3 ms·
This article is so utterly biased, that I hesitated to post it. However, I find it interesting how threatened the carriers feel by Google and after the GLAAD/AT
by joelhaus 15y ago
This article is so utterly biased, that I hesitated to post it. However, I find it interesting how threatened the carriers feel by Google and after the GLAAD/AT&T debacle[1], I hope that this casts some more light on the shady lobbying practices of the big telcos:
From the Author's bio, Scott Cleland (http://scottcleland.com/ http://scottcleland.com/):
"Chairman of www.NetCompetition.org, a pro-competition e-forum
supported by broadband interests"
[1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/accused-of-att-astroturfing-glaad-withdraws-support-for-t-mobile-buyout.ars http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/accused-of-a...
- redthrowaway 15y agoYeah, I see a whole lot of accusation and wild language about things everybody knows, combined with gross misrepresentations about what Google actually says. I don't think they've ever once cast themselves as philanthropists rather than a business. They'll be the first ones to admit that their customers are advertisers, not users. However, their primary claim is that focussing on the user delivers a better product, and thus more users to advertisers. Everybody wins. The tinhattery in this article was pretty hard to read. Hosting this kind of content isn't really doing much for the Forbes brand.
- arkitaip 15y agoIt's a hit piece by a economic hitman but I'm glad you posted it. We live in a world where ignorance of propaganda and pr could be very dangerous to one's rights and society at large. The hit piece is almost humorous in its lack of sophistication but it's very important to know that people like this exists and what it is they do.