Consumer 'Watchdog' Anti-Google Video Just Part Of A Stunt To Sell Books?
from the who's-watching-those-consumers dept
There was all sorts of news coverage recently about the group Consumer Watchdog creating a video that mocked Google's Eric Schmidt for not caring about your privacy -- though, which did so by getting all sorts of basic facts wrong and while relying on the "evil" Google Analytics for its own site (though, the group claims it's been trying to get rid of it, and has tried to spin the story into a claim that shows "how hard it is to escape Google on the Internet." Actually, it's not that hard at all. The whole thing seemed pretty silly, and clearly a stupid promotional stunt.It seems that folks associated with Consumer Watchdog's Jamie Court are perfectly willing to admit that the whole thing is a crass stunt to help Jamie sell more of his new book. They've sent over a letter to us, hyping up Court's book, offering to send us a copy, and linking the recently released book to the "stunt" in Times Square, which they blatantly admit was a stunt. So, now, who's going to watch over Consumer Watchdog to make sure it's not engaged in questionable motives in its own activities? I'm all for people actually looking out for consumer rights, but sometimes I wonder who appointed these folks as our "watchdogs?"
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: eric schmidt, jamie court, privacy, stunts
Companies: consumer watchdog, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
There are some rumors that they are indirectly funded by Microsoft maybe also AT&T.
They have no other initiatives that making Google look bad, they were the same group asking for a Google split-up back in April, and the same group that collected WiFi payload data near politician's residence to "highlight" the street view incident.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We also troll Slashdot and Techdirt, watching for people slandering our good name! We then jump on with lots of near ad hominem attacks and vague information about other campaigns!
If you want trust, give trust. If you expect us to believe you are motivated solely by what is right, and that you are watchdogs and not attack dogs, OPEN YOUR FINANCIAL RECORDS. Show us who pays the bills. Show us how your decisions on what campaigns to pursue are divorced fully from your financial matters. Won't do that? Gosh, color me surprised.
NEXT TROLL!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Nice "defense", too bad that you might be just a tiny bit biased since you are part of the company yourself. What's your cut of the book sales?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obviously
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obviously
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Consumer Watch Dog
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Appropriate?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wired piece worth reading.
The WiFi sniffing snafu was an embarrassment, even if experts agree there wasn’t anything useful to be snared in a quick-drive-by-packet-sniff. I agree with the EFF’s analysis by the wickedly smart attorney Jennifer Granick, which boiled down to “This was too stupid a move to be repeated by Google”.
Allowing its venture capital arm to pair investments with the CIA’s VC group was bone headed, while turning to the NSA for help when it got hacked is a PR nightmare. Likewise, its drive to land big, secretive search contracts with the feds is also short-sighted — the revenue will be tiny compared to AdWords."
Those who deny it's a spy agency please note the last paragraph.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wired piece worth reading.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wired piece worth reading.
Facts are facts, and they're in context.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
opt out
http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout
[ link to this | view in chronology ]