The Privacy International "Race To The Bottom" Report touched off the expected punditry party:
Why Google?
We are aware that the decision to place Google at the bottom of the ranking is likely to be controversial, but throughout our research we have found numerous deficiencies and hostilities in Google's approach to privacy that go well beyond those of other organizations. While a number of companies share some of these negative elements, none comes close to achieving status as an endemic threat to privacy. This is in part due to the diversity and specificity of Google's product range and the ability of the company to share extracted data between these tools, and in part it is due to Google's market dominance and the sheer size of its user base.
I feel like someone should just set up some sort of system where one or two bloggers can be picked as the champion-of-battle of the inevitable reaction. As in, if you think Google is a poor misunderstood maligned gentle giant, go to Matt Cutts' Why I disagree with Privacy International. On the other hand, if you believe Google is an enormous corporation subject to all the negative aspects that come with being a huge business which has a deep interest in collecting personal data, read Shelley Powers On Privacy Redux. Danny Sullivan and Donna Bogatin can be the respective seconds.
Given that there's far more people saying things, than things to say, I'll leave it that.
By Seth Finkelstein | posted in google | on June 11, 2007 01:55 PM (Infothought permalink)
Thanks, Seth. I accept that sword and look forward t the dawn meeting.
Who gets to be Majikthise and which one Vroomfondel?
I was going to add more but it seems pointless - no matter how will it change much?
See also
http://authorities.loc.gov