Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Consumers are rightfully distraught by how Google deals with privacy issues.
Transcript of Consumers are rightfully distraught by how Google deals with privacy issues.
Google's web Google facing criticism over relationship with US government, privacy
Meet Google Street View Closure Is Google changing from hero... responds to Privacy Concerns The stakeholders Corporations Consumers Governments Behavorial study in German Why should you care? What do you mean, neutral? Inflating the private sphere
Because Google cares about you! Bigger brothers to worry about?
Privacy Corporate governance Google retaliates Consumer watchdog defense Controversial Author suggestivity Actual
“Google's held itself to be the company that says its motto is, 'don't be evil,' and they also advocate openness for everyone else,” Simpson said. “We're trying to hold them to their own word.”
In January 2009, Consumer Watchdog said that Google was trying to get Congress to authorize the sale of electronic health records. Google said those accusations were “100 percent false and unfounded.”
Consumer Watchdog's most recent beef is about the relationship of Google and the Obama administration and it is detailed in a 32-page report.
The report questions a decision by NASA that allowed Google executives to use its Moffett Federal Airfield near Google base of operations. Although H211, a company run by Google upper level executives, pays NASA rent, they enjoy permissions to the airfield that other mega companies or influential groups don't have, Simpson said.
The advocacy group says that Google spends millions of dollars lobbying (bribing?) Congress to leave them alone. They want to use Issa’s authority to force Google to address the troubling questions that many technology consumers want answered.
to a villain? A mouthpiece for Google questioned Consumer Watchdog’s motives. Some people have questioned the organization’s connections to Microsoft, and its complaints about online privacy efforts have also zeroed in on Google, with the group hardly mentioning other online portals, including Microsoft, Facebook, and other Web-based businesses in the last two years.
“This is just the latest in a long list of press stunts from an organization that admits to working closely with our competitors,” said the Google spokesperson according to PC World.
But Consumer Watchdog receives no funds from Microsoft or any other business enemy of Google, John Simpson, consumer advocate with the group, told PC World. “We don't have any relationship with Microsoft at all … We don't take any of their money,” he said. Protecting the privacy of consumers Refusing to comply with the law Google blocks the abillity to upload files to Youtube through cellular devices It was just a year ago when South Korean Internet users praised Google as a safe haven for privacy while debating government attempts to impose restrictions on the Web.
However, the U.S. Internet giant now appears to be struggling to keep its "don't be evil'' motto here, with local users expressing anger over the company's supposedly lax support for its mobile content and blogging services. Didn't start with an amazing fact, question or quote, but it suits the writer's neutrality. While no one doubts that Google is becoming more essential to Korean users with the Web going mobile, this also means that its services are destined to draw larger scrutiny. And based on the criticism aired through the media or on comments in the blogosphere, Google doesn't seem to be doing so well so far in the court of public opinion. Appealing to probability "It seems that the users are ending up the only losers in the fight of egos between the Korean government and Google.'' - Seems to show neutrality - Succumbs to hasty generalization Google is making a business decision Trying to be consistent Doesn't deal with local laws Trying to stop cyber bullies and libels Google is misinterpreting the law on purpose Textcube, originally created by Tatter and Company (TNC), was bought by Google in 2008, marking the Internet giant's first major acquisition in Korea.
However, in an announcement last month on its official blog, Google announced that Textcube will be absorbed by its main blogging platform, Blogger.com, a departure from its earlier stance that the two services would be developed separately.
Some Textcube users are now expressing frustration about their Web pages being taken over by Blogger.com. Neutral, but not really What does Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, think about the issue? Nice anekdote in favor of google The first thing everyone agrees on is that Street View, which shows gives users a virtual tour of cities, doesn’t break any laws. It is perfectly legal to take pictures of public areas and publish them on the internet, said lawyer Dominik Boecker, a Cologne-based lawyer who specialises in data protection issues.
The German website, Sightwalk, is already doing something similar to Street View but has attracted no apparent controversy, according to Boecker. The attention given to Google probably has something to do with its being a dominating US internet giant “I don’t think it’s the people being overly concerned, as much as it is the politicians. Most people are on holidays … the second tier of politicians are stepping forward … trying to get into the press, creating a tempest in a teacup,” he said. (lawyer Dominik Boecker.
He’s not alone in that view. Sascha Lobo, probably Germany’s best known technology blogger, said Street View has given a lot of politicians an easy issue to cling on to Among them, it questioned why the company needed to retain its server logs for 18 to 24 months, saying the practice does not appear to meet Europe's data protection rules. The server logs, which include search histories, can be linked to individual users and therefore constitute personal data, the group said.
Fleischer responded by saying that Google would make data anonymous in its server logs after 18 months, the low end of its previous commitment. "We ... firmly reject any suggestions that we could meet our legitimate interests in security, innovation and anti-fraud efforts with any retention periods shorter than 18 months," Fleischer wrote. Given a choice of two online stores, one of which charged €1 less for DVDs but demanded to know the customer’s date of birth and monthly income, the vast majority of the students went for the discount.
In fact, even when the discount was scrapped, they were no more likely to pick the privacy-friendly store, even though three quarters said they had a very strong interest in data protection and almost all said they were interested in protecting their personal information.
Appeal to authority
Between the lines pro-google arguments
What do you mean something similar? Lack of counter arguments from the other side
Another appeal to authority Overall argument Supporting argument The company said it needs the log data to improve its search algorithms, fight click fraud and spam, comply with data retention laws, and meet "valid legal orders from law enforcement as they investigate and prosecute serious crimes like child exploitation." Contributing argument Premise Predicate “The private sphere … extends to your surroundings. Disturbing others is the biggest danger someone can create – it’s why someone might complain about (noise from) a playground five blocks away,” he said. (blogger Lobo)
Street View isn’t, strictly speaking, a privacy issue but rather an issue about the way massive amounts of relatively innocuous information are put together and made easily available, without someone having to do the legwork of, for instance, travelling to a person’s home to see what it looks like from the sidewalk. Moving the goal post or a solid argument? Lawyer Dominik Boecker said that government intrusion into personal data is a considerably greater concern than anything Google is doing. He pointed, for instance, to the law, overturned by Germany’s Constitutional Court earlier this year that allowed authorities to keep every person’s phone and internet records for at least six months, or the fact social welfare recipients have to hand over large amounts of personal data.
Moving the goalpost
Appeal to emotion or even appeal to fear? The university city of Göttingen, where Schindler lives, has also been home to some of Germany’s most famous thinkers. Why, he asked, should a keen physics student in another country be prevented from seeing Max Planck’s former house just because its current, temporary resident wants it blurred out?
“I’m very interested to see whether this is a tipping point, where people say, ‘This is ridiculous. Bashing Google was fun but now it’s becoming a witch hunt and some people are using the issue of privacy to fight against innovation. (Matthias schindler wikimedia project manager) - Quoting out of context
- Wrong direction
- False attribution Solid ending of the article It noted that the E.U.'s own Data Retention Directive will require companies to retain such data for 6 to 18 months when new laws go into effect by 2009. Since few countries have passed their retention laws yet, "we have no choice but to be prepared to retain log data for up to 24 months," Fleischer wrote. Google issues are inflated and you should worry about bigger problems One observer, while acknowledging privacy concerns about Google, was critical of the working group for singling out one company. Microsoft and Yahoo have not specified how long they store their log files, he said, and they may retain them for longer than Google. biased treatment Poisoning the well
Strawman argument False attribution The working group in its letter last month cited Google's "market position and ever-growing dominance." It also thanked the company for its "ongoing engagement with the data protection community," especially in contrast with "a lack of engagement by some of the other leading players" in the search industry. Biased conclusion due to false deduction Appeal to fear
Attacking the person
no sources Proper referal Ditch the bad arguments Nice style Meaty enough Level of neutrality Indicate goal Left the reader with questions