[bestbits] Accountability group puts Google in same league as big oil and big tobacco
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Mon Jul 17 00:50:34 EDT 2017
On Friday 14 July 2017 01:32 AM, James Gannon wrote:
>
> Agree on the final point for sure and 100% on transparency.
>
Sure, everybody is for 100 % transparency, but then only till we
actually begin to talk what that means.
So let me ask you, James, what would the 100% transparency be that you
agree with..... Like civil society groups should disclose their funding
(unless compelling circumstances which makes is counter-productive can
be proved)? This is a long history of that discussion in the matter of
formation and governance of this very group bestbits. Maybe you can
contribute to it. Look forward to hearing your response.
parminder
>
>
> *From:*Renata Avila [mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org]
> *Sent:* 13 July 2017 21:00
> *To:* James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
> *Cc:* Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>; Jeremy Malcolm
> <jmalcolm at eff.org>; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> <
> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Accountability group puts Google in same
> league as big oil and big tobacco
>
>
>
> I respectfully disagree on your restrictive interpretation of ICANN
> mission.
>
>
>
> I also disagree on relaxing accountability on who funds academic
> research and its impact. On the contrary, I think limiting our work to
> some sort of transparency is insufficient. Strict accountability is
> needed to limit the power of such powerful companies (which are
> involved in broader sectors, like defense, health, etc.).
>
>
>
> We need more and better accountability and also make visible how big
> companies (as big Pharma did) are influencing through lobby, research
> and "philanthropy" the public agendas and apply the experience from
> other sector, like public health and the environment.
>
>
>
> Happy to continue the dialogue off list.
>
>
>
> R
>
>
> Renata Avila
>
> *Senior Digital Rights Advisor*
>
> renata.avila at webfoundation.org <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>
>
> *1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC 20005,
> USA* *| **www.webfoundation.org* <http://www.webfoundation.org/>* |
> Twitter: @webfoundation*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:52 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net
> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
>
> No because the auction funds are also bounded by ICANN mission.
>
>
>
> I think that we should trust academics to be able to conduct
> research in an independent manner, that we need to stop looking at
> the GAFA conspiracy theories and that we shouldn’t sully those
> academics who are working on critical areas of research for us by
> claiming that once they are ever ‘tainted’ by corporate funding
> that they should forever have to walk around with a a
> Google/FB/etc disclaimer on every word they write or talk they
> give or opinion they express.
>
>
>
> *From:*Renata Avila [mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org
> <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>]
> *Sent:* 13 July 2017 20:31
>
>
> *To:* James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net
> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>
> *Cc:* Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com
> <mailto:raquino at gmail.com>>; Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org
> <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>>; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>> <
> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Accountability group puts Google in same
> league as big oil and big tobacco
>
>
>
> Well, there is more:
>
>
>
> The proceeds from New gTLD Program auctions, *which will total
> more than $230 million, are being reserved.* The multistakeholder
> community will develop proposals for how these proceeds could be
> distributed. A community-based drafting team is currently working
> on a charter for a Cross-Community Working Group that will create
> recommendations for Board consideration.
>
>
>
> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2016-07-28-en
>
>
>
> My point:
>
>
>
> - Google funds everything, especially advocacy and research in
> poor countries.
>
> - If not google, it is Facebook.
>
> - That harms legitimacy.
>
>
>
> Funds are really scarce for research, advocacy and policy.
>
>
>
> Meanwhile, ICANN = 230 million plus 70 million reserves.
>
>
>
> What if we advocate for those funds to *support public interest
> research*, via a Foundation or similar, instead of Google (or
> other companies) funding research.
>
>
>
> Is it clear now?
>
>
>
> R
>
>
> Renata Avila
>
> *Senior Digital Rights Advisor*
>
> renata.avila at webfoundation.org <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>
>
> *1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC 20005,
> USA* *| **www.webfoundation.org*
> <http://www.webfoundation.org/>* | Twitter: @webfoundation*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:21 PM, James Gannon
> <james at cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
>
> The ICANN reserve fund is designed to keep ICANN running in
> the event of financial distress and is not subject to any
> external use outside of ICANN, and even if it was it would
> still be bound by ICANNs mission.
>
> Im not seeing the relationship to the current discussion at all.
>
>
>
> -James
>
>
>
> *From:*Renata Avila [mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org
> <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>]
> *Sent:* 13 July 2017 20:19
> *To:* James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net
> <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>
> *Cc:* Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com
> <mailto:raquino at gmail.com>>; Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org
> <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>>; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>> <
> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Accountability group puts Google in
> same league as big oil and big tobacco
>
>
>
> Its reserve fund.
>
>
>
> It could be modified, any time, to support broader areas...
>
>
>
> Figures in USD (millions) Page 9.
>
>
>
> Link: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/fy17-unaudited-financials-31mar17-en.pdf
>
>
>
> R.
>
>
> Renata Avila
>
> *Senior Digital Rights Advisor*
>
> renata.avila at webfoundation.org
> <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>
>
> *1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC 20005,
> USA* *| **www.webfoundation.org*
> <http://www.webfoundation.org/>* | Twitter: @webfoundation*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:09 PM, James Gannon
> <james at cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
>
> Can you elaborate on this piece? What ICANN money, ICANN
> does some very limited funding of research but doesn’t
> fund anything in the area of advocacy, and there is very
> little research that is within ICANNs mission anyway.
>
>
>
> -J
>
>
>
> *From:*bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net>
> [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net>] *On Behalf
> Of *Renata Avila
> *Sent:* 13 July 2017 20:05
> *To:* Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com
> <mailto:raquino at gmail.com>>
> *Cc:* Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org
> <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>>; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>> <
> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Accountability group puts Google
> in same league as big oil and big tobacco
>
>
>
> I second Renata.
>
>
>
> Our research and advocacy space is suffering from a
> funding problem and it is harming its credibility. It will
> be great to have a larger pool of funds supporting our
> efforts, which are becoming more mainstream and relevant
> for the next 50 years (especially for developing
> countries). The production of research is extremely
> concentrated and, as austerity is rampant all over the
> World, State funding to research is shrinking by the day
> even for developed countries at the same pace as tax
> evasion (or elusion) (Google is not guilt free in this
> area http://fortune.com/2016/03/11/apple-google-taxes-eu/)
>
>
>
> And in small countries, priorities of both governments and
> private sector to support research support traditional
> areas, such as health or education. Certainly, local funds
> are not supporting local advocacy efforts for privacy, net
> neutrality, etc.
>
>
>
> I think the problem is deeper and I think that, in order
> to continue our work and efforts with impartiality and
> credibility, we need a coordinated effort to get a diverse
> pool of donors and ways towards sustainability. I think
> the comparisons of Big Oil funding Greenpeace, when we
> talk about giants like Facebook or Google, is valid now.
>
>
>
> What about all the ICANN money? Will it be enough to fund
> all global and local advocacy and at least part of the
> relevant research? A global fund? Crowdfunding for
> advocacy and more pressure on governments for research?
>
>
>
> R
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Renata Avila
>
> *Senior Digital Rights Advisor*
>
> renata.avila at webfoundation.org
> <mailto:renata.avila at webfoundation.org>
>
> *1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC 20005,
> USA* *| **www.webfoundation.org*
> <http://www.webfoundation.org/>* | Twitter: @webfoundation*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
> <raquino at gmail.com <mailto:raquino at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Yes it does.
>
> Unless they are transparent about it and clear about
> it not interfering with their research ethics.
>
>
>
> In the public education system in developing countries
> it is quite common to see funding being misused.
> Researchers who get money from international
> organizations, even some national ones, using public
> universities to advance an agenda. And yes, this can
> be sometimes an astroturfing exercise.
>
>
>
> Which is why access and production of knowledge needs
> to be always transparent and public.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately most of internet policy has not waken up
> to this yet. I wonder if it ever will.
>
>
>
> Em 13/07/2017 15:09, "Jeremy Malcolm"
> <jmalcolm at eff.org <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>> escreveu:
>
> But here's an article putting the other side of
> the story:
>
> http://www.chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Cry-Foul-at-Their/240635
>
> We place Google Policy Fellows at EFF, too. Does
> that mean that whatever work they do for the rest
> of their careers is tainted by the few thousand
> they received to support their living expenses as
> an EFF fellow?
>
> On 13/7/17 3:21 am, parminder wrote:
>
> Google has spent millions funding
> academic research in the US and Europe
> <https://www.theguardian.com/world/europe-news> to
> try to influence public opinion and
> policymakers, a watchdog has claimed.
>
> Over the last decade, Google has
> funded research papers that appear to
> support the technology company’s
> business interests and defend against
> regulatory challenges such as
> antitrust and anti-piracy, the
> US-based Campaign for Accountability
> (CfA) said in a report
> <https://campaignforaccountability.org/new-report-reveals-googles-extensive-financial-support-for-academia/>.
>
> “Google uses its immense wealth and
> power to attempt to influence
> policymakers at every level,” said
> Daniel Stevens, CfA executive director.
>
> ................
>
> Academics were directly funded by
> Google in more than half of the cases
> and in the rest of the cases funded
> indirectly by groups or institutions
> supported by Google, the CfA said.
> Authors, who were paid between $5,000
> and $400,000 (£3,900-£310,000) by
> Google, did not disclose the source of
> their funding in 66% of all cases, and
> in 26% of those cases directly funded
> by Google, according to the report.
>
> ...........
>
> “Whenever Google’s bad behaviour is
> exposed, it invariably points the
> finger at someone else,” said Stevens.
> “Instead of deflecting blame, Google
> should address its record of academic
> astroturfing, which puts it in the
> same league as big oil and big tobacco
> <https://www.theguardian.com/world/series/tobacco-a-deadly-business>.”
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/13/google-millions-academic-research-influence-opinion
>
> As we know Google has recently been fined $
> 2.7 billion for anti-competitive practices by
> the EU regulator, which only means that in all
> countries that are too weak to take on google
> (or benefit from its profits, meaning the US)
> Google remains in violation of competition
> (and many other) laws..... All this Google
> funded research and advocacy, of dont regulate
> the Internet (read, Internet companies), are
> playing a dangerous game, seriously
> compromising public interest.
>
> It is time we declare the honeymoon of civil
> society and academic love for digital global
> corporations over. They are today like big oil
> companies -- no doubt the latter provide what
> is still the main energy resource that keeps
> our societies ticking but in the bargain they
> very often, and systemically, indulge in stuff
> that needs academics and NGOs to be watching
> against. It is pretty difficult to undertake
> such watching while taking considerable money
> from them. It is a simple truism, but the
> digital sector tends to ignore it.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jeremy Malcolm
>
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
>
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
>
> https://eff.org
>
> jmalcolm at eff.org <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>
>
>
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
>
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
>
>
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
>
> PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20170717/cdaa0fa7/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list