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.

17 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >"Why companies should stay out of politics"

      +1 Google has been ACTIVELY "left", so why would this surprise anyone? And "left" government officials have done exactly the same type of harassment as this in the past. It is best to be neutral on political things not directly about business.

      Actors, too, should keep the hell out of politics. A lot of them look pretty damn stupid going on ads telling us how to vote, or making stupid political commentaries, as if their opinions are somehow more valid, important, or enlightened than the rest of us.

    2. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Google has been ACTIVELY "left", so why would this surprise anyone? And "left" government officials have done exactly the same type of harassment as this in the past.

      So many commenters here have been quick to forget discriminatory IRS practices under Obama.

    3. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yup. And actually the recent kerfuffle with Keurig shows the same thing.

      Media Matters called up Keurig and convinced them to pull advertising from Hannity because he was, according to Media Matters 'pro child molestor'. None of which was true of course.

      http://www.dailywire.com/news/...

      So Keurig pulled their ads. Of course at that point the right started a 'boycott Keurig' campaign, with videos of people smashing their Keurig machines. Though as Ben Shapiro pointed out - smashing a machine you already own doesn't make any sense. All you need to do is stop buying K cups from Keurig.

      Now in the long run this means that companies will either be Democrat companies or Republican ones. Up to now that hasn't happened. E.g.

      http://www.foodandwine.com/fwx...

      Experian assigned number values to restaurants, with 100 representing neutral territory. That means that a restaurant that scores 120 on the liberal index boasts 20 percent more liberals at its tables than average. The numbers aren't all that surprising. California Pizza Kitchen brings in the most liberals, with a score of 146 on the lefty index. O'Charley's-a chain located throughout the South and Midwest-and Cracker Barrel have the most conservative clientele, scoring 121 and 118, respectively, on the righty index.

      I live outside the US and CPK used to have a branch near me and I used to quite like their salads, despite being politically conservative. If I was in the US I'd have gone there too. However suppose CPK took a political stand I didn't approve of. Then I'd eat somewhere else.

      Companies don't realise that as soon as they take a political position they will please about half the people and alienate about half. However the people they please are not going to shop their more and the people they alienate can easily shop somewhere else. I.e. companies taking an open political stance is a net loss.

      People who don't realise this are spending too much time inside an echo chamber were everyone things their politics are virtuous and the other side's politics are evil.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Agreed. If actors had stayed out of politics, we wouldn't have Reaganomics or the current shit show.

    5. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean the thing that was investigated by a republican congress and didn't happen?

    6. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Funny

      Everybody should stay out of politics. Only professionals should express their opinions.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Informative

      US debt to GDP is already at over 100%

      https://tradingeconomics.com/u...

      It's forecast to stay there

      https://tradingeconomics.com/u...

      Now going from $19 Trillion and 100% of GDP to $51 Trillion and presumably over 200% of GDP doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

      And that's from one policy. Most people think the forecast is hopelessly optimistic and if you're willing to add $32 trillion to the debt over one policy to buy votes, what's to stop you adding another one?

      It's disastrous. And up until the last election most Democrats knew it. Hillary still does

      http://www.businessinsider.com...

      In an interview published Wednesday, Ezra Klein of Vox asked Clinton, who defeated Sanders to become the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016, what she thought of the independent Vermont senator's Medicare-for-all plan, which he is set to release later Wednesday.

      "Well, I don't know what the particulars are," Clinton said. "As you might remember, during the campaign he introduced a single-payer bill every year he was in Congress - and when somebody finally read it, he couldn't explain it and couldn't really tell people how much it was going to cost."

      Clinton also highlighted what she saw as potential flaws in selling such a plan: special interests and public sentiment.

      "When I was working on healthcare back in in '93 and '94, I said if we could've waved the magic wand and started all over, maybe we would start with something resembling single-payer plus other payers, like other countries that have universal coverage and are much better at controlling costs than we do, primarily in Europe," Clinton said. "But we were facing the reality of not just strong, powerful forces but people's own fears as well as their appreciation for what they already had."

      As an example, Clinton cited the difficulties with the attempt at single-payer in Sanders' home state of Vermont, saying it was "difficult to out the pieces together."

      In Vermont Single Payer For All failed

      https://www.politico.com/story...

      I bet the Democrats end up supporting it though and wheeling out Jimmy Kimmel to cry that anyone who opposes it wants kids like his to die.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    8. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean the thing that was investigated by a republican congress and didn't happen?

      OJ isn't a murderer. Clinton didn't perjure himself. Bill Cosby, Weinstein, and all the others never molested anyone. Etc.

      Interesting that pointing out left wing bias is modded offtopic while the opposite is not. Almost as if one side is more insincere than the other these days, not unlike equating a lack of criminal conviction with the absence of action...unless it benefits your political party of course.

    9. Re: Why companies should stay out of politics by GLMDesigns · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's a reflection upon you if you think Bernie Sanders is middle of the road.

      The biggest problem in politics is we don't have a definition of "right" that makes any sense.

      Ayn Rand and Adolf Htler cannot both be "right-wing". They are mutually exclusive.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    10. Re:Why companies should stay out of politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, the one that didn't happen so bad that Tea Party groups ended up with a $3.5M settlement.

      Keep on being a dumb fuck though, it's clearly working for you.

  2. Re:Why exactly does Google by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  3. Regulations by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, basically, reducing regulations only matter when it affects large Republican donors?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  4. Re: Why exactly does Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I didn't look closely, but my understanding was that Damore was quite liberal, just apparently not the kosher type liberal.

  5. Google is a monopolist in advertising by FeelGood314 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  6. Re:Headline by Bodhammer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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."
  7. Manipulation of available information by Kagetsuki · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.