are absolutely correct that, by merit of being right leaning, does not make an article discountable. However, the guy who wrote the article talks about how Google collected URLs, e-mails, and passwords, and its credibility is "shredded". This is a clear misrepresentation of what Google Street View actually did. It claims the "scandal" is one of the most serious issues of privacy, wiretapping, and campaign financing. The author is actually claiming that Google has been capturing and storing your personal information illegally, which is absolutely not true. I don't have the references on me now, but basically the Street View program just used hotspot points to triangulate location data. So, the source does not have known, undisputed facts, in fact it is wrong.

This is the real result of the election

[funkylovemonkey]

Gaining the House doesn't really help Republicans much at all without having the Senate. And of course anything that they can get through the Senate can still be vetoed by the President. But having the House does allow subpoenaing power, and it's not surprising that already the right leaning NLPC has started preparing for what will certainly be a very long two years of investigations and hearings.

Re:This is the real result of the election

[sarhjinian]

You know what bothers me about the Democratic party?

They could have spent the last two years dragging everyone and anyone who was involved with the Bush administration's more questionable policies (wiretapping, suspending habeus corpus, extraordinary rendition, Halliburton, bogus intelligence and so forth) and probably had a PR field day tearing the ethics of their predecessors apart. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld alone would have been pure gold, and we'd all have been better for having the spotlights turned on the dark, dusty corners of that era.

But oh no. Either they were idiots and thought that, after eight years of dirty pool, the Republican party's powerbrokers would respond well to bipartisanship (you'd think they'd notice how that was going after six months?), or they were hoping to pull some of the same stuff, in which case they pissed away the moral high ground which would have served them pretty well a few days ago.

I swear, the Democrats have, certainly since Clinton and possibly since Kennedy, been completely spineless and cripplingly un-unified in the face of a much more disciplined Republican machine. How they managed to piss away the single biggest political advantage of all time in two years is astounding. How they've silenced their conscience (and anyone else on the Left who has one) is even more shameful

They really are past their sell-by date, and the few who have principles (Kucinich comes to mind) need to put some respectful distance between the rest of the chumps, endorse Nader (or someone like him) and start work on a progressive, thinking version of the Tea Party.

Re:This is the real result of the election

[StopKoolaidPoliticsT]

They could have spent the last two years dragging everyone and anyone who was involved with the Bush administration's more questionable policies (wiretapping, suspending habeus corpus, extraordinary rendition, Halliburton, bogus intelligence and so forth) and probably had a PR field day tearing the ethics of their predecessors apart.

First, a correction, the Democrats gained both houses in 2006, not 2008, so they could have started then... and as a member of the right, I WISH THEY WOULD HAVE. Not because the open partisanship would have cost them votes, because I don't think it would have given how reviled the right had become by 2006, but because we need an open an honest government. However, neither party wants that, they both want a closed, powerful government even if it means they take turns owning the keys.

Obama continued the Bush wiretaps, even "accidentally" extending them to domestic only calls and wants to extend it to the internet. Obama hasn't closed Gitmo, he's still practicing extraordinary rendition (which didn't started under GWB), Halliburton is still getting contracts (because they're one of only a handful of companies that does what they do), we still have problems with bad intelligence, etc.

I don't say that out of partisanship, I say it because Obama and Bush are relatively interchangeable in their practice of foreign policy (oh, sure, there are minor differences, but all the major policies are identical).

But oh no. Either they were idiots and thought that, after eight years of dirty pool, the Republican party's powerbrokers would respond well to bipartisanship (you'd think they'd notice how that was going after six months?), or they were hoping to pull some of the same stuff, in which case they pissed away the moral high ground which would have served them pretty well a few days ago.

Again, noting the above, there is one additional reason why they didn't... They were acting like Mark McGwire. Career batting average of .263, but you knew every time he got up to the plate, he was swinging for the fences, looking for that home run, or even better, grand slam. What do I mean?

Democrats have long been in love with socialized medicine... for the political leadership, it's the one thing they're missing in their dependency pie. Again, what do I mean? Every time a Democrat runs for office and is seriously challenged, what do they run on? "My opponent wants to starve your kids, kick your parents out of the nursing home, take away your childcare, etc." A HUGE portion of the Democrat bases votes Democrat on the fear that their precious entitlements would be taken away. By finally getting socialized medicine in place, it would have forced the working stiffs in the middle that traditionally vote Republican to vote for the party that would keep the handouts going.

So, they spent most of the first two years swinging for that grand slam. The bases were loaded - people already hated the Republicans, the Democrats occupied the White House and, most importantly, had large majorities in both houses of Congress. They came up to the plate, pointed to left field, swung and missed. The liberal Republicans weren't going to go along. They came up to the plate again and missed. This time the conservative Democrats weren't going to go along either. Then Ball 1, the Senate passed a bill in the middle of the night before Christmas break. Ball 2, the House would work on passing the Senate bill if they could get some fixes. Ball 3, they promise some meaningless stuff on abortion and to fix the bill's most glaring problems down the road, all while giving the crowd the finger. Democrats are standing at a full count. Finally, a homer down the left line! But wait! Now th

Collecting data

[wiredlogic]

Google only logged publicly accessible information. How is that a privacy violation? They didn't attempt to crack any encrypted sessions. It seems rather unfair to hold them accountable because of someone else's lax security. Consider the amount of information that other, older data mining companies have on us, what Google did was nothing to be bothered by.

Re:Collecting data

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly.

The lack of understanding of technology by our public figures is going to doom the internet. It worked fine back when the decisions were made by engineers for primarily technical reasons. But more and more they're made for political reasons, and that is going to kill it.

And it's not just "lax security", it's a REAL dangerous game to say that you can't listen to something that another party is broadcasting in the clear out into public space. We don't want to go down that road. If you want it private, there are very, very clear and well known ways to say that. Hell, even if they had ROT13'ed the damn stuff and google had decrypted it, I'd be on their side against google! But if you spew it out in the clear to everybody within 100 meters, don't be surprised if someone hears it. If we change this trivial fact, that will be used against our interests eventually, and it STILL doesn't stop a less honest party from listening and not self-reporting. Trying to dumb down reality for the incompetent does no one any favours.

Re:And ?

[clarkkent09]

Are you saying that if the US president gets a company off the hook because, if the allegation is correct, they contributed money to him, it is ok as long as the previous president did the same thing? Plenty of people did call attention to Bush admin. dealings with Halliburton. These guys happen to be calling out Obama's dealings with Google.

Re:"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts."

[icebike]

The interesting thing about that list is I would enlist on Google's side in every single one of them.

Google vs. Net neutrality, not so much.

Re:This is just propaganda

[clarkkent09]

Your sig is laughable given your childish left wing posts. The NLPC describes itself as promoting small government, which by definition makes them right leaning, so your expert investigation was not necessary.

Re:This is just propaganda

[Pojut]

"Here's politics in America: 'I think the puppet on the right shares my belief.' 'I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking.' 'Wait a minute...there's one guy holding both puppets!'" -Bill Hicks

Republican, Democrat, Third Party...they all serve the same corporate masters. The only difference exists in we the people's minds.

Re:Same Obama administration

[drinkypoo]

Good points. I'd also counter with a request for a probe into the former administration's ties to Microsoft. Why exactly did the DoJ find that Microsoft had illegally exploited their monopoly position and then let them go with nothing more than an admonition?

Re:This is just propaganda

[Anonymous Coward]

You cite a breitbart website as proof? You might as well just make shit up. .. Oh, wait, you did!

Re:This is just propaganda

[clarkkent09]

Wow, when you get tired of foaming at the mouth about evil Republican "corporate masters" that you read so much about on huffington post and daily kos, maybe you'll realize that Democrats get more money in political contributions from corporations than Republicans do. To take one example, Obama was the biggest recipient of donations from BP.

Let no good deed go unpunished

[mcrbids]

The wi-fi situation wasn't a case of Google "getting caught" - it was a case of them noticing the data being collected had more than they had wanted and being up front and open about its disclosure. And in the latter case, it's basically never a good idea to prosecute as it shows good faith, and attacking people for good faith effort only encourages bad faith. Nobody in their right mind wants that!

We provide technology solutions. Despite all our care and attention otherwise, mistakes get made. And when they do, it's our policy just to say what happened, how we fixed it, and whether or not we think it violates TOS. This simple act creates trust and goodwill because by casually acknowledging that your pants were down in the first place, everybody realizes that they're just happy you pulled them back up and quickly lose interest.

Re:More Info on the NLPC, they are DIRTY

[spun]

No one asked if it sounded fair and balanced. I believe the assertion was that they correct misinformation. Yes, they correct misinformation put out by the right and not the left, but their goal is to get the truth out, not to make money for two old rich guys, which is what the NLPC is for.

Re:"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts."

[bonch]

The interesting thing about that list is I would enlist on Google's side in every single one of them.

I think you just summed up Slashdotters' bias pretty well. On this site, Google can do absolutely no wrong. The CEO flat-out tells you that only criminals care about privacy, and you'll still leap to their side. It's incredible, especially after the bashing that Facebook gets around here.

Re:Same Obama administration

[mcgrew]

An article I found says

"Like Halliburton in the previous administration, Google has an exceptionally close relationship with the [Obama White House]," NLPC Chariman Kenneth Boehm wrote in a letter to the House obtained by The Hill.

Google's relationship with the Obama administration is nothing like Cheney and Halliburton. I mean, has Biden or Obama held large amounts of Google stock like Cheney and Bush held stock in Halliburton?

I don't remember anybody calling for an investigantion into Cheney and Halliburton during the Bush administration.

This is more like the Bush ties to Microsoft; the Bush Justice Department pretty much let MS off the hook after Clinton had them by the balls. I didn't see any investigantions into that, either.

This smells to me like nothing more than dirty politics; kind of like Clinton's forty million dollar blow job.

Re:Same Obama administration

[hey!]

Look for a lot, lot more calls for the House to investigate the Obama administration. The new majority in the House will not be able to pass any of its program, but it will have the subpoena power to make political theater. With enough smoke, some voters will believe there's fire.

Re:"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts."

[darien.train]

Jesus you're dense. A preference for one entity's actions over another is not bias you twit. You sound like a petulant child.

Re:LIAR

[clarkkent09]

I don't lie, I might be wrong but if so I am honestly wrong. First of all, technically I am right because he just donated $1 million to them so they ARE financed by him. Secondly, you are being pretty naive if you think that overt donation directly from his pocket is the only kind there is. For example, Soros laughably claims that the donations made by his Open Society Institute are not actually made by him and it's a totally separate thing. OSI has spend over $5 billion over the years on liberal causes, including a lot of goups which in turn create or fund things like media matters. Without having time to research the matter, here is one example: OSI donates $1 million to The Tides Foundation in 2005. The Tides Foundation donates $1 million to Media Matters in 2005. Nothing to do with Soros, right?

Re:More Info on the NLPC, they are DIRTY

[spun]

Ah, so you've bought the right wing propaganda about Soros hook, line and sinker. Let me ask you, what are George Soros' activities and feelings regarding communism, and why? If you don't know how Soros feels about communism, you know nothing about the man. Here's a hint: if communism is left wing, then Soros isn't.

Re:LIAR

[blackraven14250]

Maybe it's because none of the above are unbiased, but all except Fox do nothing more than spew talking points constantly and have every Republican candidates on the payroll as hosts and advisers. How many Republican presidential and vice presidential candidates from the 2008 election are employed by Fox? (Here's a hint: nearly every single one) Now how many Democratic candidates are employed by all of the rest of the stations you listed combined? (Here's another hint: none)

Just for reference, I have no problems with me being genetically superior to you because I can look at facts and use my brain in a manner not consistent with party doctrine, but I'm not going to be the one to say it. I'll leave that up to you. Or, rather, you already said it.

Re:LIAR

[IICV]

Uhm, I hope you realize that the second largest shareholder (not donor, actual owner of the company) of Fox News is a Saudi Arabian prince who, according to Fox News, may have ties with terrorists?

Look, just because people give money to causes they approve of doesn't automatically make those causes suspect. You should also critically examine the material they put out, not just who funds them.

Re:LIAR

[sumdumass]

Dude, give it up. we are in an age when Science can be debunked or ignored or even left standing unchallenged after someone questions the claim because someone worked for an oil company, or some company that worked for an oil company 20 years ago.

You won't be able to convince people that others are just like them and act in their own interests. Everything has to be associated with the evil of the day (for or against) and nothing can be further from their own truth. Perhpas this is because they operate on an agenda too, perhaps it's because they haven't grown up and gotten off the third grade detective show investigative reporter kick. I don't know but it's a sign that the entire world is becoming increasingly paranoid and it mostly exists within their own heads. Attempts to change that is pretty much futile. You just have to ignore the idiots, pay attention to the seemingly innocent, and investigate the claim independently of the favorite agenda driven party of the time.

Re:This is just propaganda

[QuoteMstr]

Bullshit. This false equivalence between the parties is fueled by conservative media outlets, and it's designed to frustrate voters so they skip the polls entirely, allowing the vote be dominated by the right-wing base.

If you want to see the difference between the parties, just compare the Bush keys to the legislation that was passed by the House over the past two years. A lot of that didn't make it into law, but that's because of Republicans filibustering in the Senate, not Democratic malfeasance.

It really takes a special kind of stupidity to think "they're all the same" after 2000-2008. The Democrats aren't perfect, but by god, at least they don't yearn for a return to serfdom.

Re:This is just propaganda

[chrb]

Just look at all the people who immediately rushed to Google's defense by attacking the NLPC...

I remember the vast majority of the defensive posts being entirely technical and not political. The issue was that Google used some modified version of a tool like tcpdump, dumped raw packets, and didn't strip packets that might contain http headers or other potentially identifiable information. Nobody has alleged that Google used this raw data for anything nefarious, and nobody appears to be arguing that it's collection was anything more than a simple programming oversight. The defensive posts generally boil down to two points:

• The data was sent unencrypted over public airways
• Storing the raw unfiltered data was an accident and any potentially personal data was never used for anything.

Those are both technical arguments, not U.S. political arguments.

You cannot criticize Google on Slashdot....

Sure you can, people do all the time - if Google really were secretly collecting masses of personal information then they would be criticised. But this is a really odd argument, since Google of all corporations don't have to - since they already openly collect personal information and use it to target adverts, with the full cooperation of their users. Google doesn't need to sniff private data from your public wifi, and it makes little sense that they would deliberately do so, given the huge backlash it could cause.