3 ms·

In a tweet, New America claims this is false, and will release a statement soon: https://twitter.com/slaughteram/status/902874942433263616 https://twitter.com/

In a tweet, New America claims this is false, and will release a statement soon: https://twitter.com/slaughteram/status/902874942433263616 https://twitter.com/slaughteram/status/902874942433263616

dleslie 9y ago
Of course they do. Their credibility is on the line, and much has already been lost; they will forever be that group who is beholden to Google.
- tptacek 9y ago
  Maybe wait until after the announcement to judge its veracity.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    Ah usually I'd give the benefit of the doubt, but look at that email sent by Slaughter. Besides it's not just Barry Lynn departing, it's the whole Open Markets program aka anyone in a position to question Google's market dominance. The statement by New America is going to be sufficiently vague to avoid saying that there was any connection between Google's funding and the cutting of this program but the email lays out quite clearly that's exactly what it was. Sometimes it's better to ignore the PR.
  - tanderson92 9y ago
    As expected, Slaughter's statement doesn't challenge any of the facts ("false") reported. It is, however, a textbook non-denial denial.
defen 9y ago
Prediction: strenuous (truthful) denials that Google/Alphabet were in any way involved with this. Left unexamined: the role Eric Schmidt played in his personal capacity. For people to argue about: whether there is a difference between Eric Schmidt working in his personal capacity to benefit Google/Alphabet vs Eric Schmidt acting as an official representative of Google/Alphabet
- tptacek 9y ago
  Pretty solid prediction.
  - defen 9y ago
    https://www.newamerica.org/new-america/press-releases/new-americas-response-new-york-times/ https://www.newamerica.org/new-america/press-releases/new-am...
rst 9y ago
Here's their statement, which doesn't actually dispute any of the facts in the article: https://twitter.com/NewAmerica/status/902929634592948224 https://twitter.com/NewAmerica/status/902929634592948224 In a subsequent tweet, Slaughter (the head of New America) claims that the quotes were accurate, "but quotes are taken way out of context and interpretation is wrong". She hasn't yet said how the interpretation was wrong, or in what context the leader of a group of independent scholars could properly say "We are trying to expand our relationship with Google ... just THINK about how you are imperiling funding for others".

In a tweet, New America claims this is false, and will release a statement soon: https://twitter.com/slaughteram/status/902874942433263616 https://twitter.com/slaughteram/status/902874942433263616

dleslie 9y ago

Of course they do. Their credibility is on the line, and much has already been lost; they will forever be that group who is beholden to Google.

tptacek 9y ago
Maybe wait until after the announcement to judge its veracity.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  Ah usually I'd give the benefit of the doubt, but look at that email sent by Slaughter. Besides it's not just Barry Lynn departing, it's the whole Open Markets program aka anyone in a position to question Google's market dominance. The statement by New America is going to be sufficiently vague to avoid saying that there was any connection between Google's funding and the cutting of this program but the email lays out quite clearly that's exactly what it was. Sometimes it's better to ignore the PR.
- tanderson92 9y ago
  As expected, Slaughter's statement doesn't challenge any of the facts ("false") reported. It is, however, a textbook non-denial denial.

defen 9y ago

Prediction: strenuous (truthful) denials that Google/Alphabet were in any way involved with this. Left unexamined: the role Eric Schmidt played in his personal capacity. For people to argue about: whether there is a difference between Eric Schmidt working in his personal capacity to benefit Google/Alphabet vs Eric Schmidt acting as an official representative of Google/Alphabet

tptacek 9y ago
Pretty solid prediction.
- defen 9y ago
  https://www.newamerica.org/new-america/press-releases/new-americas-response-new-york-times/ https://www.newamerica.org/new-america/press-releases/new-am...

rst 9y ago

Here's their statement, which doesn't actually dispute any of the facts in the article: https://twitter.com/NewAmerica/status/902929634592948224 https://twitter.com/NewAmerica/status/902929634592948224 In a subsequent tweet, Slaughter (the head of New America) claims that the quotes were accurate, "but quotes are taken way out of context and interpretation is wrong". She hasn't yet said how the interpretation was wrong, or in what context the leader of a group of independent scholars could properly say "We are trying to expand our relationship with Google ... just THINK about how you are imperiling funding for others".