View Full Version : Google Is A two-faced liar

Pope Bitterz D'Alomo
8th August 2010, 04:14 AM
This week, three of the biggest newspapers in the U.S. either exposed Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) as a two-faced liar of a corporation, or published significant falsehoods that could seriously undermine the company and its investors.

Or maybe it's somewhere in between. Honestly, nobody seems to be sure what the real story is right now, and the denials are flying fast and thick.

This much we know: On Thursday, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post all ran stories asserting that Google was negotiating an agreement with Verizon under which Web publishers would be able to pay for the privilege of having their content carried faster on Verizon's network. That sort of deal would fly directly in the face of the concept of Net neutrality -- treating all Internet traffic the same, whether that traffic is going toward a blog read by all of three living souls or the biggest website in the world.

For Verizon to go for a deal like this is only to be expected -- most ISPs are against neutrality. They want to be allowed to manage their networks as they see fit.

But Google is regarded as one of Net neutrality's biggest champions. In 2006, it even urged Internet users in the U.S. to call their representatives and voice their support for neutrality on the eve of a big House vote on the issue. Cutting a backroom deal with Verizon would give the phrase "I just Googled you" a whole new meaning, and it wouldn't be very pleasant.

But Google quickly issued a strong denial, claiming The New York Times article in particular is flat-out wrong, and swearing that it hasn't had any conversations with Verizon about paying for faster traffic.

According to Google, all that's happening is an FCC-organized roundtable talk, and a lot of different companies with different interests are participating -- not just Google and Verizon, but also AT&T (NYSE: T), Skype, the Open Internet Coalition and the National Cable Telecommunications Association. They're just banging out some rules concerning Net neutrality as a team so they can present a consensus plan to Congress.

Not surprisingly, Net neutrality proponents were livid when the news first broke, though that rage may need to be put on hold for a while until it becomes clear what actually did and did not happen.

9th August 2010, 08:10 AM
Google is indeed two-faced and nowadays i am particularly wary of the "Don't be Evil" mantra. They are monetary vampires who care less about you and i. The wifi snooping scandal, and now the net neutrality nuke. I am not a fan of Google anymore.

12th August 2010, 07:03 AM
Welcome to the darkside...lol