Google spending more on D.C. lobbying
Faced with issues ranging from online ads to copyright laws, Google spent $950,000 lobbying Washington in the second quarter, according to a federal government database.
The amount compares with the $880,000 that Google spent on lobbying in the first quarter--and the $2.84 million it spent for all of 2008.
Among the issues that Google lobbied on: intellectual property, copyright related to the Google Book Search settlement, and privacy and competition surrounding online advertising.
Google has been under fire from the Justice Department over the company's settlement of a lawsuit with book publishers on digital rights issues.
Washington is also thinking of limiting the type of information that online advertisers can collect from consumers, according to a Wall Street Journal blog on Google's lobbying efforts. That's another hot button topic for Google, which depends on Internet ads for 97 percent of its sales.
"There is a growing number of issues being debated in Washington affecting the Internet and our users, and we feel it is important to be involved in those debates," said Adam Kovacevich, a Google spokesman told the Journal.
Although Google has upped its lobbying budget, other high-tech giants still pay more, according to the federal database: Microsoft spent $1.89 million to lobby in the second quarter, IBM paid $1.34 million, AT&T spent $3.06 million, and Verizon Communications and Verizon Wireless combined shelled out $4.37 million.
The government's searchable database of lobbying activity is available on the U.S. Senate Web site.
(via Wall Street Journal)
Lance Whitney wears a few different technology hats--journalist, Web developer, and software trainer. He's a contributing editor for Microsoft TechNet Magazine and writes for other computer publications and Web sites. You can follow Lance on Twitter at @lancewhit. Lance is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and he is not an employee of CNET. 
I always got the feeling that Microsoft always receives a different "treatment" than other companies (especially Google and Apple).
It seems that it is OK for other companies to do things that MS shouldn't do. And people (and Cnet in particular) seem not to be bothered about it.
Not that MS is a saint, but I'm always puzzled about this.
Last I checked, the government was incrementally gathering more and more information and pushing for more and more restrictions on the individual. The only difference is that in the last few months we've moved toward that full sprint.
Google gathers info you agree to give them, or doesn't if you choose not to deal with them. You have no defense against Omnipotent government...by definition it's Forced. I love the rants against the evil corporations (with whom you interact voluntarily) while The Party cements itself into every aspect of your life regardless of what you say.
So you dont vote i take it? you can argue that theres not much choice but you vote for those who will be resistant or receptive to special interests.. i wouldnt call that forced.
" I love the rants against the evil corporations (with whom you interact voluntarily) while The Party cements itself into every aspect of your life regardless of what you say."
My point being that when using anything of Google your data is their property.. they dont have to ask you for permission to use it... as it was never yours by design.
Saying "once I agreed to give them the data I couldn't do anything about it!" is like me complaining what once you sold me your car my money belonged to you and there was nothing I could do about it. Well duh, I agreed to pay you for the car; I also could've not bought it.
What you seem to be arguing for is your "right" to be provided with their services while also dictating the terms. You're free to not patronize them, to find other services who you think have better terms, etc, but you aren't free to coerce them into your terms any more than I should be able to force you to sell me your car for less than you're willing to part with it for.
The alternative is to strip parasite politicians' ability to push their views on the unwashed masses. If they don't have the powers over the things they shouldn't to begin with, there's no influence to buy.
You cant lay everything on Congress.. its greedysoulless companies that ultimately do the harm.
Enron was actually pushing for more government interference, because like most energy companies they're basically psuedo-government entities. The batch of legal changes was a stack of additional legal hoops and transaction rules that constricted who could provide what.
It was a pretty Orwellian stretch to call it "deregulation" and a "free" market, because it ADDED regulation and BLOCKED competition. Enron supported it because they profited from it. Smaller energy companies couldn't afford the huge overhead to get past government restrictions, their prices were mostly set by fiat, and having that many layers of government makes it easier to hide things. Divorcing prices and costs (what any government program does) means the math doesn't have to add up and allows for all sorts of deception (see DMV medicine for a current example).
Coincidentally, they were huge supporters of cap-and-tax because it would force more California companies to buy their energy, and at higher prices. Gotta love the move from free minds and markets to the politics of push, favors, and interference.
Google doesn't need to lobby to have a say. The average citizen doesn't get this benefit, why give it to Google?
In fact, less influence by Google and other corporations/special interest groups would probably make regulation a little easier for Congress and allow them to pass more sensible laws for the rest of us not just big business.
- by BigAl35540 October 31, 2009 4:40 AM PDT
- I don't care what they say, advertising doesn't belong on the Internet, it should be open and available for all people of the world! It turns out that Google is one of the biggest violators of your privacy on the Internet! Tracking software is in just about anything they put out and they share this information with their advertisers. That is a blatant and unwarranted violation of our privacy! Consequently I have loaded software that blocks ALL advertisements on Google and other websites and that is our right to run such software. I run an OS that doesn't permit reporting and have set it's browser to absolutely reject third party cookies. I also don't run the Google Toolbar within my browser! This assures Google will not even know I exist! When I go on Google, I want the information I'm looking for and nothing else! That's exactly how I now get it! I don't even get those shady sponsored sites Google has allowed on their service that have been spreading malware. This has been talked about a lot recently within security circles. It's up to you, the computer user to defend your privacy on the Internet! As far as I'm concerned Google can find some other way of making money, they are certainly innovative enough.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)