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

A 'Soho house for techies': VCs place a bet on community

Contrary is the latest venture firm to experiment with building community spaces instead of offices.

Contrary NYC is meant to re-create being part of a members-only club where engineers and entrepreneurs can hang out together, have a space to work, and host events for people in tech.

Photo: Courtesy of Contrary

In the pre-pandemic times, Contrary’s network of venture scouts, founders, and top technologists reflected the magnetic pull Silicon Valley had on the tech industry. About 80% were based in the Bay Area, with a smattering living elsewhere. Today, when Contrary asked where people in its network were living, the split had changed with 40% in the Bay Area and another 40% living in or planning to move to New York.

It’s totally bifurcated now, said Contrary’s founder Eric Tarczynski.

Keep Reading Show less
Biz Carson

Biz Carson ( @bizcarson) is a San Francisco-based reporter at Protocol, covering Silicon Valley with a focus on startups and venture capital. Previously, she reported for Forbes and was co-editor of Forbes Next Billion-Dollar Startups list. Before that, she worked for Business Insider, Gigaom, and Wired and started her career as a newspaper designer for Gannett.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Fintech

Binance CEO wrestles with the 'Chinese company' label

Changpeng "CZ" Zhao, who leads crypto’s largest marketplace, is pushing back on attempts to link Binance to Beijing.

Despite Binance having to abandon its country of origin shortly after its founding, critics have portrayed the exchange as a tool of the Chinese government.

Photo: Akio Kon/Bloomberg via Getty Images

In crypto, he is known simply as CZ, head of one of the industry’s most dominant players.

It took only five years for Binance CEO and co-founder Changpeng Zhao to build his company, which launched in 2017, into the world’s biggest crypto exchange, with 90 million customers and roughly $76 billion in daily trading volume, outpacing the U.S. crypto powerhouse Coinbase.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Enterprise

How I decided to leave the US and pursue a tech career in Europe

Melissa Di Donato moved to Europe to broaden her technology experience with a different market perspective. She planned to stay two years. Seventeen years later, she remains in London as CEO of Suse.

“It was a hard go for me in the beginning. I was entering inside of a company that had been very traditional in a sense.”

Photo: Suse

Click banner image for more How I decided seriesA native New Yorker, Melissa Di Donato made a life-changing decision back in 2005 when she packed up for Europe to further her career in technology. Then with IBM, she made London her new home base.

Today, Di Donato is CEO of Germany’s Suse, now a 30-year-old, open-source enterprise software company that specializes in Linux operating systems, container management, storage, and edge computing. As the company’s first female leader, she has led Suse through the coronavirus pandemic, a 2021 IPO on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange, and the acquisitions of Kubernetes management startup Rancher Labs and container security company NeuVector.

Keep Reading Show less
Donna Goodison

Donna Goodison (@dgoodison) is Protocol's senior reporter focusing on enterprise infrastructure technology, from the 'Big 3' cloud computing providers to data centers. She previously covered the public cloud at CRN after 15 years as a business reporter for the Boston Herald. Based in Massachusetts, she also has worked as a Boston Globe freelancer, business reporter at the Boston Business Journal and real estate reporter at Banker & Tradesman after toiling at weekly newspapers.

Enterprise

UiPath had a rocky few years. Rob Enslin wants to turn it around.

Protocol caught up with Enslin, named earlier this year as UiPath’s co-CEO, to discuss why he left Google Cloud, the untapped potential of robotic-process automation, and how he plans to lead alongside founder Daniel Dines.

Rob Enslin, UiPath's co-CEO, chats with Protocol about the company's future.

Photo: UiPath

UiPath has had a shaky history.

The company, which helps companies automate business processes, went public in 2021 at a valuation of more than $30 billion, but now the company’s market capitalization is only around $7 billion. To add insult to injury, UiPath laid off 5% of its staff in June and then lowered its full-year guidance for fiscal year 2023 just months later, tanking its stock by 15%.

Keep Reading Show less
Aisha Counts

Aisha Counts (@aishacounts) is a reporter at Protocol covering enterprise software. Formerly, she was a management consultant for EY. She's based in Los Angeles and can be reached at acounts@protocol.com.

Latest Stories
Bulletins