Senator Orrin Hatch Asks FTC To Investigate Competitive Effects of Google's Conduct in Search and Digital Advertising (thehill.com) 110
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) is calling on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate whether Google's search and digital advertising practices are stifling the marketplace. From a report: Hatch sent a letter to FTC [PDF] Chairman Joseph Simons expressing concern about reports in recent years ranging from Google restricting competing advertising services to collecting data from users' Gmail inbox contents. "Needless to say, I found these reports disquieting," Hatch wrote. "Although these reports concern different aspects of Google's business, many relate to the company's dominant position in search and accumulating vast amounts of personal data." The letter comes at a time when critics of Google's market power are gaining momentum, helped along by growing concerns over data privacy. But most of the lawmakers echoing those concerns have been Democrats and Hatch, the longest-serving member of the Senate, may be the highest-profile Republican to call for the government to take antitrust action against Google.
Hunt for Google (Score:1)
Re:Hunt for Google (Score:5, Interesting)
That, and it's a big target at a time where POTUS is looking for enemies he can vilify to distract from is own problems.
Re:Hunt for Google (Score:4, Insightful)
Its just that nearly half the country believes the racist, misogynistic, gay bashing vitriol that he speaks. He is not a good or even neutral human. He is Chaotic Evil thru and thru.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hunt for Google (Score:4, Informative)
Here are some other examples: https://www.usnews.com/opinion... [usnews.com]
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
You want mentally unstable in the military so they can get the taxpayer to pay for rearanging their genitalia ?
As opposed to mentally unstable invisible sky fairy serving commanders who describe the Wall of Separation as a fraud?
I'll take LGBTQ over your kind of favored crazies every day
Re: (Score:1)
That an a guest BLOG on the Wash. Post.
Absolute proof....That you are a fucking idiot
Re: (Score:2)
Do you remember his prohibition on transgender people in the military? I do.
Wait until you get the impeachment you crave. You're not going to know what President Pence's views on LBGTSPUEQI* are going to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, we know exactly what Pence's views on women and gays are. If Pence ever does become president, there will be a lot of SJWs longing for the good ol' days under President Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, that one got autocorrected: ...not going to want to know...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
There isn't a single "gay bashing" quote from Trump in that article, so I guess you couldn't find any. All the article has is positive quotes from Trump about gays, plus the article author's disagreements with policy decisions by his Administration.
But hey, if you do find a couple of actual quotes, feel free to reply with them. Until then we'll mark you down as yet another TDS sufferer.
Re: (Score:2)
Narrative fail:
1. I rarely hear directly from Trump saying anything and I see anything on Fox News about once every two years ago. Sorry to contradict your premises.
2. I asked for specific facts, an actual example of the guy's claim. He could produce no quotes even resembling what he claimed. He presented no relevant facts at all. Your resort to attacking the person simply asking for an example or two is quite revealing about your level of irrational obsession. How about you get someone to actually present
Re: (Score:2)
Some of his racist ones
Re: (Score:2)
So, zero examples of "gay bashing vitriol" provided, right?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.self.com/story/sex... [self.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So, no "gay bashing vitriol" in that article....
Re: (Score:2)
Along the lines of Hitler. He just didn't have the same fertile environment as him to lock up the poor, blacks, Hispanics, and everyone else his donors do not like and claim it was for the betterment of the country.
Re: (Score:1)
More, right after this message from our sponsor...
Re: (Score:2)
You have to compare it to the fact that anyone that has an R by their name usually starts at 10% for black approval.
It's just the way it was and he is changing that.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Yes, it's TDS and it is strong in this one. Sometimes I wonder if these people come up with on their own or have to be told this. Then I wonder those that are told, how warped to you have to be led down this merry path of disillusionment.
I imagine in a few years once all those with this level of TDS get the help those so desperately need, that there will be several large studies on the effects of mass hysteria. The eight years that the Trump presidency will probably encompass will probably be studied
Re: Hunt for Google (Score:3, Insightful)
He doesn't bash us (gays). In fact, he's said very little with respect to the LGBTQ community and always avoids responding to questions in every interview, changing the subject. To follow, most federal sites have removed references to LGBTQ progress since the administration took office. He _did_ say he believes marriage should stay "traditional," whatever that means for someone with multiple divorces and cases of infidelity.
Instead of bashing, he appoints officials to attempt to erode any LGBTQ equal rights
Re: (Score:2)
I do find it interesting that an obvious flamebait comment literally directed at half the country and which is clearly untrue in at least one particular is currently "insightful", but my reply asking for examples of the claim has been modded down to 0 at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Works both ways bud.
Re: (Score:2)
please?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well, they're better than Microsoft and Facebook. That's not saying much though, since those two companies are basically the least ethical in the entire history of companies.
Clarity (Score:2)
It is unlikely that they can pass a regulation to make Google behave they way they want, nor should they.
They CAN, and should, pass regulations requiring that Google and all the other sites have complete transparency of their policies and rules.
Further, that the rules should be objective in nature and that there is a process in place to contest findings of rule violations. No one should be wondering why their content is blocked or otherwise not available to people who are looking for it.
There is also an arg
Re: (Score:2)
I this case I'm looking at the proponent of the legislation, and suspecting that it will be much worse if it passes.
Re: (Score:1)
I followed it fine. Are you sure he's the one who is dumb here?
Well of course (Score:2)
It's a purely political move. Hatch has got his tongue so far up Trump's backside that he can taste what Trump's eating before he swallows.
Trump puts the hate out on google, Hatch responds by saying "Hey! I hate google too!"
I'm not saying that this isn't a smart thing to do, at least in the short term, but he's not concerned about antitrust or regulation. He's concerned about being on Trump's good side, and antitrust and regulations are the tools he happens to be using now to get that done. He's not sudd
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm... Same AC? Or well played troll...
Re: (Score:2)
"It's a purely political move. "
Google only has itself to blame for giving in last year to corporate media news demands on filtering their news results. Same mistake Facebook made. Corporate media news created the "fake news" tag to beat them out and limit new media outlets. Trump has nothing to do with this (although they would love if he would stop using Twitter).
He should ask them to find his missing glasses (Score:3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Good idea. Wrong reason (Score:4, Interesting)
But the reason to look into it cuz the president is an idiot is not.
Re: Good idea. Wrong reason (Score:1)
Hows Rupert Murdoch doing lately?
Remember when it was you guys it was all "cooperations are people, they should be able to support canidates"
What you meant is...only if it's a republican candidate, If not, collusion.
Orrin Hatch (Score:1)
Is just about THE most clueless Senator when it comes to technology. And he's carrying Trump's water here since Google is the latest entry on the Trump Enemy List.
Equifax (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the very first google result [senate.gov] for https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com] .
Please attempt an attack line next time which takes more than 5 seconds to totally disprove.
Re: (Score:2)
If you read the link.... as the Senate Finance Chairman, he held up the IRS from giving Equifax a contract and told Equifax to:
Re: (Score:1)
It wasn't an exhaustive search, it was literally the first result and in line with Hatch's level of power in the Senate. It also pretty easily contradicts the "didn't feel obligated to do anything" narrative above, though, doesn't it?
Orrin - retire already (Score:1)
I know that it's ageist, but there needs to be mandatory retirement at age 80 for Senators, Prez & VP, and supreme court justices. I'll leave an opening for US Representative. (2 yr terms). I mean pilots are forced out at a certain age and they only control the lives of a couple hundred people.
This is enlightening and scary:
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_senators_by_age.html
"What do you call a senator who's served..." (Score:2)
That was Hatch when he was running against his predecessor.
Time to go home Orrin.
Not Trump's Proaganda Machine (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
He's right tho. Only the stupid and most morally bankrupt among us still support Trump.
Google??? (Score:2)
This is the same Google that in 2017 was fined 2.4 billion Euro by the EU for manipulating search results?
https://www.theguardian.com/bu... [theguardian.com]
Good Example of Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Orrin Hatch, one of the architects of striping both the FTC and FCC of their ability to regulate business is asking the FTC to investigate Google because they are mean to "conservatives".
The irony is palpable with a man who's spent his career defanging governments ability to go after monopolies asking government to investigate when they don't have the authority to do a damn thing and he knows it because he was instrumental in taking those abilities away.
But Hatch is a sycophant who finally proved he didn't have any morals and he proved it when he got down on his knees and serviced Trump. It's a good thing he's retiring because he shat all over his legacy the last 4 years.
Firearms? (Score:2)
Google blocks various legal firearm related links and searches so why not?
Re: (Score:1)
Microsoft was being funded by the CIA, NSA, and FBI to backdoor Windows and Internet Explorer. They had to kill off Netscape because it couldn't be intimidated, coerced, or bought.
Re: (Score:1)
Empirical evidence abounds. All you have to do is watch where the money has been going for the past 30 years. I'm smart enough to know the litany of "accidental" exploits were largely left unaddressed on purpose, and even when they weren't actively inserting them they were using management and hiring practices they knew would make passable security nearly impossible to achieve while at the same time eliminating any impetus to even try. Nobody even questions this anymore in the IT community. Luckily for