Power

In a letter to Pichai, top philanthropists slam Google for placing charity ads on disinfo sites

The letter points to research that found ads from the American Red Cross and Save the Children running alongside conspiracy theories about COVID-19 vaccines.

Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai

In the letter, the foundation executives note that charities are forced to "try to police where Google might place their names" and calls on Google to "do better."

Photo: Geert Vanden Wijngaert/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The leaders of more than a dozen of the country's top philanthropic organizations, including the Rockefeller Foundation and the Ford Foundation, wrote to Google CEO Sundar Pichai on Wednesday night, criticizing his company for placing ads for prominent charities on websites that promote misinformation.

The letter points to new research from a group called the Global Disinformation Index, which found that ads from organizations like the Red Cross and Save the Children have been running alongside conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and calls to jail Dr. Anthony Fauci on far-right websites like TheGatewayPundit.

"Charities, which depend on online advertising for donations to keep the lights on and serve their constituencies, have their ads placed on websites that openly spread hate speech, promote dangerous falsehoods about the spread and prevention of COVID-19, and even encourage violence," the letter reads. "In too many cases, this means the charities are paying Google, only for Google to damage their reputation and undermine their mission."

Among the foundations that signed onto the letter are several noted critics of Big Tech, including Open Society Foundations and The Omidyar Network. The Omidyar Network recently published several reports outlining an antitrust case against both Google's search and advertising businesses.

In the letter, the foundation executives note that charities are forced to "try to police where Google might place their names" and call on Google to "do better." They also compare what's happening with Google ads to the recent Facebook boycott, during which more than 1,000 companies stopped advertising on the platform during the month of July, banding together under the hashtag #StopHateforProfit.

In a statement, a Google spokesperson called the Global Disinformation Index's research "fundamentally flawed in that it does not define what should be considered disinformation."

"We are deeply committed to preventing harmful, dangerous and fraudulent content from monetizing while elevating quality content across Google products," the spokesperson said, pointing to a recent policy change that prohibits ads on content that "contradicts scientific consensus" regarding a health crisis. That includes, for example, claims that COVID-19 is a bioweapon created in a Chinese lab or that Bill Gates created it.

The policy against monetizing content that contradicts scientific consensus goes into effect next week. Google's spokesperson couldn't immediately say whether the stories flagged by Global Disinformation Index's report would be allowed to advertise under that policy. But several of the stories, including one promoting the unproven drug hydroxychloroquine and another accusing Bill Gates of pushing vaccines as part of his "eugenics agenda" appear to fit.

Google has written some other firm policies against COVID-19 misinformation. On YouTube, it takes down any content it finds that includes misinformation about COVID-19 "that poses a serious risk of egregious harm." Early on, Google went so far as to ban most nongovernmental COVID-19 advertising, only to reverse course following an outcry from Democrats who objected to the Trump administration being the primary source of information. It now prohibits ads from making harmful claims about prevention, unproven cures and false information about how the virus spreads, among other things. And it already has a long list of prohibited content that publishers can't run ads on, including "dangerous or derogatory content" or child sexual abuse material.

Google does permit advertisers to blacklist websites that "aren't appropriate for [their] brand." But monitoring all of the obscure sites their ads appear on and the content of those sites is a task the foundation leaders say puts too much stress on charities without the resources or expertise to do it.

"Google has an opportunity to lead the way by designing an advertising placement model that respects advertisers and does not put them into unwanted and damaging associations that undermine their good works and values," the letter reads. "Google has the resources and capacity to make a better product, without these design flaws and harmful consequences to charities and the communities they serve."

Read the letter below:

August 12, 2020

Mr. Sundar Pichai
Chief Executive Officer Alphabet Inc.
Mountain View, Calif., 94043

Dear Mr. Pichai,

We represent some of the leading philanthropic organizations in the country. We write to you today to raise our serious concerns about the way Google sells and displays advertising.

Privacy advocates around the world have raised the alarm about unacceptable violations related to the way Google sells advertising space. We share their concerns: the system is broken. It routinely violates the basic privacy rights of users. Reform is needed.

A new report by the Global Disinformation Index, a U.K.-based nonprofit that works with governments, business, and civil society to disrupt and defund disinformation sites, chronicles many examples of the damage Google AdSense can do. Charities, which depend on online advertising for donations to keep the lights on and serve their constitu encies, have their ads placed on websites that openly spread hate speech, promote dangerous falsehoods about the spread and prevention of COVID-19, and even encourage violence. All the while, Google pockets the fees.

In too many cases, this means the charities are paying Google, only for Google to damage their reputation and undermine their mission. Few nonprofit organizations have the luxury of hiring marketing specialists or global ad agencies to help them navigate the currents of the online advertising world. While we appreciate that Google may offer some benefits to small charitable groups in the form of reduced costs for ads, your ad placement model forces them to try to police where Google might place their names—something most of them have neither the resources nor the experience to handle.

Social media platforms can and must do better. Facebook, as you know, is facing a major boycott from advertisers who are increasingly outraged over that company's failure to change its policy on hate speech. Left unaddressed, this scourge not only serves to further divide our already highly polarized society, it can literally put lives at risk.

Google has an opportunity to lead the way by designing an advertising placement model that respects advertisers and does not put them into unwanted and damaging associations that undermine their good works and values. Google has the resources and capacity to make a better product, without these design flaws and harmful consequences to charities and the communities they serve.

We urge you to act now to put principle over profit and end this harmful practice.

Sincerely,
Darren Walker, Ford Foundation

Ed Henry, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation

Ellen Dorsey, Wallace Global Fund

Joe Goldman, Democracy Fund

Joseph Zimlich, Bohemian Foundation

Larry Kramer, Hewlett Foundation

Lee Bodner, New Venture Fund

Lee Wasserman, Rockefeller Family Fund

Mark Surman, Mozilla Foundation

Mike Kubzansky, Omidyar Network

Patricia Bauman and Gary D. Bass, Bauman Foundation

Patrick Gaspard, Open Society Foundations

Dr. Rajiv Shah, Rockefeller Foundation

Rey Ramsey, Nathan Cummings Foundation

Ridgway White, C.S. Mott Foundation

Stephen Heintz, Rockefeller Brothers Fund

Stephen King, Luminate

Steve Daetz, Sandler Foundation

Google Ad Disinformation Letter.pdf

Protocol | Policy

5 things to know about FCC nominee Gigi Sohn

The veteran of some of the earliest tech policy fights is a longtime consumer champion and net-neutrality advocate.

Gigi Sohn, who President Joe Biden nominated to serve on the FCC, is a longtime net-neutrality advocate.

Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images

President Joe Biden on Tuesday nominated Gigi Sohn to serve as a Federal Communications Commissioner, teeing up a Democratic majority at the agency that oversees broadband issues after months of delay.

Like Lina Khan, who Biden picked in June to head up the Federal Trade Commission, Sohn is a progressive favorite. And if confirmed, she'll take up a position in an agency trying to pull policy levers on net neutrality, privacy and broadband access even as Congress is stalled.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

If you've ever tried to pick up a new fitness routine like running, chances are you may have fallen into the "motivation vs. habit" trap once or twice. You go for a run when the sun is shining, only to quickly fall off the wagon when the weather turns sour.

Similarly, for many businesses, 2020 acted as the storm cloud that disrupted their plans for innovation. With leaders busy grappling with the pandemic, innovation frequently got pushed to the backburner. In fact, according to McKinsey, the majority of organizations shifted their focus mainly to maintaining business continuity throughout the pandemic.

Keep Reading Show less
Gaurav Kataria
Group Product Manager, Trello at Atlassian
Protocol | Workplace

Adobe wants a more authentic NFT world

Adobe's Content Credentials feature will allow Creative Cloud subscribers to attach edit-tracking information to Photoshop files. The goal is to create a more trustworthy NFT market and digital landscape.

Adobe's Content Credentials will allow users to attach their identities to an image

Image: Adobe

Remember the viral, fake photo of Kurt Cobain and Biggie Smalls that duped and delighted the internet in 2017? Doctored images manipulate people and erode trust and we're not great at spotting them. The entire point of the emerging NFT art market is to create valuable and scarce digital files and when there isn't an easy way to check for an image's origin and edits, there's a problem. What if someone steals an NFT creator's image and pawns it off as their own? As a hub for all kinds of multimedia, Adobe feels a responsibility to combat misinformation and provide a safe space for NFT creators. That's why it's rolling out Content Credentials, a record that can be attached to a Photoshop file of a creator's identity and includes any edits they made.

Users can connect their social media addresses and crypto wallet addresses to images in Photoshop. This further proves the image creator's identity, but it's also helpful in determining the creators of NFTs. Adobe has partnered with NFT marketplaces KnownOrigin, OpenSea, Rarible and SuperRare in this effort. "Today there's not a way to know that the NFT you're buying was actually created by a true creator," said Adobe General Counsel Dana Rao. "We're allowing the creator to show their identity and attach it to the image."

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

Protocol | China

Why another Chinese lesbian dating app just shut down

With neither political support nor a profitable business model, lesbian dating apps are finding it hard to survive in China.

Operating a dating app for LGBTQ+ communities in China is like walking a tightrope.

Photo: Nicolas Asfouri/AFP via Getty Images

When Lesdo, a Chinese dating app designed for lesbian women, announced it was closing down, it didn't come as a surprise to the LGBTQ+ community.

It's unclear what directly caused this decision. 2021 hasn't been kind to China's queer communities; WeChat has deactivated queer groups' public accounts and Beijing has pressured charity organizations not to work with queer activists.

Keep Reading Show less
Zeyi Yang
Zeyi Yang is a reporter with Protocol | China. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow for the digital magazine Rest of World, covering the intersection of technology and culture in China and neighboring countries. He has also contributed to the South China Morning Post, Nikkei Asia, Columbia Journalism Review, among other publications. In his spare time, Zeyi co-founded a Mandarin podcast that tells LGBTQ stories in China. He has been playing Pokemon for 14 years and has a weird favorite pick.

The Oura Ring was a sleep-tracking hit. Can the next one be even more?

Oura wants to be a media company, an activity tracker and even a way to know you're sick before you feel sick.

Over the last few years, the Oura Ring has become one of the most recognizable wearables this side of the Apple Watch.

Photo: Oura

Oura CEO Harpreet Rai swears he didn't know Kim Kardashian was a fan. He was as surprised as anyone when she started posting screenshots from the Oura app to her Instagram story, and got into a sleep battle with fellow Oura user Gwyneth Paltrow. Or when Jennifer Aniston revealed that Jimmy Kimmel got her hooked on Oura … and how her ring fell off in a salad. "I am addicted to it," Aniston said, "and it's ruining my life" by shaming her about her lack of sleep. "I think we're definitely seeing traction outside of tech," Rai said. "Which is cool."

Over the last couple of years, Oura's ring (imaginatively named the Oura Ring) has become one of the most recognizable wearables this side of the Apple Watch. The company started with a Kickstarter campaign in 2015, but really started to find traction with its second-generation model in 2018. It's not exactly a mainstream device — Oura said it has sold more than 500,000 rings, up from 150,000 in March 2020 but still not exactly Apple Watch levels — but it has reached some of the most successful, influential and probably sleep-deprived people in the industry. Jack Dorsey is a professed fan, as is Marc Benioff.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Latest Stories