“Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification, which will result in most users naturally clicking on the top (verified) results. The true cost of remaining anonymous, then, might be irrelevance.” – Eric Schmidt
Authoritarian Regimes & Data Mining
One wonders how Mr. Schmidt can balance the above statement along with warning about authoritarian governments.
And the risks from such data mining operations are not just in “those countries over there.” The ad networks that hire lobbyists to change foreign privacy laws do so such that they can better track people the globe over and deliver higher paying ads. (No problem so long as they don’t catch you on a day you are down and push ads for a mind numbing psychotropic drug with suicidal or homicidal side effects.)
And defense contractors are fast following with mining these social networks. (No problem so long as your name doesn’t match someone else’s that is on some terrorist list or such.)
Large & Anonymous
What’s crazy is when we get to the other end of the spectrum. Want to know if your hamburger has pink slime in it? Best of luck with that.
Then you get the mainstream media sites that get a free pass (size = trust) and it doesn’t matter if their content is created through…
- a syndicated partnership of with eHow-styled content (Demand Media)
- a syndicated partnership of scraped/compiled date (FindTheBest)
- auto-generated content from a bot (Narrative Science)
- scrape + outsourcing + plagiarism + fake bylines (Journatic)
- top 10 ways to regurgitate top 10 lists from 10 different angles (BuzzFeed)
- hatchet job that was written before manufacturing the “conforming” experience (example)
- factually incorrect hate bait irrelevant article with no author name, wrapped in ads for get rich quick scams (example)
… no matter how it is created, it is fine, so long as you have political influence. Not only will it rank, but it will be given a ranking boost based on being part of a large site, even if it is carpet bombed with irrelevant ads.
Coin Operated Ideals
But then the companies that claim this transparency is vital for society pull a George Costanza & “Do The Opposite” with their own approach.
Whenever they manipulate markets to their own benefit they claim the need for secrecy to stop spammers or protect privacy. But then they collect the same data & pass it along without consent to those who pay for the data.
When Google was caught vandalizing OpenStreetMaps or lying to businesses listed in Mocality, those were the acts of anonymous contractors. When Google got caught in a sting operation pushing ads for illegal steroids from Mexico they would claim that behavior didn’t reflect their current policies and that we need to move on.
Then of course there are the half dozen (or more) times that Google has violated their own search quality guidelines. So often that is due yet again to “outsourcing” or a partner of some sort. And they do that in spite of the ability to arbitrarily hardcode themselves in the result set.
If we don’t exam the faux ideals push to shift cultural norms we will end up with a crappier world to live in. Some Googlers (or Google fanbois) who read this will claim I am a broken record stuck in the past on this stuff. But those same people will be surprised x years down the road when something bizarre surfaces from an old deranged contact or prior life.
Anyone who has done anything meaningful has also done some things that are idiotic.
Is that sort of stuff always forever relevant or does it make sense at some point to move on?
When that person is Eric Schmidt, the people he pontificate to are blackballed for following his ideals.
After all, his ideals don’t actually apply to him.