,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This Washington Post article about how "Google’s web browser has become spy software" contains 11 megabytes of ad cruft and includes invasive trackers from at least 20 domains, including Google, the subject of the article. Of course there is no disclosure. washingtonpost.com/technology/201… 
The article also has trackers from Amazon, a direct competitor to Google, whose CEO personally owns the Washington Post. Now, I'm no journalist, but if I had this kind of financial relationship on my blog without prominently disclosing it, people would call me a shill.
The pattern we see with articles like this (most notoriously on the New York Times's Privacy Project) is that the deeply invasive tracking and financial dependence of journalism on the tech oligopoly are so taken for granted that editors don't even see them as meriting mention
Fortunately the Washington Post, like the New York Times, no longer has a public editor or ombudsman to watch over such ethical lapses. Instead, I as a reader am empowered to make these criticisms directly.
(Also the 'democracy dies in darkness' infant onesie is kind of fucked up)
Tagging @jayrosen_nyu into this thread because he sometimes screams into a similar void
