Slashdot Mirror
Why Google Should Be Afraid of a Missouri Republican's Google Probe (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Republican attorney general of Missouri has launched an investigation into Google's business practices. Josh Hawley wants to know how Google handles user data. And he plans to look into whether Google is using its dominance in the search business to harm companies in other markets where Google competes. It's another sign of growing pressure Google is facing from the political right. Grassroots conservatives increasingly see Google as falling on the wrong side of the culture wars. So far that hasn't had a big impact in Washington policymaking. But with Hawley planning to run for the U.S. Senate next year, we could see more Republican hostility toward Google -- and perhaps other big technology companies -- in the coming years. The Hawley investigation will dig into whether Google violated Missouri's consumer-protection and antitrust laws. Specifically, Hawley will investigate: "Google's collection, use, and disclosure of information about Google users and their online activities," "Google's alleged misappropriation of online content from the websites of its competitors," and "Google's alleged manipulation of search results to preference websites owned by Google and to demote websites that compete with Google." States like Missouri have their own antitrust laws and the power to investigate company business conduct independently of the feds. So Hawley seems to be taking yet another look at those same issues to see if Google's conduct runs afoul of Missouri law.
We don't know if Hawley will get the Republican nomination or win his challenge to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) next year, but people like him will surely be elected to the Senate in the coming decade. Hawley's decision to go after Google suggests that he sees some upside in being seen as an antagonist to a company that conservatives increasingly view with suspicion. More than that, it suggests that Hawley believes it's worth the risk of alienating the GOP's pro-business wing, which takes a dim view of strict antitrust enforcement even if it targets a company with close ties to Democrats.
We don't know if Hawley will get the Republican nomination or win his challenge to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) next year, but people like him will surely be elected to the Senate in the coming decade. Hawley's decision to go after Google suggests that he sees some upside in being seen as an antagonist to a company that conservatives increasingly view with suspicion. More than that, it suggests that Hawley believes it's worth the risk of alienating the GOP's pro-business wing, which takes a dim view of strict antitrust enforcement even if it targets a company with close ties to Democrats.
When your company founders are openly supporting the political opposition party, your company partnered with the old government, and your company has demonstrated your willingness to censure political thought of the user base when they go against your chosen politics, then you shouldn't be surprised that your company becomes targeted by the opposition party when your party is out of power. You made your bed, now sleep in it.
Seriously though, what is the googs doing that would make them seem like suspicious to conservatives?
They donate lots of money to Democrats.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
So, basically, reducing regulations only matter when it affects large Republican donors?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
I didn't look closely, but my understanding was that Damore was quite liberal, just apparently not the kosher type liberal.
They don't have a problem with Google's business practices, their privacy intrusion, their anti-trust violations. The problem is that they do all these things while not supporting the GOP.
Maybe if Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google were to molest some children they'd be more comfortable with him.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You are not google's customer. You are the product. There is no monopoly on search, there is almost no barrier to creating a new search engine and there is nothing sticky about me using Bing, Google or DuckDuckGo. Google is completely up front about what they do with the data people freely give them.
Google is how ever a monopolist in advertising. If I want to buy advertising on the internet I go to Google. They make it easy, they give me amazing tools and they can sell me placement everywhere. No other advertiser on the non-facebook internet is even relevant. On the flip side if you want to sell advertising space on your website, unless you want to have a real sales team, you have no choice but to sell to Google. The barrier to entry in online advertising is massive. Search, email, maps, documents, etc., those are just added lines of defense to protect adwords.
Which are the right wingers on this list? https://www.opensecrets.org/se...
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
It's not just "grassroots conservatives" that are worried about this. Re: the Demore memo, but also the fact Google was contributing to the Clinton campaign, and of course the "american scientist" search results. I'll grand that search result could be an organic result... but the fact we've had multiple engineers stating it's common practice to feed the engine specific data to "help" it find the right data does make me pretty suspicious. You can't deny most people use Google services, so if what they see come up on those services is manipulated for political gain, directly or indirectly, that's a pretty scary thing - especially when you consider there seems to be a large push for a non-meritocratic/anti-technocratic culture within the current ranks of Google employees.
James Woods is about the only conservative actor and he even admitted it hurt his career.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Now it's all political and how anyone not fully left of center is evil.
I'm sorry, I must have missed it for all the right-wing FYGM shit that I have to wade through to read any actually intelligent comments.
Eat the rich.
No. They have an ever widening ring of censorship that is targeting conservative voices on Youtube. Additionally, it is now known that they have a toxic leftist monoculture that is hostile to conservative workers in their work force that became apparent with the firing of James Damore. Who dared ot ask reasonable questions but felt the full rage of the toxic left because it impinged on their every widening ideology of identity politics that is essentially cult-like now.
Funny how the people who distrust big business the most are the ones screaming about somebody wanting to shine the spotlight on Google.
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.