Google Open Letter - What Are Your Thoughts?

CtrlAltSpoods on 17/08/2020 - 11:22
Last edited 17/08/2020 - 11:24

Hi all,

I have seen a new warning on Google, and wondering if anyone else has had a read over this, a warning pops up to tell you your search data is at risk due to a new law which will force google to hand over data about what you're searching for to news businesses. To me on first read this just seems like a massive breach of privacy. (It is written as if this info would be handed over to be identifiable to you, and not just an advertising ID)

I understand that Google sells this information any way, but that is why the service is free.

Have a read here: https://about.google/google-in-australia/an-open-letter/ and let me know your thoughts

Internet

Related Stores

Google
Google

Comments

  • netjock on 17/08/2020 - 11:48
    +1

    Believe this is the new law which requires Google to pay for content. I am going to be on neither side of this. But to say that Google makes nothing on driving traffic to sites is simplifying it.

    No difference to currently searching on Google on a topic and clicking through a link to find it is behind a pay wall. Google still makes money if I click through the ads and from businesses who pay to advertise based on keywords.

    Google could have done a Bezos and acquire a news outlet (Washington Post), Google could have got AAP for cheap but obviously they see a cheaper way and it might no longer be so cheap.

    Big business is big because they have out sized profits. When those profits collide us little people get caught in the middle.

  • EhhSteavOhDeav on 17/08/2020 - 11:54
    +13

    The ACCC have a pretty good write-up on the legislation. https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/digital-platforms/draft-…

    It's unsurprising that Google seem to be blowing things out of proportion, and I definitely trust the ACCC more than Google. They also have a pretty in-depth Q&A which specifically states that this won't affect user privacy. It looks like Google just don't want to have to hand over information on how their algorithm works, and the collective bargaining will probably mean less profit for Google.

    This could even be good for users regarding data protection. Google would have to tell News Media platforms exactly what kinda of data they're taking.

    Basically, Google would have to be a lot more transparent regarding a lot of things, and Google obviously aren't big fans of that.

  • leiiv on 17/08/2020 - 11:57
    +1

    Is this Murdoch lobbying power at play?

    • Diji1 on 17/08/2020 - 12:20
      +3

      Google spends more money on lobbying.

      • Caped Baldy on 17/08/2020 - 13:11
        +2

        I'd rather see all Murdoch influence out of this country rather than Google's.

        • payton on 17/08/2020 - 14:26
          +4

          The media, no matter what alignment, is not your friend and placing your trust in news from one side alone is even worse.

  • o53djz7qTPY4der on 17/08/2020 - 12:06
    +3

    Duck Duck Go. The ACCC and Google can go duck themselves.

    • CtrlAltSpoods on 17/08/2020 - 12:25
      +3

      I had set my browsers up to use Duck Duck Go for a while, but I find sometimes the search results are just not quite as spot on as Google for some things.

      The privacy is nice though.

      • OZB Al on 17/08/2020 - 22:39

        I love that if I use ddg I can quickly change search engines, just add a !g to change to a Google search, !staticice to search on staticice, or even !ozbargain to search here!

  • Diji1 on 17/08/2020 - 12:21
    +4

    Google loses money to legislation and then sets about lying to people to try and stop it happening.

    BTW, have you ever wondered why de-anonymised data is not called anonymous data? It's because the identity of the victim can be revealed by anyone holding a third set of data which means it isn't anonymous.

    The mainstream media is used to control the population of Australia given it's owned by two corporations who cooperate closely with power. Watching it is harmful and there is nothing more pathetic than seeing brainwashed journalists dribbling on about how important to democracy they are when their activities are explicitly those that undermine democracy.

  • Chandler on 17/08/2020 - 12:58
    +1

    Started a long post but it got too hard. Suffice to say it's a very complex issue with multiple sides to the story (Google's, the News', Advertisers', Facebook's…)

    Original (unfinished) post below for posterity.

    ~~This is a side effect of all these (currently or previously) "free" services. Both Google and news are hurting due to significantly decreased/ing ad revenue. Due to COVID-19, a lot of companies are dropping marketing budgets.

    A lot of news agencies have already (pre-COVID) pay-walled their material.

    The issue I have here is Google isn't doing anything "wrong". They are indexing and displaying (in relation to a user's search) publicly accessible information.

    The real issue is that Google is #1 in search. News sites need themselves to be in Google's search results to get people going to them and either generating subscription or ad revenue for the news site. But people don't want to pay and don't like the ads - whether due to the disruptive displaying of some, or due to tracking, or something else - and thus block the ads.

    News agencies thus see Google making money (from ad's on Google's results page) from users searching for their articles, but the news agency sees nothing (due to blocked ads or no subscription) - and the news agencies see this as Google's fault and that Google should be paying towards the news agency, even though Google hasn't really done anything apart from aggregate public available information. And the news agencies don't want to just block Google because they'll lose more than they are in the current arrangement. So they want to make Google Pay (heh)~~

  • onetwothreefour on 17/08/2020 - 15:02
    +2

    As long as they don't tell my employer what I do when "working" from home then I'm fine.

  • Digitalco on 17/08/2020 - 17:51

    Wow. Breach of privacy…..

  • Sammy Boi on 17/08/2020 - 20:02
    +3

    My biggest problem is this
    "Hurting the free services you use"
    I feel like this is aimed at pulling the wool over peoples eyes like oh my god I've been using the search engine for years I owe these guys something.

    Data is the most valuable commodity we have and they have made that much money of us and continue to.

  • payton on 18/08/2020 - 11:36

    the 'progressive' tech company is actually a manipulative scumbag. An open letter from the company with the 'Don't be evil' motto :)
    https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/response-to-google-ope…

    • Chandler on 18/08/2020 - 13:14
      +1

      Have a proper read of the legislation - seriously; IANAL, but it's pretty hardcore if my understanding is correct. It also reads a lot like it was written by a news business.

      Issues I see from my understanding of the legislation:

      • The Treasurer determines who a "digital platform" is [see §52C (1)]. They're also suppose to determine if there's a "bargaining imbalance" between the "digital platform" and the "news business", and even if they don't do that their determination is not invalidated [see §52C (2)]
      • Platform Operators (i.e. Google) have to share information about users and the products/services they use [see §52M]. There also doesn't appear to be any time limitation to this sharing, apart from it has to be updated at least annually (i.e. if you stop using the Platform Operator's services for viewing News, they don't (in my understanding) stop sharing your data).
      • Platform Operators have to tell News Businesses if they're changing the search algorithm [see §52N, §52O, §52Q];
      • News Businesses have the authority to edit/remove and disable comments on their content on Platform Operators' services (i.e. Google Plus if it was still a thing). This includes blocking particular individual/s, or in "particular circumstances". [see §52S]

      Please, see the draft bill available here: https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Exposure%20Draft%20Bill%20-%20TREASURY%20LAWS%20AMENDENT%20%28NEWS%20MEDIA%20AND%20DIGITAL%20PLATFORMS%20MANDATORY%20BARGAINING%20CODE%29%20BILL%202020.pdf

      Again - IANAL. The issues I listed above concern me but, especially the pick & choosing and seeming lack of controls/checks & balances/limitations. If anyone with a good law background on here has had a look - please chime in.

  • payton on 21/08/2020 - 09:28

    wow, Google have begun e-begging daily and spamming their users with the yellow ! notification popups now …… on google searches, youtube
    there's a special place in hell for them and frikin Jimmy Wales' yearly wikipedia donation harassment campaign.

  • scotty on 23/08/2020 - 18:25
    +3

    If ACCC is so concerned about having a "healthy news media sector" as per their response to Google, they should request the federal government to

    • Tax Google / Facebook more
    • Fund ABC / SBS more
    • Mandate the extra funding to be used on news & journalism at ABC / SBS, rather than creating niche shows

    and leave Google & news media companies alone on how they run their business…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join