Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
TRENDING TODAY
Home > News > Editorials

May 31st, 2010, 09:04 GMT · By

Media Scaremongering in the Google Wi-Fi Blunder

SHARE:

Adjust text size:

Google's actions are bad enough without newspapers' conspiracy theories and fantasy scenarios
Enlarge picture
Google’s Wi-Fi data-collection blunder couldn’t have come at a worse time. The company is already under scrutiny over its business and privacy practices largely due to it becoming one of the biggest web companies in the world. So, revealing that it has been collecting publicly available but potentially personal info from unprotected wireless networks couldn’t have gone unnoticed. And Google’s mistake, it says it didn’t know it was collecting the personal data, should definitely be investigated by the proper authorities.

But there’s another group just as eager as regulators for Google to mess up, the media, particularly the mainstream media. Nothing is more exciting than a scandal and public outrage keeps newspapers selling and draws in visitors. And if public outrage doesn’t come naturally, a bit of scaremongering goes a long way.

Favoring the sensational is not unexpected from a publication like the Daily Mail, a British tabloid. The newspaper ‘revealed’ the company’s secret ploy of acquiring everyone’s Wi-Fi details and then using them for mobile targeted ads, two weeks after Google admitted to having collected the data. The gist of it is: Google secretly collected the wireless network data without telling anyone or asking for permission. It planned to then use that data to sell to advertisers who wanted to target potential customers who were near their stores, restaurants, and so on.

To a degree, this is true, Google didn’t actively inform regulators or the public that it was gathering Wi-Fi data along with shooting photos for Street View. The company now says that this has been a mistake and that it should have been more transparent. However, it was no secret either that Google was indeed collecting Wi-Fi location data.

The second part, which implies that Google is using your personal data to sell ads, is even more disingenuous. Of course, it’s not an outright lie, Google, and other companies are, indirectly, using Wi-Fi data to target mobile ads. The way it works now, if you search for something on your mobile phone, or use an app with advertising, those ads can be tailored based on your location. But the location of the mobile phone is not revealed automatically to the advertisers. And more often than not, using the location data, the ads become much more relevant.

But since the ‘truth’ isn’t that spectacular, the tabloid adds a bit of fantasy to the story for good measure. It claims that, “There are fears” of users being bombarded by mobile advertising as they stroll along a street, by using Google’s ‘secretly’ collected data. Anyone who has ever used a smarphone or has the slightest bit of knowledge about how this thing works will know that a phone doesn’t broadcast its location over the web, just to the network operator, and that ads don’t just magically appear on your phone out of thin air. It would be technically possible to do this, but that’s not how phones work today.

There are other assumptions, exaggerations, theoretical implications in the article, and others from the publication, but the Daily Mail is just one example. The Telegraph, a more ‘highbrow’ publication in the UK, isn’t afraid of hyperbole itself, starting from the title, “Google has mapped every WiFi network in Britain.” Again, anyone with even little understanding of wireless networking, or just basic common sense, would know that this would be impossible.

Even if it set out to do it, it’s hard to believe that Google would be able to map “every” Wi-Fi router in an entire country. There are plenty of routers that would have simply been too far away from the Street View cars to register. Even so, since Google finished collecting photos in the UK, plenty of new routers must have been set up, and older ones removed or have had their location changed. An accurate statement would have been, “Google has mapped most of the WiFI networks in Britain.” But it just doesn’t have the same punch, does it? The rest of the article is mostly balanced, but the ‘bait and switch’ technique is probably not the best way to build trust in your audience, even if you are the largest broadsheet newspaper in the UK.

These are just a couple of examples, there are plenty of others, and, as things drag on, there will be plenty more, this is just how the media works. No one is saying that Google is innocent. It made a huge mistake, unknowingly or not, and it shouldn’t go unnoticed. What’s more, Google’s general lack of transparency after it has revealed its mistake doesn’t help. It recently failed to meet a deadline for handing over the collected data to German regulators for investigation. And its explanation for the mistake is a bit weak, so it would be very interesting to know how exactly all of this happened. Hopefully, things will clear up in the coming weeks, but the matter will haunt Google for years to come.


7,320 hits · 2 comments
Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


A Police State Is the Answer to Piracy, Big Media Believes

Google Latitude Gets an Interesting New Dashboard

Facebook Starts Rolling Out Simple Privacy Controls

Google Enables Users to Opt Out of Analytics

Google Generated $54 Billion for Small Businesses in 2009

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Eric on 04 Jun 2010, 20:02 UTC reply to this comment

Hyperbole is dangerous for the media, especially since many people don't look for information elsewhere.

However, I'd rather the media was overly paranoid than blindly obedient and trusting. It is dangerous to arm their readership with misinformation, but like it or not their over-hyped scenarios put attention on the issue and force Google to be upfront. I'm not saying that it is right, but then again I can't really blame them.

The media knows that sensationalism sells, and in these hard times (especially for the mainstream media) they have little choice but to stretch the truth a little for the sake of compensation. It is sad and dangerous, but as consumers of news we have given them little choice.

Data security and privacy are certainly important issues, hopefully those that are really serious about protecting themselves won't rely just on a single media source and will do their own research!


Comment #2 by: Chip D. Monk on 10 Jun 2010, 17:28 UTC reply to this comment

If it was publicly available data I don't see what the problem is because people write spidering scripts all the time, bookstores have been selling books detailing how to write spidering scripts specific to your information needs, and -- at least this is what I've always thought -- if your data isn't encrypted and if you don't use a robots.txt file to tell crawlers your data is private -- then your data is in the public domain. Check out the Oreilley book "Spidering Hacks" and you'll see what I mean. People just want to gripe about Google because Google's rich and they are not. If they had one 1/1000 of the ingenuity the Google team has they could make a decent living for themselves and wouldn't have to try to hit Google up for some bucks. Hopefully Google will be able to afford good enough lawyers to explain their position better than I have tried to do on their behalf.

Copyright © 2001-2013 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM