[governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com

[Guru गुरु]

On 01/08/2013 01:43 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Pariser's "filter bubble" thesis has very little scientific grounding. 
> It is one of those things that has acquired credibility primarily 
> through repetition, and the fact that some people always badly want to 
> believe that "the media" are manipulating us.
>

I think the point of how Internet could have been to be a space to build 
bridging capital and how the 'personalisation' process will erode is 
something we need to ponder over. Can you elaborate on why you think 
"thesis has very little scientific grounding." i assume you are talking 
of social sciences here...

also do you really believe that there is no element of manipulation in 
the media? that this is just what "people always badly want to believe"
(perhaps weapons of mass destruction were indeed found in Iraq ...)


> I recall seeing him on a television program when his claim was put to 
> the test and they conducted searches using two different accounts and 
> got virtually the same results. He was embarrassed.
>

otoh I am embarassed that you think a sole case like this can disprove 
the point!
The article quotes Google as saying the search algorithm uses  57 
signals about the user to provide personalised results, so you think all 
this is in vain?

> On the other hand, I was quite grateful this morning when using a 
> generic professional term to search for an office and discovering that 
> the search had been limited to Syracuse area.
>
> Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking 
> for it, what is to stop you from not using Google?
>
That the only action I can take to address this is by walking away is a 
naive response ... the issue is not of one individual user not using 
google. the issue is given the market dominance of google search engine, 
the terms of engagement are so biased in favor of one party that it is a 
joke to assume contractual law (clicking the i agree button or not 
clicking it) will solve the problem.

> *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org 
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Guru ????
> *Sent:* Monday, January 07, 2013 12:29 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the 
> Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com
>
> On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
>     So do you get all your news from just news.google.com
>     <http://news.google.com> and other google search results, instead
>     of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees
>     about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church?
>
>     And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search?
>
>     And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have
>     actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it?
>      Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action,
>     statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc.
>
>
> Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or 
> having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality 
> distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the 
> same keyword search.
>
> See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore)
>
> Guru
>
>     And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just
>     where google got spanked by the FTC.
>     http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc#
>     <http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc> is
>     worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about
>     how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying.
>
>     Can we please
>
>     1. Have a reality check here
>
>     2. Go back to discussing Internet governance
>
>
>     --srs (iPad)
>
>
>     On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com
>     <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing…
>
>         To put that in English…
>
>         /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate"
>         Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather
>         than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the
>         potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to
>         know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or
>         not say…/
>
>         //
>
>         /M/
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130108/cdbeb310/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t