News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe. Parent comment

Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by notamanager on Friday February 21, 2020 @11:49AM (#22384538)
The Washington Post article linked above mentions that the Texas AG is using his google probe to solicit donations in his reelection emails.

Here is a NYT article about how state AGs get used by company lawyers to go after competitors with money exchanging hands (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/19/us/politics/lawyers-creat...)

Here is the one about the Mississippi AG used by the movie industry to go after google (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/technology/google-attorne...)

The WSJ is a not an uninterested party in this case, and this is but one example of them misquoting and spinning reports to attack google (https://searchengineland.com/misquoted-and-misunderstood-why...)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by creaghpatr on Friday February 21, 2020 @01:03PM (#22385221)
Suggests that the probe is popular with the constituents who elected them. Anti-trust probes are a very popular form of oversight, in case that isn't blindingly obvious.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by dantheman on Friday February 21, 2020 @01:59PM (#22385732)
It doesn't mean they aren't corrupt and wrong. Many things the government does have been popular and wrong.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by nwienert on Friday February 21, 2020 @02:09PM (#22385817)
It doesn’t mean they are.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by sangnoir on Friday February 21, 2020 @02:16PM (#22385870)
> Suggests that the probe is popular with the constituents who elected them.

Could you please clarify if you mean the donors, the voters, or both?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by creaghpatr on Friday February 21, 2020 @03:39PM (#22386471)
Both, and they aren't mutually exclusive either.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google resists demands from states in digital-ad probe by a1369209993 on Friday February 21, 2020 @06:43PM (#22388152)
> they aren't mutually exclusive either.

This is technically true but misleading, as it's generally assumed that "the voters" means the >99% of the electorate who are not rich enough to make individual demands of candidates in return for campaign contributions. (And "donors" mostly means corporations, which thankfully do not get to vote, although there are a few people (ie, technically voters) who are rich enough personally to bribe candidates.)

[ Parent | on HN ]