71–80 of 245 posts
From a PR point of view Google has handled this whole privacy debacle very well. By keeping a very low profile on privacy, they’ve made sure Facebook takes the heat. Facebook’s horrendous management of the issue has also allowed Google to slide under the radar on the topic. Generally I think Page is doing the right thing by keeping a low public profile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is correct, they rejected anyone but top officials. https://www.law.com/2018/09/04/after-senate-intelligence-com... (Disclosure: I work at Google)
Of course they only wanted the senior flesh. I'm not trying to dunk on Congress too hard, but so much of their public hearings are about the spectacle of gov officials holding "someone" accountable. And it's bipartisan too, the spectacle. The Dems were looking to further the Russia election manipulation spectacle, and I'd guess Repubs were hoping to advance their narratives of "shadowbanning" and ideological search r…
This is how the sausage is made.
From a PR point of view Google has handled this whole privacy debacle very well. By keeping a very low profile on privacy, they’ve made sure Facebook takes the heat. Facebook’s horrendous management of the issue has also allowed Google to slide under the radar on the topic. Generally I think Page is doing the right thing by keeping a low public profile.
I would feel much better about being a google user if they were standing up strongly for the original "do no evil" ethos. Where is Page indeed? It really seems like the ethical stance has faded away.
Idealism goes away once a company has reached a certain size and has to reach for big growth like Google. They all have to turn into big faceless corporations. That's why we shouldn't celebrate things like trillion dollar companies or the richest man in the world but we should celebrate small companies. That's where ethics and also innovation can happen .
That said, celebrating billionaires (many of whom trampled on others to get there) leaves a bad taste.
I wish we had more cooperatives...
From a PR point of view Google has handled this whole privacy debacle very well. By keeping a very low profile on privacy, they’ve made sure Facebook takes the heat. Facebook’s horrendous management of the issue has also allowed Google to slide under the radar on the topic. Generally I think Page is doing the right thing by keeping a low public profile.
Google didn’t play as fast and loose with sharing data as Facebook did. That helps.
It's kind-of Congress' own fault here. They so often have these... events, that are mostly for show and for the politicians to grandstand making them seem tough to voters but really have very little substance. I doubt any meaningful policy ever comes of them. Doesn't everybody know by now that they're grilling these CEO's in front of the cameras and begging them for money behind the cameras? "outrage" indeed.
Completely disagree. I don’t know how you could say that. Business leaders have to answer for their companies actions, and senate hearings is one way we have of them doing that. And as wybiral said, it was a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. Maybe I’m jaded, but your response reminds me of those from Theranos employees on this very forum when it was criticised.
We have a law enforcement and judicial system for that. Most Senators don't know anything about business or technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to the article they did offer to send someone else. Presumable the senate was not satisfied with anyone other than the top guy.
They did seem to find Sandberg acceptable.
Google offered Walker, who was just promoted to the position back in July, and has no operational control over the company.
People just seem propagandistically pro-Google on here. You’re mostly pretty darn smart people. I don’t get it.