14 DAY TRIAL // The US government asked search engines to turn over records on millions of its users' search queries as part of the government's effort to uphold an online pornography law. While AOL, Yahoo and MSN agreed, Google decided to "vigorously" oppose the demand. The Michigan-based Ponemon Institute asked 16,550 randomly selected adults to answer an eight-question survey. The results, released yesterday, indicated that approximately 56 percent of respondents believed Google shouldn't hand over the information demanded by the Department of Justice. Some also questioned Google's policy of retaining vast amounts of user data. Nearly 90 percent of those polled were under the impression that their Internet searches were kept private.
Other online search engines have ceded to the government's demands for data, while maintaining that private user information was still safeguarded. The MSN press release regarding the issue writes:
"Let me start with this core principle statement: privacy of our customers is non-negotiable and something worth fighting to protect.
Over the summer we were subpoenaed by the DOJ regarding a lawsuit. The subpoena requested that we produce data from our search service. We worked hard to scope the request to something that would be consistent with this principle. The applicable parties to the case received this data, and the parties agreed that the information specific to this case would remain confidential. Specifically, we produced a random sample of pages from our index and some aggregated query logs that listed queries and how often they occurred. Absolutely no personal data was involved.
With this data you:
- CAN see how frequently some query terms occurred. - CANNOT look up an IP and see what they queried - CANNOT look for users who queried for both "TERM A" and "TERM B".
At MSN Search, we have strict guidelines in place to protect the privacy of our customers data, and I think you'll agree that privacy was fully protected. We tried to strike the right balance in a very sensitive matter."
Respondents to the Ponemon survey were evenly split over whether the administration of US President George W. Bush could be trusted "to take reasonable steps to protect the privacy rights and civil liberties" of citizens, the survey concluded.
Of those who backed Google's position, 41 percent contended they would stop using the Mountain View-based search engine if it yielded to the government's demand.
However, overall, 58 percent of people agreed police should have access to Google search data if it aids in fighting crime.
Chris Kraeuter and Rachel Rosmarin from Forbes Magazine speculate about Google's reasons for not accepting the Department of Justice demands. They write: "Perhaps the company really is worried about protecting your privacy. Much more likely: It is worried about protecting itself."
Google may have two different types of concerns. For one thing, the data could be used either by the government itself or by some competitor to discover how Google executes its searches. Secondly the Google may be worried that the result of the government study could affect its image. Kraeuter and Rosmarin write: "Google and its competitors all benefit from porn sites, which help generate search queries and page views. But Google is the only portal company that makes nearly all of its revenue from click-through advertising. Restricting porn and porn advertising - the likely aim of Child Online Protection Act's sponsors - could hurt Google disproportionately.
And filtering in general would also hurt Google more than its competitors. The Google brand is built on the notion that the engine gives users the clearest picture of the Web, without playing favorites. Restricting content in any way could hurt Google's carefully burnished image, its 60% market share for search queries and its share price."