A few hundred pages of internal Google docs just posted from discovery in a privacy lawsuit. some serious self-reflection clearly happening the last few years. For example, read this section. /1
"Three years to kill cookies" ... "we make lots of money from ads - that sounds like selling data to many people." /2
In fact, even Google's own employees state Google making money through its data practices if "effectively selling your data." Google must hate seeing this ack in an internal document. /3
Now, now. That's not the right attitude, Google. You should be willing to give users choice when it's not good for your business if they say "no." /4
To be fair, they/Google were smart enough to redline this section which acknowledges (see GDPR) that Google relies on a single broad consent - "take it or leave it model" - that uses "personalization" to sell their surveillance practices. Anyway, it's 200+ pages of interest. /5
Here is the case for those interested. /eof
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Scanning front pages across America this morning. Still today, the local A1 best captures the biggest story of the day. The majors from NY to LA to Detroit to even Arkansas. /1
From Washington DC all of the way up to the major newspapers in Alaska… the No Kings protest images are everywhere capturing the moment. /2
All of them capture peaceful protest, democracy in action, and what America is all about at a time when social media algorithms may distort what the day was all about. Illinois to Colorado. /3
Incredible work being done by the press to keep facts building on facts. Grateful. This entire WSJ report overnight starting with this lede on how White House orders sparked LA crackdown is both chilling and informative. /1
This statement. “We came to the United States for protection of what we encountered in Russia. It seems that we are encountering here what we fled.” /2
WSJ separating out cases of targeting groups who have not committed crimes but even noting here incredible resources being used against what appears to be clear, First Amendment protected activity alerted the community. Here is the must-read report. /3 wsj.com/us-news/protes…
Confession. Having watched Scott Pelley's outstanding work over nearly three decades, I almost didn't take the time to watch his W.F. commencement speech thinking the news reports told me enough of the facts. Frankly, that would have been a huge mistake on my part. Huge. 1/5
Disclosure: I'm a 60 Minutes fan. In fact, I read Don Hewitt's "Tell Me a Story" after nearly a decade in sports media and it likely tipped the scale in 2007 when I decided to jump to work at CBS. I find Pelley and team brilliant in telling stories in barely 15 min segments. 2/5
“If liberty means anything at all, it means telling someone something that they don’t want to hear. I fear there may be some people in the audience who don’t want to hear what I have to say today but I appreciate your forbearance in this small act of liberty.” - Scott Pelley 3/5
wow, another order for Mark Zuckerberg to sit for another court deposition. This time in a case involving privacy violations with ingesting web-wide health data. Remember they paid billions in cases to try to avoid this. Data and privacy issues are especially sensitive. /1
Zuckerberg depositions are interesting as they often go on for hours with highly informed attorneys driving for answers. And those answers may be put up against the often questioned veracity of his answers to Congress. Yes, as a CEO, he has testified to Congress A LOT. /2
I think his first real depo was SEC on very sensitive data scandal leading to $5B+ settlements with FTC+SEC. That scandal is still playing out in courts (did he overpay to protect himself?) It took 3yrs to get unsealed after I caught it in a footnote. /3
The Verge comes in with a massive scoop on the backstory reporting it was Musk - and Sacks - behind the scenes trying to blow up IP to train AI on behalf of his allies. This wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. /1
they have reports and details on the carnage and firing of the leadership and on the possible incorrect assumption that the new people in charge were running their playbook. /2
It may be rare that @mrddmia is in agreement with Dems but in the world of accountability for big tech abuse whether over data, monetization, IP, censorship, privacy, you name it, these aren't partisan issues. appreciate the shared voice from advocates all around. /3
omg. I can't believe what I am seeing in the FTC v Meta exhibits that just posted. This is the start of a long Oct 2018 thread where redacted executive tells another c-level executive, Adam Mosseri, "some estimates fake engagement [on Instagram] could be in range of 40%." /1
and Mosseri does nothing to dispute the data point either. he actually agrees they are a threat saying, "they present a bigger thread [sic] to the business than to the user experience." The timing of this remarkable if you know the context of what was going on there. /2
Earlier in that year, Facebook was using same Mosseri to pitch and spin (this entire pitch document is amazing behind the scenes) the infamous Wired cover story, WSJ, CNN press on work to improve meaningful social interactions, and much much more. /3 ftcvmeta.app.box.com/s/b8m39toze8uc…