Connect With Us

6. Google Spying?

Earlier this year the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigated Internet search engine giant Google for illegally collecting personal data such as passwords, emails and other online activities from unsecured Wi-Fi networks in homes and businesses across the United States and around the rest of the world.  Google has claimed the data was accidentally picked up by their Street View cars   while driving the world’s streets.  Clearly, this is an invasion of the public’s privacy and yet the FTC has done basically nothing about it, not issuing even a slap on the wrist for Google.  In late October 2010, David Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, sent a two-page letter to Google attorney Albert Gidari saying that the FTC has ended its inquiry into the matter with little more than an assurance from Google that it will make “improvements to its internal processes” and “continue its dialogue with the FTC” (Vladeck).  Why was nothing done to stop the practice and prevent it from happening again?

Less than a week before the FTC’s decision to drop the inquiry, President Obama attended a $30,000per person Democratic Party fundraiser at the Palo Alto, California home of Google executive Marissa Mayer (Carlson).  Google’s former head of public policy, Andrew McLaughlin, joined the Obama administration as the deputy chief technology officer in mid-2009. Other Obama administration officials include: Eric Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, who serves as a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology;  Katie Stanton,who joined the administration as Director of Citizen Participation after serving as a Google project manager; and the former head of Google.org’s global development, Sonal Shah, who is now head of the White House’s Office of Social Innovation.  These facts suggest that the Obama administration may have a conflict of interest in its handling of Google’s civil rights violations.

Sources:

Personal Communication, United States Federal Trade Communication, Office of the Director Bureau of Consumer Protection, David Vladeck, October 27, 2010.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/101027googleletter.pdf

“Google’s Marissa Mayer Hosting Obama At $30,000-A-Head Fundraiser Tonight,” Nicholas Carlson, San Francisco Chronicle, October 21, 2010.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/10/21/businessinsider-googles-marissa-mayer-to-host-president-obama-for-30000-a-head-fundraiser-2010-10.DTL

“Andrew McLaughlin ’94 Leaves Google to Join Obama Administration,”  Harvard Law School website, June 18, 2009. http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2009/06/18_mclaughlin.html

Student Researcher:  James Dobbs, Affiliation ???

Faculty Advisor:  Elliot Cohen, Ph.D., Indian River State College

  • Michael Wood October 6, 2011

    Really, I have come to trust Google. They make things easier for regular people, without asking for anything back. They make GREAT products. They donate millions of dollars to charity and fun countless non-profit events. I honestly don’t mind if Google knows my browsing history, or my address, or phone number or such. They’re going to own the world at this rate, and honestly? It doesn’t bother me.

    • Jgarrett38 October 9, 2011

      Spoken like a true “Progressive”?????

      • Kr. October 18, 2011

        So you have to be a certain type to come here? I don’t agree with the man, but I respect his opinion. If I want to change it that will never happen if I berate him – respectfully discuss, listen and enlighten, if you feel that your fellow man is wrong.. that would be a true “progressive”, if such a term even existed.

    • tonebone October 13, 2011

      What a complete idiot!!  How the heck is it possible for people to be so unaware, so stupid, so perfectly fine with “it don’t bother me, it shouldn’t bother you” mentality?
      I am not a Christian but I will fight to the death for their right to practice the religion of their choice. It upsets me to find that most American’s do not care about the rights of others…. simply thinking of themselves, only.
      WTH are you even at this site Michael Wood?

      • Michael Wood October 13, 2011

        1. This article had NOTHING to do with religion whatsoever.

        2. I never said you had to think it. I said multiple times it was MY opinion.

        3.  Chill the hell out, Internet Warrior. You’re starting a fight in the comment section of a little-known site, does that make you feel important? 

  • Michael Wood October 6, 2011

    Really, I have come to trust Google. They make things easier for regular people, without asking for anything back. They make GREAT products. They donate millions of dollars to charity and fun countless non-profit events. I honestly don’t mind if Google knows my browsing history, or my address, or phone number or such. They’re going to own the world at this rate, and honestly? It doesn’t bother me.

    • Jgarrett38 October 9, 2011

      Spoken like a true “Progressive”?????

      • Kr. October 18, 2011

        So you have to be a certain type to come here? I don’t agree with the man, but I respect his opinion. If I want to change it that will never happen if I berate him – respectfully discuss, listen and enlighten, if you feel that your fellow man is wrong.. that would be a true “progressive”, if such a term even existed.

    • tonebone October 13, 2011

      What a complete idiot!!  How the heck is it possible for people to be so unaware, so stupid, so perfectly fine with “it don’t bother me, it shouldn’t bother you” mentality?
      I am not a Christian but I will fight to the death for their right to practice the religion of their choice. It upsets me to find that most American’s do not care about the rights of others…. simply thinking of themselves, only.
      WTH are you even at this site Michael Wood?

      • Michael Wood October 13, 2011

        1. This article had NOTHING to do with religion whatsoever.

        2. I never said you had to think it. I said multiple times it was MY opinion.

        3.  Chill the hell out, Internet Warrior. You’re starting a fight in the comment section of a little-known site, does that make you feel important? 

      • Buffet January 12, 2014

        Well said!

  • Reg G. October 14, 2011

    This is just another example of how private corporations will control the little person. For example. if your employer wants to investigate you they just need to go to Google to find out all about you for a small fee. The regular person will not be able to buy this information or even know it was sold. The idea that all your information being sold might not upset you know but how it may be used in the future without your consent should worry you. It revises the Constitution and Bill of Rights without our consent and to date The Power elite do not have a track record that one can truly trust. This will effect your children more than you.

    • kmorgana September 15, 2012

      no it will affect YOU more than your children. EVERYTHING- every. single. digital transaction you have made since the inception OF digital transactions is stored, filed- and available at an instant’s notice in that giant database. What you clicked on, what you “liked” what you wrote about prez so and so, what you bought and used your grocery loyalty card for, your misdemeanors, calls to police, your suggestions, any cards or forms filled out- your facial recognition profile (YES they are using it now, Walmart is, and it’s in conjunction with police depts everywhere! they know WHERE u are and what TIME and can pull up video of you going in, leaving, parking..)TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS. I have a VERY sinking feeling that somehow, this info on all of us is going to be used against us- how, I am not sure.. but it will be very scary.

      • Ivan September 11, 2013

        what he meant it will be even worse in the future

  • Reg G. October 14, 2011

    This is just another example of how private corporations will control the little person. For example. if your employer wants to investigate you they just need to go to Google to find out all about you for a small fee. The regular person will not be able to buy this information or even know it was sold. The idea that all your information being sold might not upset you know but how it may be used in the future without your consent should worry you. It revises the Constitution and Bill of Rights without our consent and to date The Power elite do not have a track record that one can truly trust. This will effect your children more than you.

  • Reg G. October 14, 2011

    This is just another example of how private corporations will control the little person. For example. if your employer wants to investigate you they just need to go to Google to find out all about you for a small fee. The regular person will not be able to buy this information or even know it was sold. The idea that all your information being sold might not upset you know but how it may be used in the future without your consent should worry you. It revises the Constitution and Bill of Rights without our consent and to date The Power elite do not have a track record that one can truly trust. This will effect your children more than you.

    • $27222734 September 15, 2012

      no it will affect YOU more than your children. EVERYTHING- every. single. digital transaction you have made since the inception OF digital transactions is stored, filed- and available at an instant’s notice in that giant database. What you clicked on, what you “liked” what you wrote about prez so and so, what you bought and used your grocery loyalty card for, your misdemeanors, calls to police, your suggestions, any cards or forms filled out- your facial recognition profile (YES they are using it now, Walmart is, and it’s in conjunction with police depts everywhere! they know WHERE u are and what TIME and can pull up video of you going in, leaving, parking..)TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS. I have a VERY sinking feeling that somehow, this info on all of us is going to be used against us- how, I am not sure.. but it will be very scary.

  • mrcrowley October 15, 2011

    I don’t think the creation of google was created for this specific purpose (spying). It’s a fairly new technology… that’s only going to be enhanced in the next few years. It is a great way of gathering public AND personal information from people since using the whole “auto-fill” option just happens to be extremely convenient and people don’t realize that the information you voluntarily supply can be used for this sort of purpose. However we shouldn’t completely condemn the use of google. It’s definitely proven to be extremely beneficial for everyone. It’s just that people have this naive thought that the internet is completely anonymous, so they just openly enter whatever information they have about themselves. Obviously some people know about this and will take advantage of this to further benefit their own agenda. So I guess it’s a “use it at your own risk” sort of thing.

    • kmorgana September 15, 2012

      YES you’re right. I wonder how much of my gplus posts and rants are being stacked up against me for some future nefarious purpose perhaps. Also I disagree with you on just how “beneficial” this all is? how? using internet to learn stuff or what? what’s wrong with real, hardcover- Encyclopedia Brittanica. What’s wrong with TALKING and meeting your neighbors. How about doing something about your local community, local corruption, instead of using boards to opine on world events (like I am right now) ;p

  • mrcrowley October 15, 2011

    I don’t think the creation of google was created for this specific purpose (spying). It’s a fairly new technology… that’s only going to be enhanced in the next few years. It is a great way of gathering public AND personal information from people since using the whole “auto-fill” option just happens to be extremely convenient and people don’t realize that the information you voluntarily supply can be used for this sort of purpose. However we shouldn’t completely condemn the use of google. It’s definitely proven to be extremely beneficial for everyone. It’s just that people have this naive thought that the internet is completely anonymous, so they just openly enter whatever information they have about themselves. Obviously some people know about this and will take advantage of this to further benefit their own agenda. So I guess it’s a “use it at your own risk” sort of thing.

    • $27222734 September 15, 2012

      YES you’re right. I wonder how much of my gplus posts and rants are being stacked up against me for some future nefarious purpose perhaps. Also I disagree with you on just how “beneficial” this all is? how? using internet to learn stuff or what? what’s wrong with real, hardcover- Encyclopedia Brittanica. What’s wrong with TALKING and meeting your neighbors. How about doing something about your local community, local corruption, instead of using boards to opine on world events (like I am right now) ;p

    • Joe Mahoney June 24, 2013

      Try using a proxy service to hide your IP address from
      Google so that you can search anonymously.
      Get one by typing into a search engine “free proxy.” Then try surfing.
      After a while Google will catch on and will either block you, require you fill
      in a captcha code (and then block you) code, or they will change the language
      you are using to force you to reveal your identity. I don’t know why Google needs to know who we
      are or what websites we are going to.
      Trying using a proxy to open account on Facebook and see what
      happens. I understand Facebook has a
      policy of revealing your true identity and real email address. Otherwise we would be confusing the
      government with duplicate accounts. We
      can have that. I’m not saying most
      people need to have more than one Facebook account. It’s just the point of the matter.

  • Cnnxupfk October 19, 2011

    There is no conflict of interest in this story. This is just corruption, most of our government is corrupted, “I will contribute X amount of dollars to your campaign fund”, then Googles problem just disappears. That above  all else is why people should be in the streets now, we lost our government a long time ago to corruption. The Wall street fiasco, corporations, mass media and government are all addicted to corruption. I’ll give you this if you do that, so they do it, get rich, go into the history books they write and retire to Dubai or Switzerland if there is any pressure. Where’s mine, oh I forgot I’m not the president so I cannot get in on it. Obama, is ripe with Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Google cronies, he must of got a lot of election funds, heck Google it.

  • Cnnxupfk October 19, 2011

    There is no conflict of interest in this story. This is just corruption, most of our government is corrupted, “I will contribute X amount of dollars to your campaign fund”, then Googles problem just disappears. That above  all else is why people should be in the streets now, we lost our government a long time ago to corruption. The Wall street fiasco, corporations, mass media and government are all addicted to corruption. I’ll give you this if you do that, so they do it, get rich, go into the history books they write and retire to Dubai or Switzerland if there is any pressure. Where’s mine, oh I forgot I’m not the president so I cannot get in on it. Obama, is ripe with Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Google cronies, he must of got a lot of election funds, heck Google it.

  • Cnnxupfk October 19, 2011

    There is no conflict of interest in this story. This is just corruption, most of our government is corrupted, “I will contribute X amount of dollars to your campaign fund”, then Googles problem just disappears. That above  all else is why people should be in the streets now, we lost our government a long time ago to corruption. The Wall street fiasco, corporations, mass media and government are all addicted to corruption. I’ll give you this if you do that, so they do it, get rich, go into the history books they write and retire to Dubai or Switzerland if there is any pressure. Where’s mine, oh I forgot I’m not the president so I cannot get in on it. Obama, is ripe with Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Google cronies, he must of got a lot of election funds, heck Google it.

  • Anonymous November 17, 2011

    I’ve always been a big fan of Project Censored, I buy the book every year to help support the cause, but seeing something like this really makes me wonder if the group isn’t starting to lean a bit to sensationalism to garner attention.

    The article states “Google  has claimed the data was accidentally by their street view cars…”  as though they blatantly lied.  The letter cited from David Vladeck states: “Earlier this year, in response to a request from the data protection authority in 
    Hamburg, Germany, Google discovered that the software on the Street View cars had also been 
    collecting some “payload” data  contents of  communications sent over unsecured wireless 
    networks.”  

    That sounds suspiciously like confirmation to me that the data was collected by the street view cars, while they drove around.  I suppose it can be debated whether it was intentional or accidental.

    Here’s the rub though:  It really doesn’t much matter if it was intentional or not.  The data collected was from unsecured, unencrypted wireless access points.  Data beamed by consumers, either knowingly or unwittingly, for anyone to capture.  Its a wireless system, broadcasting open communications into public spaces.  It is no more ‘spying’ to capture some of that data than it is for me to listen to the radio in my car.  Anyone with a laptop could have captured the same data.

    In short, they didn’t sit in one location and collect everything passing by, they didn’t break into people’s computers and steal it, and they didn’t crack WEP or WPA encryption to get it.  It was broadcast IN THE OPEN.

    I personally believe most companies are allowed to keep too much personal information on us, Google included, but to label this ‘spying’ seems a broad and somewhat sensationalistic overreach.

    • kmorgana September 15, 2012

      so, the article is “sensationalism” or is it relevant?

    • Linda Adams December 29, 2012

      Nothing is private once it is thrown into the public arena sort of like having your garbage gone through while it is at the curb waiting for pick up.

  • madmark4 November 17, 2011

    I’ve always been a big fan of Project Censored, I buy the book every year to help support the cause, but seeing something like this really makes me wonder if the group isn’t starting to lean a bit to sensationalism to garner attention.

    The article states “Google  has claimed the data was accidentally by their street view cars…”  as though they blatantly lied.  The letter cited from David Vladeck states: “Earlier this year, in response to a request from the data protection authority in 
    Hamburg, Germany, Google discovered that the software on the Street View cars had also been 
    collecting some “payload” data  contents of  communications sent over unsecured wireless 
    networks.”  

    That sounds suspiciously like confirmation to me that the data was collected by the street view cars, while they drove around.  I suppose it can be debated whether it was intentional or accidental.

    Here’s the rub though:  It really doesn’t much matter if it was intentional or not.  The data collected was from unsecured, unencrypted wireless access points.  Data beamed by consumers, either knowingly or unwittingly, for anyone to capture.  Its a wireless system, broadcasting open communications into public spaces.  It is no more ‘spying’ to capture some of that data than it is for me to listen to the radio in my car.  Anyone with a laptop could have captured the same data.

    In short, they didn’t sit in one location and collect everything passing by, they didn’t break into people’s computers and steal it, and they didn’t crack WEP or WPA encryption to get it.  It was broadcast IN THE OPEN.

    I personally believe most companies are allowed to keep too much personal information on us, Google included, but to label this ‘spying’ seems a broad and somewhat sensationalistic overreach.

    • $27222734 September 15, 2012

      so, the article is “sensationalism” or is it relevant?

    • Linda Adams December 29, 2012

      Nothing is private once it is thrown into the public arena sort of like having your garbage gone through while it is at the curb waiting for pick up.

  • Kamil N November 28, 2011

    I’ve seen a lot of news stories on this, so I don’t really consider it censored.  

  • Synaxis November 28, 2011

    I’ve seen a lot of news stories on this, so I don’t really consider it censored.  

  • Bob Marshall December 30, 2011

    At the last Bilderberg Group meeting held in Switzerland, one of the invited guest was Eric Schmidt, Executive of Google

    • $27222734 September 15, 2012

      I know where he lives.. ah no not giving it out lol it’s not hard to find,palo alto CA) I couldn’t resist driving by his place while he was having it remodeled :) anyway- what concerns me is how much control and power these guys have, seems many of them have some sort of creepy agenda disguised as “world peace” bill gates polio vaccines CAUSED permanent paralysis for 60k innocent babes, he has said in his own words he’s all for depopulation. They seem to use this “green” earth crap as an excuse to rid the planet of “undesirables” meaning people like you and me- if you are all for this depopulation thing too, I GUARANTEE that YOU will be “first on the list” of “volunteers”. This depop agenda doesn’t apply to Gates, and his buddies, you see. Just the useless eaters such as us poors, those making less than billions per month.

  • Bob Marshall December 30, 2011

    At the last Bilderberg Group meeting held in Switzerland, one of the invited guest was Eric Schmidt, Executive of Google

    • kmorgana September 15, 2012

      I know where he lives.. ah no not giving it out lol it’s not hard to find,palo alto CA) I couldn’t resist driving by his place while he was having it remodeled :) anyway- what concerns me is how much control and power these guys have, seems many of them have some sort of creepy agenda disguised as “world peace” bill gates polio vaccines CAUSED permanent paralysis for 60k innocent babes, he has said in his own words he’s all for depopulation. They seem to use this “green” earth crap as an excuse to rid the planet of “undesirables” meaning people like you and me- if you are all for this depopulation thing too, I GUARANTEE that YOU will be “first on the list” of “volunteers”. This depop agenda doesn’t apply to Gates, and his buddies, you see. Just the useless eaters such as us poors, those making less than billions per month.

  • Anon January 10, 2012

    Civil rights violations? The access points were unencrypted, completely unprotected! Every time I walk by an open wireless signal my phone snatches the access points SSID and various other (useless) tidbits of information, I guess that makes me a “spy” threatening the “privacy of the people.” People uneducated (or ignorant) of technology shouldn’t write about it, I certainly don’t write a biology column.

  • Anon January 10, 2012

    Civil rights violations? The access points were unencrypted, completely unprotected! Every time I walk by an open wireless signal my phone snatches the access points SSID and various other (useless) tidbits of information, I guess that makes me a “spy” threatening the “privacy of the people.” People uneducated (or ignorant) of technology shouldn’t write about it, I certainly don’t write a biology column.

  • V0yag3r January 14, 2012

    the issue is that the data google finds, google publishes and makes available to the public.
    So what might be a relatively minor risk confined to ppl. wardriving, becomes a greater risk when google comes to your hood and posts your keys on 4chan.
    And yeah, Obama can’t really claim to be unbiased with so many google staffers and former staffers in his entourage, so yeah I consider it a conflict of interest.
    bottom line, whether the data was collected accidentally is moot- they made the decision to post the data, and should serve themselves a takedown notice!

    • kmorgana September 15, 2012

      google makes available what they CAN control. Why use google?? why not use hotbot, lycos, or others? I find google’s listings are rather.. um, “sifted” for maximum confusion. There was a book that came out in ’99 wish I could remember the title, anyway it talked about how Microsoft and others give the user the impression that they are “in control” yet their search results, news headlines are all carefully crafted and that no one is in control except the ones at the top.

  • V0yag3r January 14, 2012

    the issue is that the data google finds, google publishes and makes available to the public.
    So what might be a relatively minor risk confined to ppl. wardriving, becomes a greater risk when google comes to your hood and posts your keys on 4chan.
    And yeah, Obama can’t really claim to be unbiased with so many google staffers and former staffers in his entourage, so yeah I consider it a conflict of interest.
    bottom line, whether the data was collected accidentally is moot- they made the decision to post the data, and should serve themselves a takedown notice!

    • $27222734 September 15, 2012

      google makes available what they CAN control. Why use google?? why not use hotbot, lycos, or others? I find google’s listings are rather.. um, “sifted” for maximum confusion. There was a book that came out in ’99 wish I could remember the title, anyway it talked about how Microsoft and others give the user the impression that they are “in control” yet their search results, news headlines are all carefully crafted and that no one is in control except the ones at the top.

  • Zada January 16, 2012

    I gotta laugh..The big push right now is AGAINST internet censorship…BUT,on the other hand, we don’t want the websites looking at US! Can’t have it both ways, me thinks!  Majority of sites really don’t need log in & pass words etc anyway…NO REASON!

  • Zada January 16, 2012

    I gotta laugh..The big push right now is AGAINST internet censorship…BUT,on the other hand, we don’t want the websites looking at US! Can’t have it both ways, me thinks!  Majority of sites really don’t need log in & pass words etc anyway…NO REASON!

  • Annoy January 24, 2012

    google doesnt need to spy, its owns the majority of internet searches, your IP and the content you view.
    in a single search it knows most of your computers data and your address though its own browser CHROME.
    Lets not forget GMAIL if google wanted it knows all your email content and of course social media information found by bots.

    so you already give them everything they want, if they wanted it.

  • Annoy January 24, 2012

    google doesnt need to spy, its owns the majority of internet searches, your IP and the content you view.
    in a single search it knows most of your computers data and your address though its own browser CHROME.
    Lets not forget GMAIL if google wanted it knows all your email content and of course social media information found by bots.

    so you already give them everything they want, if they wanted it.

  • Ihatelibrals March 6, 2012

    The FTC couldn’t do anything about this if they wanted to… it’s the FCC that would handle such complaints and issue any fines, not the FTC. Get your facts straight. 

  • Ihatelibrals March 6, 2012

    The FTC couldn’t do anything about this if they wanted to… it’s the FCC that would handle such complaints and issue any fines, not the FTC. Get your facts straight. 

  • Allanornstein April 18, 2012

    Just read a new book, Wealth vs.
    Work: How 1% Victimize 99%. It’s about the vanishing

    American dream- a shrinking middle class, increased poverty
    and inequality. It’s about a return to the old aristocratic order, a world
    where hereditary privilege and power trump excellence and merit and where
    ordinary people, and those who are less able and less vigorous, are trampled by
    greed, materialism and crony capitalism. It’s about Wall Street vs. Main Street, and
    about the economic decline of labor unions and working people. It’s a gritty
    book!

  • Allanornstein April 18, 2012

    Just read a new book, Wealth vs.
    Work: How 1% Victimize 99%. It’s about the vanishing

    American dream- a shrinking middle class, increased poverty
    and inequality. It’s about a return to the old aristocratic order, a world
    where hereditary privilege and power trump excellence and merit and where
    ordinary people, and those who are less able and less vigorous, are trampled by
    greed, materialism and crony capitalism. It’s about Wall Street vs. Main Street, and
    about the economic decline of labor unions and working people. It’s a gritty
    book!

  • Allanornstein April 18, 2012

    Just read a new book, Wealth vs.
    Work: How 1% Victimize 99%. It’s about the vanishing

    American dream- a shrinking middle class, increased poverty
    and inequality. It’s about a return to the old aristocratic order, a world
    where hereditary privilege and power trump excellence and merit and where
    ordinary people, and those who are less able and less vigorous, are trampled by
    greed, materialism and crony capitalism. It’s about Wall Street vs. Main Street, and
    about the economic decline of labor unions and working people. It’s a gritty
    book!

  • Allanornstein April 18, 2012

    Just read a new book, Wealth vs.
    Work: How 1% Victimize 99%. It’s about the vanishing

    American dream- a shrinking middle class, increased poverty
    and inequality. It’s about a return to the old aristocratic order, a world
    where hereditary privilege and power trump excellence and merit and where
    ordinary people, and those who are less able and less vigorous, are trampled by
    greed, materialism and crony capitalism. It’s about Wall Street vs. Main Street, and
    about the economic decline of labor unions and working people. It’s a gritty
    book!

  • Guest100100 August 13, 2012

    marissa mayer is a yahoo executive (the chief executive officer, to be precise) not a Google executive like stated above.

  • Guest100100 August 13, 2012

    marissa mayer is a yahoo executive (the chief executive officer, to be precise) not a Google executive like stated above.

  • Chuck763 September 30, 2012

    I wonder why these cars were even equipeded with the necessary hardware and software to enable them to “accidentally” access peoples private information. I would think the only thing necessary for these cars would be the camera equiptment and GPS.

  • Chuck763 September 30, 2012

    I wonder why these cars were even equipeded with the necessary hardware and software to enable them to “accidentally” access peoples private information. I would think the only thing necessary for these cars would be the camera equiptment and GPS.

  • Jody June 9, 2013

    Google is intimately involved in setting policy for sovereign countries – and it is doing this globally. This is an example
    of the Global Financial Elite unfolding their long term hidden agenda via front organisations and placemen such as Google.

    “Embarrasment looms for UK chancellor George Osborne as he faces pressure to clamp down on offshore tax avoidance in his pre-budget report on 5 December – after years of cosying up to one of the biggest corporate tax
    avoiders, Google, and chairman Eric Schmidt.

    Osborne has previously written joined op-ed newspaper articles with Schmidt about how “innovation is the secret of economic success” for Britain (see Private Eye No. 1275), while omitting to mention that many internet companies including Google pay virtually zero UK corporation tax.

    Schmidt is also a member of UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s “council of business advisers”, despite Google being an American company. Oh, and the Google Public
    Relations chief, Rachel Whetstone, is married to Steve Hilton, who served as David Cameron’s “strategy guru”
    until leaving Downing Street a few months ago for a one-year sabbatical.

    Still, at least one senior Conservative has joined the popular clamour against corporate tax avoiders. Mayor of London Boris Johnson used his speech to the Confederation of British Industry to call on the UK government to drop plans for a “mansion tax” and focus instead on making Google
    and others pay more. Not that Mayor of London Boris Johnson is averse to hanging out with tax avoiders himself: he was one of the main speakers at Google’s Zeitgeist conference last year and recently opened the new Amazon office in London.

    (Source: The Private Eye,
    No.1328, Page 5, 30 November – 13 December 2012)

    “Lambasting Google for tax avoidance is all very well, but UK political leaders might have confronted it ages ago if the major parties were not so hopelessly entangled with the internet giant.

    Rachel Whetstone, Google’s top global spinner, is married to UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s old barefoot guru Steve Hilton. She used to be Director of Communications for
    Conservative Leader Michael Howard and, before that, was David Cameron’s deputy in the Public Relations department at Carlton TV. The Prime Minister is godfather to her younger son.

    Naomi Gummer, one of Google’s main “public policy” executives, meanwhile, is the daughter of conservative Public Relations adviser Lord Chadlington, the president of David Cameron’s Local Constituency Association. David and Samantha Cameron attended her wedding a year ago, as did the then Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt – whose Special Adviser she was before taking Google’s pay wage.

    Heading in the opposite direction, Google’s former European Public Relations woman Amy Fisher now advises UK Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.

    With Google, as once with Rupert Murdoch, the Camerons have followed where the UK Prime Minister
    Tony Blair and family led. Sarah Hunter, the Rebekah Brooks (former editor of The News of the World) lookalike who was Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Chief Adviser on Media Policy at No 10 Downing Street, went on to become Google’s “head of UK public policy”. DJ Collins, a Whitehall Special Adviser of the Prime Minister Tony Blair era (and close friend of David Milliband – brother of
    Edward Milliband, the Labour Party Leader), has in recent years been Google’s European Director of Communications.

    With so many chums in Whitehall, UK Parliament, is it any wonder Google chairman Eric Schmidt is still welcome at Downing Street as a member of Dave Cameron’s Council of Business Advisers?

    (Source: The Private Eye, No. 1341, Page 5, 31 May – 13 June 2013)

  • michael December 1, 2013

    I <3 Google

Project Censored 2014
Do You Like What Project Censored Does?
Fighting Corporate Media and Censorship
If you agree with us that Project Censored is one of the most important non-profits—unique in its approach to fighting corporate media censorship and propaganda—then perhaps you will consider making a donation or becoming a monthly subscriber during our 2014 Spring Fund Drive

contribute-button