WSJ: Google 'agonizing' over user privacy, 'vision document' suggests selling data
By Nilay Patel 
posted August 10th 2010 1:41PM
posted August 10th 2010 1:41PM
It was just last week that the Wall Street Journal reported Microsoft's decision to limit private browsing in IE8 as part of its ongoing series on online privacy, and today the focus is on Google, which is said be "agonizing" over the balance between user privacy and advertising opportunities. It's a long piece that you should read in full, but essentially the WSJ claims that Larry Page and Sergey Brin have gone from strictly forbidding any efforts to track users online to a more subtle interpretation of their famous "don't be evil" motto which allows them to leverage user data and sell finely targeted ads without "exploiting customers." According to the WSJ, the change in attitude came with the rise of upstart ad firms that lacked Google's scruples and the search giant's purchase of DoubleClick, which led to Google's first use of cookies. What's more, once at Google, former DoubleClick exec Aitan Weinberg produced a seven-page "vision document" that outlined several strategies to profit from user data, ranging from building a "trading platform" for user data to allowing users to pay directly and get rid of ads all together. (Google says the document was for "brainstorming" and that some of the proposals are "complete non-starters.")The WSJ also says Google's working hard on that rumored social networking service to go head-to-head with Facebook, complete with a "like" button it can put across the web to build an even better profile of your likes and dislikes, and that the company is considering mixing user data from across services like Gmail and Google Checkout to make those profiles even deeper, all while trying to balance privacy, security, and legal interests. This balance appears to be causing significant tension between everyone at Google, Larry and Sergey included: the WSJ says the two founders have had shouting matches over things like selling "interest-based" ads, and that Sergey has been more reluctant than Larry to take advantage of user data. Like we said, it's a good read, so hit the source link and get to it.
@maxxorz
An another note, did you know that the word "ambition" used to carry a negative connotation.
@paul34
I don't believed that I adopted an anti-business stance- I just happen to have a philosophical issue with the sheer amount of greed among people who already have everything. I understand that the counterpoint to that issue is "how do you think they got that way in the first place", but they just don't need to sell us out to grow their business. They don't have to. They just want to. While I'm not going to do anything hasty like switch to Bing, I will remain open to other options and remind myself that I'm not necessarily a human to them as I am a dollar sign.
Take your tin foil caps off people. Anyone with half a brain knows Google uses some anonymous data collected for profit. Its the primary way it stays in business alongside ad's. If you truly want no one to have any information on you get rid of your credit cards, computers, laptops, cell phone, etc.
Live in a house with candle light and hunt down your food in the wild. And then someone is STILL watching you
@iLikezGadgets
I totally agree.
@iLikezGadgets
WORD.
Besides: If you haven't done anything wrong, what the hell should you have to hide???
Everyone knows they're selling information. How else would they get so rich.
People honestly expect there is a company on earth that just gives away free stuff, and not expect anything back? Seriously?
@Ben64
some people don't understand capitalism...
Just change the motto to "Do some evil..." People who do no evil are boring anyway....
I like google and their products, but over the last few years these stories have been getting more regular and more scary.
For example, street view + 'accidentally' stealing wireless info.
Right now I feel as though Microsoft are more of a trustworthy outfit, and thats saying something.
Its from 2008 and it was just a brainstorming. Read Giz for the real story.
Didn't google give users the ability to see and manage all the stored data assoited to there account...
If people ignore this... It is there problem. Also who cares if an algorithm knows that I do searches for starcraft2, or asian porn... it is not like anyone is reading it.
Typos brought to you by swype :)
are people now just knowing google profits from advertising, if i'm not mistaken isn't that why apple introrduced IAd to compete with google.
Not sure how you get 'ride' of an ad? Does it have a saddle?
They're starting to turn *puts on tin foil hat*.
You mean all these "free" apps/tools/services from Google weren't FREE after all?!? No way!
And yet there are idiots out there that blindly support them as if they were Jebus reincarnate.
Now that soooo many of their competitors are down and gone, Google can very easily turn around and either sell it's data, or start-charging for it's services... or BOTH. And what is anyone going to do about it? Nothing.
Sometimes FREE has a much higher price than many people have ever imagined.
@Hazdaz
While many people think Apple's products are expensive, if you read their 10K, Google's profit margin is even higher than Apple.
@Hazdaz
+1 and I couldn't agree more. I have never used a Google app or service, and never will.
The fact that they (or Yahoo or Bing) shows ads on their search results doesn't bother me any more than seeing certain ads on certain cable TV channels. It's the fact that they already scan emails in GMail to display ads. Next they'll be showing ads based on what's in your GoogleDocs files, and selling what they find to others on the "trading platform".
"Google - All your data are belong to us. And whomever we choose to sell it to."
@Ben64 That's kinda silly though since virtually all software companies have higher profit margins because they have low material costs. You can't really do a straight comparison though since while their margins are high their revenues tend to be lower. A car company on the other hand usually has very low margins but will have very high revenues because cars are expensive. But that doesn't mean that a car company can't make more money than a software company, just that each industry has different standards for their margins.
Apple has high margins because while it is a hardware manufacturer it also makes a huge amount of money off of software and media (Apps, iTunes, etc.) as well as a cut of the revenue stream from carriers for the iPhone. And in a sense the Apple tax on their computers largely amounts to people paying extra for OS X.
I dont think the big issue is Google using Ads. I mean everyone know that. And I dont think its a problem when say I type in a search and an ad come from that specific search. Thats fine with me too. I think its the talk of using personal data to sell to ad agencies. When i see stuff such as "used for highly personalized tracking of individuals." and "advertisers want to target people based on more specific personal information such as hobbies, income, illnesses or circles of friends" (source WSJ) then that does leave room for concern. Especially if there is no way to opt out of releasing the data Google has collect from my search history, emails, ect. which Google could and would certainly use if they move down this path.
@DaBears
I feel the same way. I have no problem with them making ads based on searches. It's selling my personal data to other companies that I have an issue with.
Stop giving these Chinese collaborators and suspected NSA data miners any more information than absolutely necessary.
http://www.startpage.com/
"... and one day an advertising company will rule the world..."
The end is coming...
I would pay for an ad-free google, and either way I'm using adblock.
I think that many of us are focused on the wrong elements of this topic. The media industry has historically had a symbiotic relationship with marketers in order to leverage their reach. It's no different for organizations like Google who are providing us with free services in exchange for being able to leverage their reach.
The conversation should instead focus on transparency and data collection. When we use services like GMail or Google Apps we are gaining a tangible benefit; free SaaS. My concern turns to where else my marketing value is going. Is it supporting things that are tangible to me? Can I control the information? How about letting ME best decide where to put it to use. Maybe I want to support a Band or Blog with my "audience dollars". How about a choice to pay for some of these services (or content) at the same rate they might earn from advertising.
I think there exists a compromise. There's no reason why we can't make "ad-supported" work for everyone.
I had forgotten that they bought DoubleClick.
That's like stabbing yourself with a syringe full of evil.
This is a good example of why peoples' anger at big companies such as M/S or (apparently, now) Google is mis-guided. What is Google's "play" here? What happens if they don't cave? Short answer, someone else will cave in, track user data, make a freakin' fortune and begin to displace Google in specific segments of search or ads, which will impact Google's revenue stream, resulting in less robust (and possibly less free) products from Google, further shrinking their revenue stream . . . and the cycle repeats.
So, the question REALLY becomes: do you want Google to be the firm that is doing this (and is perhaps, more careful about treading on your privacy toes) or do you want some upstart who is looking to make money and enter the segment doing this?
Don't be evil. Well, unless you stand to make a fuck-load of money.
Replaced my Google search icon on my desktop. I'm using Bing now. Works pretty well. Had to do something .. Can't just stand there and take it.
And this is why some people prefer to pay for certain services.
haha. everyone throws everything into the free basket (google calendar, gmail, etc) and it gets sold to the highest bidder. there is such as thing as someone having too much power and info. you topple one king and up pops the next king. the endless cycle. the king is dead, long live the king!
Why does anybody see this as a big surprise?
Google have been doing this for years. Just have a look at your browser history and see how much you have sent to GoogleAnalytics when you didn't even know it. If you have an Android phone you are giving them information any time you use any Google service and any browser (even if you have replaced the default).
Don't think you are any better using Bing - MS have been doing it for even longer but, as usual, failed to realise how powerful it was (look for info sent to atdmt btw).
Even Apple who I used to thing were money grabbing bastards but at least open about being money grabbing bastards are now leaping into it.
The internet is a shopping mall. Be careful whose store you get dragged into.
God, I'm so bored of Google....
How the hell did we get to this point?
Huh! Who the f**k is Brin,Page and Schmidt?!
Do you go to their church, house, temple, golf course whatever? No you don't. They are a bunch of greedy ass corporate pirates and we have given them all types of power by being complacent. They gather your location(for the government I tell you!), likes, dislikes etc and all you do and say,"GOOGLE IS TAKING OVER THE WORLD". OMFG!
They don't care about anything but the bottom line. S***w them!!!
Don't be evil. Sometimes.
Anyone concerned about privacy should be alarmed when YouTube (owned by YouTube) asks them to link their account to Facebook and Gmail.
* Then should shiver some more when you look up http://wikileaks.org/
* Then should shiver some more when they learn about http://www.cryptome.org
* Then should shiver some more when they realise anyone with real opinions on the net - blogs and YouTube included - is being censored to control any dissent or information against the government (yes, in so-called free countries)
* Then should shiver some more to know that they aren't really free and don't really elect their chosen leaders; they are bought
* Then should shiver some more knowing that more of their basic rights are being taken away in the name of anti-terrorism. Every part of their life is increasingly being micro-managed. Your sovereignty is being totally eroded bit by bit. Most people don't mind as long as it happens slowly, not in one big shot.
* Then should shiver some more when they realise more taxes are being introduced to capitalise on the hard-working tax-payers concern for the environment (and laws like this are being shaped worldwide)
* Then should shiver some more when they realise so-called terrorist attacks have been staged and are being staged to create a fake enemy while the tax-payer is being drained and their countries reach record debt to the bankers lending money to the governments of the world (with vested interests in keeping them in debt and financing wars)
* Then should realise that what they are working for is to bail-out the richest corporations on earth (coincidentally with representation in the government)
* Then should shiver some more when mass media is an arm of those in power rather than a voice of some truth-telling and independence. Independence is silenced and killed...
There is nothing new here.
Except perhaps knowing this is the system we live under and starting to use products like http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ for basic email privacy.
And TrueCrypt. For basic computer privacy.
And Adblock Plus for Firefox to keep the advertisers out of your face.
And BetterPrivacy for Firefox to keep supercookies out of your face.
And using cash whenever you can.
And anything else that helps preserve basic privacy, as small as they may be.
And fighting for your rights and informing others of what's going on.
Google or anyone else will never be an advocate for your privacy, and there is so much that goes behind closed doors that we never know about. We just hear about the public face of the corporation.
Don't give away your private information so easily unless you want to be controlled and threatened more easily.
We have enough tracking going on as it is (phone, ISP, etc). Google is not your friend. Their business depends on increasingly violating your privacy, basically. Not that their competitors (Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL, etc) are any better.
Anyone concerned about privacy should be alarmed when YouTube (owned by YouTube) asks them to link their account to Facebook and Gmail.
---------------
Of course I meant "owned by Google" above.
I like how people are complaining about Google ads.
1.) Google provides free services. If you were to ask me right now, if I rather pay $5 a month for gmail, or have a free version with ads, I would take the free version with ads in a heart beat.
2.) People keep saying that Google ads are so annoying. Seriously, am I the only one that uses a web browser with tabs? If I am on youtube, and the clip has an ad, I open a new tab and do something else (i.e. check stocks, look at cool gadget stuff on newegg, etc.). How many of you are actually watching every second of every ad?
In terms of the whole "I WANT PRIVACY" complaint... I can SORT OF understand people saying private stuff over email (I think it is stupid, especially if your connection is not encrypted), but with the exception of email, how many people honestly post stuff they want or need to keep private on Google? Even if Google looked at my Google Calendar, they would know some of my friends birthdays, they would know when I have important meetings planned, and they would know other minor things like when I have a hair cut appointment. I can understand people caring if Google knew private stuff such as bank account information and social security numbers, but really, do people care if Google knows about these little everyday things? If you do, why do you even use the internet?
In terms of private stuff, I never post anything I don't want public on my Google calendar, all of my Google documents are papers that I wrote when I was in college, and I never send any private information via email (bank account stuff, social security stuff, etc.). It's called commonsense.
@Merton
1) I'd rather pay and not have the ads and better service. Back in the late 90s - early 00s I used Juno for internet. They had both free and pay. The pay service was prioritized at the expense of the free service.
2) It's not that I find ads annoying so much as I'd just prefer not to have them.
3) I suppose it depends on the level of detail you put in your calendar. I'm sure you put more information than "Meeting Today" or "Doctor's Appointment". Surely you put who your meeting is with or what doctor you're seeing. Anyone that looks up the doctor's name might figure out what your ailment is, and it could be something you don't want public. Depending on who you work for, the information that you're meeting with a particular person could be sensitive as well. Most people include such pertinent information in their calendars, otherwise it's useless.
@JackInLA
Jack, I think you bring up some very good points.
A few quick responses to the points you raised:
1.) I sort of agree with you, but honestly, I really don't have any major complaints about gmail now where I think they would need to prioritize some type of paid service. I could sympathize with this point more if gmail was unstable, or unreliable, but I can only remember one time (back when I was in high school) when gmail was out when I needed it.
2) I agree, no ads are obviously better than having ads, but the google ads are never really a disturbance to me. Yeah, sometimes when I watch clips on youtube it can get annoying, but I usually have multiple tabs open anyway. And again, if it was between having those ads and not having those ads but having to pay, I'll take the ads.
3) I definitely agree with the point you made. Don't think I have any response here.
Cheers for having a civil discussion and motivating your claims/responses!
I think it's time for an official Boycott Google campaign. First, they team up with Verizon to kill free and open Internet and now this! YOU SUCK GOOGLE!!!
So, Google is set to launch its Google Me social network? Great....
I'll bet it'll be even worse than Facebook regarding the mining, packaging and selling private information to advertisers. This is all very alarming.
There is a new privacy- and security-based social-networking site in the works that won't do any of that, by the way — no gathering and selling information about you to advertisers. No monitoring your every move. No mandated public profiles that reveal far too much information about you. No hidden terms and conditions specifying that, when you join the community, you’re giving them the license to use any content you post however they see fit.
It's called ZeldaB.
Wanna know more? http://www.zeldab.com
Hey dipshits.. nobody is selling your personal information. There's nothing alarming here.. every fucking tech company is selling and using information about your habits and behaviors to improve their services..
One such thing is with Google where they improve ad sense and their overall advertising system.
As long as they are not selling you private information, your address, your credit cards, selling your emails and stuff like that it's all nothing.
You ungrateful little shits. You want everything for free.
Everything we have received, everything positive in tech world in the recent years came from Google and it was mostly free.
For them to use your search keywords or your interests and make money off it is no big deal.. It's THEIR freakin' service.
Grow the fuck up and understand what you are complaining about.
Google is not Microsoft, Google is not stinky and greedy as fuck Apple with superiority complex..Google is a giant that's a positive company. The fact they are having so much issue with this in the first place tells me how much they do care. Not for me, but for some of you pathetic whiners.
If you don't want to give them information don't user their services and STFU.
@Bozster : Shows how naive you are. How are you 100% certain that they don't 'sell' personal info. or at least do something malicious with it? There are several services that explicitly state they don't use your info. at all, though a good number of these are services you probably pay for. Microsoft is actually promoting stricter Internet privacy laws. Sure, not implementing InPrivate browsing by default may seem like something on the contrary, but they were the first browser to have such a feature, as far as I remember. Bing even lets you delete search history from it's site.
"everything positive in tech world in the recent years came from Google" - Lol, do you work for Google or own stock? Or you're probably one of the company's biggest fans. Yeah, like no other web/software/tech company has at all made something positive in the recent year, except Google.
Have you seen how Google has been expanding into a whole lot of different types of services lately? It's because they pretty much want to infiltrate as much as they can into their users' lives as they can, to harvest that info. Google does awesome stuff all right, but don't think it's completely all out of the goodness of the company's heart.
@Bozster Boy, you haven't been keeping up with the news, have you? That "Don't Be Evil" line was 1000% manure, and they've adopted a "some animals are more equal than others" attitude with net neutrality. Just thought you should know!
I think there are two important points people are missing. The first is that you don't get the tracking cookie just when you go to Google's website or use one of their "services". ANYTIME you visit one of the websites that participate in Google advertising program, you get a tracking cookie. It's not a "cost" for using their services, it's a cost for using the internet.
The second consideration is that this is a completely new model for advertising. Sure, there ads in the printed newspaper, but they are the same for everybody. I don't mind those. I mind seeing an ad to "please come back" to a website I visited a week ago, when I'm checking my non gmail email. Think about what it would be like to notice some pimply nerd following you around the mall with a clipboard, writing down every item you pick up. Pretty soon, you'd want to punch him in the face. Then ask yourself, would it be better if this was a burly Harley biker following you? Or multi-national corporation?
Google wants agony? I'll give them agony. Bend over while I insert this flagpole in your turncoat ass.
Well, there is always baidu.com