Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Critic Ousted From Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant (nytimes.com)

Posted by msmash on from the what's-happening dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A researcher at a high-profile Washington, D.C.-think tank, which receives funding from Google, was pushed out after criticizing the company. In June, Barry Lynn, who was a scholar at New America, posted a statement praising the European Union's record $2.7 billion fine against the company. Lynn ran a team, Open Markets, that researched competition policy and was increasingly critical of giants like Google and Amazon. Google executive chairman and former CEO Eric Schmidt, criticized Lynn's statement to the think tank's CEO, Anne-Marie Slaughter, according to The New York Times. Schmidt chaired New America until 2016. The think tank has received $21 million from Google and Schmidt's family's foundation since its founding in 1999. The statement reportedly disappeared from the think tank website but returned hours later. According to the Times, word of Schmidt's displeasure spread across the think tank. Slaughter fired Lynn days later, saying in an email obtained by the Times that "the time has come for Open Markets and New America to part ways." Slaughter told Lynn in an email that his firing was "in no way based on the content of your work," but said he was "imperiling the institution as a whole." Lynn told the Times he believed his dismissal was because he criticized Google.

18 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google: let's be evil.

    1. Re:New Slogan by PoopJuggler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is firing people who aren't meeting expectations "evil"? You can't just take this guy's word -- every blowhard thinks he was fired for some nefarious reason, but usually it's because they're just horrible people to deal with and everybody in the office hates them.

    2. Re:New Slogan by ewibble · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ok I don't know why he was fired, neither do you, but the appearance of bias is almost as bad as actual bias. It takes away legitimacy from the think tank. It is like google is above firing people they disagree with (https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/8/16106728/google-fired-engineer-anti-diversity-memo). A person should have the right to express their opinion weather or not you agree with it. If your think beliefs can't stand up to scrutiny then they can't be very sound beliefs.

      If you are going to have a think tank, the need have opposing opinions, otherwise you come up with a predetermined solution. I you set up group to decide what color you should paint a wall, and your criteria for picking them is they want the wall to be pink, guess what you are going to get a pink wall.

      If google has the power to push out people it disagrees with then you don't have a think tank, you have a lobbing tool for google. In reality that is what a "think tank" is, but it shouldn't be.

    3. Re:New Slogan by scatbomb · · Score: 2

      Snarkiness aside, this is not capitalism nor is it free market. This (now commonplace activity) is conspiracy of a powerful corporation to influence the government in order to tilt the playing ground in their favor against consumers and against their competition. It's tantamount to bribery and the politicians and CEOs behind it ought to be placed before a court of law. We haven't had a free market for as long as I've been alive, and probably well before that.

    4. Re:New Slogan by spun · · Score: 2

      Are you twelve? Talk like an adult if you expect a response. Kids these days need a taste of the belt, damn liberals ruined today's youth with their permissive attitude.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    5. Re:New Slogan by scatbomb · · Score: 2

      Are you playing ignorant or do you really not know what a think tank is? Whatever, I'll play along... think tanks are organizations which aim to lobby the government in and influence public opinion, or at least manufacture consent/approval by giving something in exchange for favorable news coverage.

    6. Re:New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "If you are going to have a think tank, the need have opposing opinions, otherwise you come up with a predetermined solution."

      I don't think you understand what think tanks are for. They are for exactly this. They are to provide a facade of credibility to a body that is pushing an agenda of one sort or another.

    7. Re:New Slogan by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Snarkiness aside, this is not capitalism

      Capitalism is defined as an economic system in which capital controls the means of production. How is this not capitalism?

      nor is it free market.

      Google wasn't getting what it was paying for, so they decided that he shouldn't get paid any more. How is this not the free market?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Understandable by volodymyrbiryuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The so called think-tanks are institutions for lobbyism and public opinion manipulation in favor of the funding company. In other word a propaganda machines. Lynn didn't do what he iwas payed to do and got fired. Stop pretending like his job was to be objective in the first place.

    --
    sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
    1. Re:Understandable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly correct. They are just fake news generators for their funders.

  3. Good marketing by alvinrod · · Score: 2

    I think it's pretty good marketing for the New America Foundation. This is a fairly inexpensive way to tell the whole world that they'll think whatever they're paid to.

    1. Re:Good marketing by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Calling it a "think tank" indicates that pretty effectively all by itself.

  4. Well, duh by JohnFen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He who pays the piper calls the tune.

  5. Re:WRONG! by ilsaloving · · Score: 2

    A comma is NOT necessary just because the subject consists of more than one word. Fuckheads.

    I, disagree.

  6. Let me get this straight by teknosapien · · Score: 2

    You want the company that provides funding to part ways with your organization?
    At what point when funding goes away does the org cease to exist?

    --
    no matter how good it is, it is human nature always wants to make things better
  7. Yes, let's all agree how Google is right by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 4, Informative

    Soon it will be all you can do anyway.

    --
    Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
  8. Re:Not obvious? by spun · · Score: 2

    That sounds like commie talk, mister. The free market has spoken, amen, praise be to The Invisible Hand.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  9. Re:WRONG! by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    It should have both or neither.

    The woman over there with the gold hat is Queen Elizabeth. OK

    The woman over there, with the gold hat, is Queen Elizabeth. OK

    The woman over there, with the gold hat is Queen Elizabeth. No!

    The woman, over there with the gold hat is Queen Elizabeth. Even Joe_Dragon wouldn't do this!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."