EXPOSED: Google, Obama caught doing it once a week

Google and the White House manage to hook up more than the majority of married couples, having met up once a week for the past five years. That's the latest indicator of the powerful internet giant's worrying cosy relationship with the Obama administration, pulled from logs requested by the Wall Street Journal. The disclosure …

[The Dude]

Told ya so!

Some years ago, when Google was just getting started, I sent them and email saying they should not worry too much about becoming the dominant search engine, and should really focus on ruling the world. I thought they ignored the email... but maybe not.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's RACISM !

[Daggerchild]

Coo. High bandwidth requirements..

You don't meet that often unless one is giving constant updates to the other, on either instrumentation of an entity, or progress of a directed task.. and that some of that is required in a timely manner in order to adjust a running operation..

The question is how many of either of those are running, and for which recipient side...

Although if you drop this raw on the table, does Obama *really* have access to anything else of comparable power and expertise, even before you go darkside with it? Google does find answers..

(Which leads to the delicious thought... doesn't Obama trust the NSA?)

[The Nazz]

Re: Coo. High bandwidth requirements..

Is it more pertinent to ask :

Does the NSA trust Obama?

[Youngone]

Stupid Question

The question "Who's in charge, here?" is a bit redundant. The corporation or industry group who pays the politician is always in charge.

This is not new, George Bush II said it best: "Ya gotta dance with those what brung ya".

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Stupid Question

I suppose its a little better than when Blackwater or Lockheed-Martin were in charge of the Whitehouse.

At least if Google needs to boost business they just tell the president to lean on the FCC, they don't have to start an actual war.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Stupid Question

Just wait some foreign country declares illegal Google practices, and, even worse, ask Google to actually pay taxes...

[TeeCee]

Re: Stupid Question

Oh, I dunno. They only wanted to make a shitload of cash.

I'll take corporate greed over megalomania any day when it comes to who pulls the levers of power.

As for not starting a war, when your endgame's world domination rather than profit you have to be a tad more subtle than that to win.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Stupid Question

Please explain to me how the net neutrality ruling boosts Google business?

[Gannon (J.) Dick]

(Which leads to the delicious thought... doesn't Obama trust the NSA?)

You get an upvote for the correct usage of the verb "to think", but frankly the implications of the analysis gives me indigestion.

Here's why. Google's functional use of data is improper. The functions are not normalized. The NSA may use data in the same dodgy way, but the careerists at the NSA will eventually have to say "No, can't do it, won't work, could kill people ... etc." if only to protect their personal reputations.

Google will never say no.

[Daggerchild]

Google will never say no.

I think you're underestimating your species. Schmitt told his subordinates to remove his political donations from the search results.

His subordinates told him to take a flying leap on principle.

[Triggerfish]

Bill Hicks

Bill Hick sort of summed it up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIiCjhCBDaM

NSFW

[Mark 85]

We knew it was bad when the "former" employees hit staff level at the White House... I wonder how bad it really is? Just plain "bad". Nasty "bad". or We're all screwed "bad"?

[Breen Whitman]

Google data will be contributing to the target acquisition of US drones and special forces(and Israel's by extension).

Simple as that.

[ratfox]

You mean, it's thanks to Google that we got the reclassification under title II? Way cool, Google!

And the White House actually listens to acclaimed and respected experts like Vint Cerf, Turing Award recipient, president of the ACM, "father of the Internet", without whom we all wouldn't have a job? Thanks Obama!

[Anonymous Coward]

@bratfox

"You mean, it's thanks to Google that we got the reclassification under title II? Way cool, Google!"

No, you got the _parts_ of title II that _Google_wanted_, but not complete and equitable regulations. Did you actually read the article?

You sound young by the language you use, which is good, as from my perspective, you will have to live with the results of your data being abused by the corporations that blind sight you. Enjoy your trinkets, you pay enough for them.

[Anonymous Coward]

…As opposed to the parts of title II that Comcast wanted, which would have been nothing at all…

[John Sturdy]

Whatever the downsides are, it's refreshing to see a government paying attention to someone competent in a field, rather than the usual crowd of bootlicking cronies.

[JohnMoser]

Isn't corruption awesome! Obama only listens when millions of dollars are donated. Now Americans will pay more for their Internet service, so that Google and Netflix can pay less for theirs. Thanks Obama!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would you rather?

Who would you rather he listen to? Comcast, TWC, Verizon, AT&T? As others have mentioned, the real problem is the influence of the surveillance industrial complex as a whole, itself just a subset of the same old military industrial complex that has been warping our democracy for 3 generations. The main difference is that under the new rules they get to use thei own people. In the bad old days the targets were "merely" people overseas in 3rd world countries.

[Daggerchild]

Re: Who would you rather?

That's another question actually - who else meets him this (or more) often? Anyone tracking this stuff?

[silent_count]

A politician taking policy advice from people who are knowledgeable about the subject matter, while certainly novel, is not exactly the crisis situation that you guys seem to think it is.

Flippancy aside, and as an outside observer*, I don't believe you blokes at El Reg have made a sufficiently compelling argument that corruption is the most likely explanation... not quite yet. Though a link between the white house and Google being made aware unpublished FCC proposals would, for my money, be the smoking gun.

* Living in .AU, I don't much care if Mr Obama is signing laws in exchange for "googly" suitcases of unmarked bills. And secondly, most Americans seem so partisan that the democrat voters would re-elect him anyhow - at least he's not named Bush, right? And the republican voters would chuck him out even if he cured cancer while creating a lasting peace in the middle east.

[Mark 85]

By Jove! I think you've got it. That does indeed seem to be the way politics here in the States are working these day. The words "compromise" and "rational" have disappeared from the language for some reason.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously have any of you actually read the Net Neutrality ruling Vs the original proposal? It is much better than what Comcast and Verizon were doing and better than the original Net Neutrality proposal with fast lanes. It's not perfect, but it better and guess what? Just like every other law in the US, it can be modified at a later time. I personally am glad the out of touch administration is getting advise. I would rather it be Google then Comcast, Verizon and yes even Apple (a company company who tried to sue a competitor for making a square phone with round edges) Google is pushing the envelope of technology and innovation. We wouldn't be where we are today without them.