14 DAY TRIAL // A One World Trust issued report that ranks government organizations, civil groups and private corporations in terms of their public "accountability" and "transparency" has been released, and the results are (smile) interesting, to say the very least. Google, the concept of openness on the Internet, the impartial judge that lets everybody have their say, failed miserably at this test, as it scored only 17 out of 100 possible points.
The points are awarded for accountability, based on transparency, participation, evaluation, complaint and response mechanisms, according to The Register. Have I mentioned that Google was the absolute last to come in this race, while the highest score was obtained by the United Nations Development Programme with an astounding 88/100?
The "runners up" for the last place were, besides Google, PricewaterhouseCoopers International with 18 and the Interpol with 22. Man, if the Interpol is more open than it is in theory, in everybody's eyes, on the Internet, we've still got ways to go when it comes to setting our records straight about what should be open and what shouldn't.
The biggest problems that Google was faced with in the test that lead to the infamous report were its refusal to cooperate with the researchers, and thus scoring a big zero for transparency, the environmental impact evaluation that also brought the nice round number in Google's tab, while also trailing for its internal complaint procedures. These are the most important, but there were some others, like the privacy policy that the Mountain View based company has, which allows it to collect information from users while "the policy itself meets no good practice principles." Not to mention the absence of a feedback link on the website, that is.
The funniest part is that, as Greg Sterling of searchengineland.com says, "There were various criticisms of the report and its methodology leveled against the One World Trust, including by international police agency Interpol, which also was ranked poorly and said 'One World Trust lacked transparency in its own working methods'."