[Clips] Don't be Google

[R. A. Hettinga]

--- begin forwarded text


  Delivered-To: clips at philodox.com
  Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:43:23 -0500
  To: Philodox Clips List <clips at philodox.com>
  From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com>
  Subject: [Clips] Don't be Google
  Reply-To: rah at philodox.com
  Sender: clips-bounces at philodox.com


<http://www.townhall.com/print/print_story.php?sid=184032&loc=/opinion/columns/debrasaunders/2006/01/26/184032.html>

  Townhall.com


  Don't be Google

  By Debra Saunders

  Jan 26, 2006

  Google gives life to the Eric Hoffer observation, "People who bite the hand
  that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them."

  Google painted itself as heroic in refusing to help the U.S. Department of
  Justice's efforts to reinstate a 1998 federal Child Online Protection Act,
  then revealed that it was going to help the Chinese government suppress
  free speech. That sort of goes against the company's informal corporate
  motto, "Don't be evil."

  I realize how eager those in the Bay Area are to believe that the evil
  Bush administration wants to double as Big Brother and eavesdrop on
  well-meaning peaceniks. So it doesn't matter that the DOJ isn't looking for
  information on individual accounts -- but instead wanted data on how the
  Internet is used during a given week to see how users access porn.

  Personally, I'd be more supportive of the Department of Justice's subpoena
  if the feds were trying to locate specific individuals --
  child-porn-aholics, for instance -- just as I would support a government
  subpoena for bank accounts used to launder mob money. My issue with the
  subpoena -- and I agree with Google on this -- is that it asks for a huge
  chunk of information to support the government in a civil suit. It's a
  fishing expedition, in which corporate America provides free research.
  Yahoo and Microsoft, however, were able to comply. A Yahoo spokesperson
  said the company did not release personally identifiable information.

  Care about rights? Be it noted that exposing children to porn on the
  Internet violates their parents' rights. Still, Google emerged from the
  controversy as a defender of privacy. Columnist Robert Scheer in
  Wednesday's San Francisco Chronicle duly lauded Google's refusal to comply
  with the Justice Department's request, as he wrote that the "latest
  high-tech upstart giant dared to challenge the government's claim of an
  unbridled right to break into our information-age virtual homes." The
  Washington Post's Eugene Robinson described the subpoena as "more of an
  Orwellian threat than the National Security Agency's snooping on phone
  calls and e-mails."

  You have to marvel at Google's great marketing ploy. The company amasses
  founts of information on users of its service. Yet, by riding on the
  coattails of anti-Bush sentiment, Google claims the mantle of champion of
  privacy rights. "We intend to resist (the government's) motion vigorously,"
  said a Google lawyer in a statement.

  All hail Google. The Google-philes fawn as if bashing the Bushies in the
  Bay Area is an act of courage, when it's the most popular -- and probably
  profitable -- thing a company can do.

  Meanwhile, back in Beijing, Google has agreed to filter out sites that the
  Chinese government doesn't like. The Chinese government won't have to rely
  on its fleet of monitoring devices that block out "subversive" content from
  the West, such as information on the Tiananmen Square protest, Tibet and
  Taiwan. Google will do the dirty work.

  The Mountain View, Calif., company will withhold e-mail and blogging
  services, it says, to protest the Chinese filtering. A Google statement
  explained that "while removing search results is inconsistent with Google's
  mission, providing no information" is "more inconsistent."

  It may be only a matter of time before Google starts acting like other
  Internet providers that also censor for China. Last year, Yahoo helped the
  Chinese government prosecute a dissident reporter. This month, Microsoft
  shut down a pesky blog. As The Associated Press reported, Microsoft's
  service in China bars such terms as "democracy" and "human rights."

  Here's a thought: Google could ban the phrase, "Don't be evil." I
  understand that Google wants to make a profit. I just don't know how
  company execs garner the image of little guys standing up to big, bad
  government.

  Google can say no to the Bushies and know that it won't lose any business,
  its executives won't go to jail and their children will not get run over by
  tanks. In the country where those things could happen, Google is a
  collaborator.

  --
  -----------------
  R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
  The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
  44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
  "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
  [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
  experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
  _______________________________________________
  Clips mailing list
  Clips at philodox.com
  http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'