Another Google privacy FAIL (grrr)

Posted in 18 February 2012
6 Comments »

The Wall Street Journal reported that Google engineers had developed — and then rolled out — a ‘workaround’ to defeat MY privacy setting in Safari (oh yeah, I take it personally) where I had overtly intended to block third party cookies, viz:

A clear intention to block third parties like advertisers from setting cookies in my browser to track my history. Google found a way to defeat that and used it. Scummy. (Safari OSX)

Here’s what WSJ’s Julia Angwin and Jennifer Valentino-DeVries reported:

Google’s iPhone Tracking

Web Giant, Others Bypassed Apple Browser Settings for Guarding Privacy

By JULIA ANGWIN And JENNIFER VALENTINO-DEVRIES

Google Inc. and other advertising companies have been bypassing the privacy settings of millions of people using Apple Inc.’s Web browser on their iPhones and computers—tracking the Web-browsing habits of people who intended for that kind of monitoring to be blocked.

The companies used special computer code that tricks Apple’s Safari Web-browsing software into letting them monitor many users. Safari, the most widely used browser on mobile devices, is designed to block such tracking by default.

Google disabled its code after being contacted by The Wall Street Journal.

That “Google disabled its code …” is followed by this damning comment …

In Google’s case, the findings appeared to contradict some of Google’s own instructions to Safari users on how to avoid tracking. Until recently, one Google site told Safari users they could rely on Safari’s privacy settings to prevent tracking by Google. Google removed that language from the site Tuesday night.

This is, of course, being discussed all over the interwebs, with Google saying it’s been misunderstood. Henry Blodget, ran a bit of defence for the many-tentacled beast search/advertising giant in GOOGLE: The Wall Street Journal Is Full Of Crap—Here’s What That Apple Safari ‘Tracking’ Was Really About but even he, in laying out the ‘facts’, says:

But it’s also no surprise that people are once again stunned by Google’s behavior here. And Google’s statement will not set everyone at ease.
The facts are that:

  1. Google secretly developed a way to circumvent default privacy settings established by a hated competitor, Apple
  2. Google enabled this workaround to further its own advertising (revenue) and social-networking goals.
  3. Google then used the workaround to drop ad-tracking cookies on the Safari users, which is exactly the sort of practice that Apple was trying to prevent

Given the scrutiny around Google’s power and privacy practices, Google’s decision to do this can charitably be described as tone-deaf. More accurately, it can be described as idiotic. But, as usual, there’s a backstory.

What the hell is Google thinking to design a system to 'workaround' (trick) my specific privacy settings to limit cookies? (Safari iOS settings)

I think it’s scummy of Google. Scummy. Even the very reasonable John Battelle seems to agree, provisionally:

In this case, what Google and others have done sure sounds wrong – if you’ve going to resort to tricking a browser into offering up information designated by default as private, you need to somehow message the user and explain what’s going on. Then again, in the open web, you don’t have to – most browsers let you set cookies by default. In iOS within Safari, perhaps such messaging is technically impossible, I don’t know. But these shenanigans are predictable, given the dynamic of the current food fight between Google, Apple, Facebook, and others. It’s one more example of the sad state of the Internet given the war between the Internet Big Five. And it’s only going to get worse, before, I hope, it gets better again.

Flash — another dodgy business model IMO

John Battelle also mentions Flash — which, truth be told, I was very dubious about when I heard there was such a thing as ‘Flash cookies‘. I downloaded Flush app for OSX to get rid of them periodically *— before following John Gruber’s lead and removing the Flash plug-ins from my computer … relying on the Flash player embedded in Google Chrome (ha! the irony), which quits when I quit Chrome, unlike system-wide Flash, as I understand it.

This move from Google, following their streetview camera cars snooping on private wifi networks and in the context of their soon-to-be-unified ‘privacy policies’ makes me doubt them even more.

I think Google’s intentions are suspect, and I’m moving to a ‘guilty until proven innocent‘ attitude to them. The same view I have of Facebook, incidentally.

As Kashmir Hill puts it:

GOOG Safari tracking is same “co. doing something it shouldn’t, but w/o nefarious purpose” storyline appearing again & again in tech space.

Yeah, it’s a pattern.

For me, it’s time to disentangle myself from Google, if possible. They’re doing ‘evil’, in my eyes.

– P

* I just ran Flush and it cleaned out 83 flash cookies. What the hell?

Update: And yeah (hell yeah) I’ve purged the 3790 cookies stored on Safari.

Media issues - Tech
, ,

Do your opinions invalidate your reporting? – continued

Posted in 18 February 2012
Comments Off on Do your opinions invalidate your reporting? – continued

I can see both sides of this conflict, which is rarely spelt out so plainly.

Honolulu mayoral candidate tries to get Civil Beat reporter thrown off campaign

by Andrew Beaujon
Published Feb. 17, 2012 11:38 am Poynter Institute

Former Hawaii Gov. Ben Cayetano is running for mayor in Honolulu. And he does not like what Honolulu Civil Beat’s been writing about him.

“There is no point in talking to a reporter who accuses me of lacking in ‘believability,’” Cayetano writes to Civil Beat editor John Temple. Of City Beat reporter Michael Levine, Cayetano says, “I will not answer his questions, his phone calls or emails.”

“If Civil Beat wants my opinion on issues — send another of its reporters,” Cayetano writes.

One problem with the former governor’s media criticism: Levine didn’t write the piece Cayetano felt impugned him. Temple did.

“People in public life do not get to choose who covers them,” Temple writes.

I know from personal experience that some news media organizations cave in to political pressure far more subtle than that expressed by former Governor Cayetano. Indeed, some anticipate such objections from ‘newsmakers’. Like an approval-seeking poodle, they cravenly act to stifle coverage which, they apparently believe, may, possibly, be open to imagined criticism from those covered (or their media minders). Such shadow boxing eviscerates journalistic integrity, in my view. Say what you like.

I know that some newsroom directors and their management masters feel that opinions about politicians’ believability expressed by journalists outside the organization’s legitimate realm (i.e. outside the news ‘product’ of their newsroom, e.g. personal social media use or blogs) are a matter for a policy of control (and censorship?) by them.

This “I will not answer his questions” boycott threat is rare, and short-lived in my experience. A partisan, inaccurate or unfair journalist or reporter, as we have discussed many times here, is not doing his or her job. Their duty to their readers — and their subjects — is to be truthful and accurate in their reporting, not necessarily in their opinion about a politician’s trustworthiness.

Governor Cayetano’s complaint runs pretty close to “I don’t like that reporter”. Tough. Professional journalists observe a code of ethics. Pretend-journalists, like partisan attack bloggers, aren’t troubled by such niceties.

‘The View from Nowhere’ fake neutrality’s spell is losing its power — rightly.

– P

See my earlier post: Do your opinions invalidate your reporting?

 

 

 

 

 

Media issues - Politics - Uncategorized
,

Paying for results

Posted in 15 February 2012
17 Comments »

Congratulations (whether they’re deserved or not) to spin doctor Matthew Hooton (last discussed in Matthew Hooton and the exquisite agony of being a paid shill). Look:

Oh.

Read Patrick Gower’s column here.

– P

Business/Investment - Politics

Rupert Murdoch on politicians … and truth

Posted in 15 February 2012
2 Comments »

Wow.

And he knows a few, too.

So ‘truth‘? That’s what News International and News Corporation are aiming for?  *cough* Fox News *cough*

– P

Big Questions - Media issues - Politics
,

Governor Chris Christie

Posted in 15 February 2012
1 Comment »

Gay marriage vote in NJ faces sure veto from Gov. Chris Christie, who prefers the issue be settled by the voters via pie eating contests

Pure genius from whoever runs the parody Twitter account for New York Times public editor.

I laughed.

Big Questions - Humour - Politics

Sources are important (continued)

Posted in 15 February 2012
2 Comments »

I don’t discuss Tucker Carlson much. There’s a good reason for that. I don’t respect what he does. He’s never recovered from the discrediting he received at Jon Stewart’s hands on Crossfire, and his bitterness and petulant readiness to try to label Stewart a ‘partisan hack’ at any slender opportunity is laughable.

Where I do acknowledge Tucker’s expertise is in the area of converting right wing angst about the ‘liberal media’ into a meal ticket. Tucker has managed to attract funding for what was pitched as a right wing answer to the influential left wing news site Hufflington Post — the Daily Caller which histrionically ‘goes after’ left wing media figures exposing them as having opinions (gasp) as if that was akin to exposing a child pornography ring involving policemen, politicians and priests (… oh, wait.)

At present, election year in the US, Tucker and his online mag are trying to discredit Media Matters for America, unquestionably a thorn in the side of the liars and hyperbolists (new word!) of all shades who seek to smear their opponents by falsehoods, deliberate misinterpretations and exaggerations (think Sarah Palin’s ‘death panels’ and Rush Limburgh etc)

Sadly for Tucker (although he’ll gain stature in the view of his one-eyed funders) he’s doing a crap job of it. I read his first breathless vacuum and noted the lack of attribution to sources, calling it an

Obvious smear campaign filled with unnamed ‘sources’, alleged but not produced ‘memos’ and ominous hyperbole. Shabby.

The turgid innuendo about mental illness, allegedly on and off meds, looked like Carlson-esque character assassination and, not providing sources, as I have often said before (see Linking to sources — why it’s vital for credibility (Case study: property spruiker Sean Wood for example) is a dead giveaway for making sh*t up.

The Poynter institute for journalism ran an article by Andrew Beaujon which touches on this lack of sources, actually quantifying Tucker’s (lack of) demonstrated basis for his vitriol …

The Daily Caller’s series of attempted takedowns about Media Matters for America continues with a Tucker Carlson-bylined piece, published late Monday night, that alleges Media Matters considered attending the same events as Fox News personalities … paying for their own tickets if necessary. At least this story has a solid document behind it; the DC’s first story quoted, in order: “a former coworker,” “one employee,” “a former Media Matters employee,” “one staffer,” “one former staffer,” “one source,” “a Media Matters source,” “another source with firsthand knowledge,” “one former staffer,” ”the former employee,” “a Media Matters source,” “a source,” “a fellow attendee,” “this person,” “a coworker,” “Friends,” “Sources back at the Media Matters offices,” “one source with knowledge of what happened next,” “someone who witnessed it,” “One staffer,” “David Saldana, the former deputy editorial director at Media Matters,” and “one employee.”

Before you get too excited about the ‘solid document’ behind Tucker’s second er, article, see this:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/02/daily-caller-publishes-yearold-mmfa-memo-114321.html

Anyway, we could talk until the cows come home about partisan hackery, but my respect as a journalist will always go to those who provide concrete sources for their allegations/exposés etc rather than just try to demean and smear their opponents with name-calling and innuendo or weak suggestions that because someone doesn’t agree with them, they must be kinda insane.

– P

PS Of course Media Matters for America is just as much in the ‘raise funds from like-minded people’, ‘build an empire’ and ‘influence the public discourse’ game as Tucker Carlson and his henchmen teammates are. The political game, especially in America, is so choked with money and influence it attracts people who want … money and influence. Hello?

UPDATE: Doh! Why is Tucker running an “‘Inside Media Matters’ investigative series” now? Gee could it be this:

The Fox Effect How Roger Ailes Turned a Network into a Propaganda Machine

Coming out next week ... so, for the faithful, start discrediting Brock/Media Matters now. D'ya think?

 

Media issues - Writing/Publishing
, , ,

What we look for

Posted in 13 February 2012
3 Comments »

I popped over and read a blog I used to visit a while ago but stopped when the relentlessness of its negativity toward anything remotely liberal (left wing politics, Maori issues, unions, climate change, Occupy movement, etc) became too rich and hysterical.

Wow. My tolerance for the bigotry that this guy pushes had really dropped away. Yuk.

I guess it’s a good example of this:

Source: piccsy.com via Peter on Pinterest

.

Update: fixed the typos. Doh!

– P

Media issues

This still makes me chuckle

Posted in 13 February 2012
1 Comment »

Spotted at a cafe in Howick.

Humour - Media issues

Whitney Houston RIP

Posted in 12 February 2012
Comments Off on Whitney Houston RIP

20120212-160330.jpgSad to hear today that Whitney Houston has died.

What a magnificent gifted voice. RIP.

-P

Uncategorized
,

US troops building bridges with Nazi symbolism …

Posted in 10 February 2012
1 Comment »

I spotted this on the Mother Jones news website today, and words fail me.

Oh, gee. (Mother Jones - click to read)

Why is this making news now? Several Marines who were concerned about the photos contacted Mikey Weinstein (no relation), president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit that watchdogs religious intolerance in the armed services. Their behavior, Weinstein told me, “eviscerates good order, morale, and discipline,” in addition to angering non-Americans and alienating survivors of the Nazis’ atrocities. He published the photos on the foundation’s website and sent a letter to Gen. John Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, demanding punishment for the Marines involved. “That flag symbolizes the vile ideology of Hitlerian fascism and sends a menacing signal to religious minorities within the United States armed forces,” Weinstein said.

Wow.

– P

Big Questions
,

Ellen DeGeneres and ‘traditional values’. Nice.

Posted in 9 February 2012
6 Comments »

Ellen: "My haters are my motivators!" Nice.

Watch this. It’s brilliant. From Ellen DeGeneres, facing a boycott threat against JC Penney from people offended she’s gay …

“I usually don’t talk about stuff like this on my show, but I really want to thank everyone who is supporting me. … Here are the values I stand for: I stand for honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you’d want to be treated and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values. That’s what I stand for.”

Watch the video below (requires Flash).

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Way to go!

– P

Encouragement
,

Full of sound and fury

Posted in 9 February 2012
3 Comments »

Some who fancy themselves as ‘political players’ put me in mind of this from Macbeth:

Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Encouragement - Media issues

Radio station referred to police over pre-election ‘Prime Minister’s hour’

Posted in 9 February 2012
2 Comments »

Not a great look for RadioLIVE just as their excellent TV spots boosting their ‘breaking news’ brand get under way. Ouch. Breaching the Broadcasting Act.

I preferred the Broadcasting Standards Authority’s description of John Key’s (let’s-face-it:-pretty-entertaining-but-maybe-for-the-wrong-reasons) ‘politics free’ radio show as ‘light flim-flam and frivolity‘.

No doubt the legal advice RadioLIVE sought prior to the broadcast will give them a sense of assurance that this will all work out well for them. We’ll see. Radio NZ reports that

…Radio Live was warned against airing the show, but it chose to test the boundaries without offering the same opportunity to other political leaders.

The intersection between news and talkback radio (‘newstalk’) is fraught with tricky ‘programming’ compromises like this, in my experience.

It should be no reflection on the station’s reporters and newsroom staff  what programmes do … but it’s sometimes a hard distinction to make since they share the same ‘brand’. That, and the equally-hard-to-shake awareness that RadioLIVE has fair dripped with former or current National Party MPs or candidates, with a few notable exceptions, over the years.

As former drive time host – now National MP – Maggie Barry, said: ‘Being opinionated is contagious on this station, isn’t it?’

I wish them well.

– P

Media issues - Politics
,

NOT taking their own ‘advice’ … for better outcomes

Posted in 7 February 2012
1 Comment »

Last year I read an article called How Doctors Die which I highly recommend you also read.

In a nutshell, and as a generalization, Ken Murray MD finds that doctors faced with their own terminal disease seek none of the high level medical interventions they might carry out or recommend to their patients, but rather go for palliative care … and instructions like ‘Do not to resuscitate’ …

… doctors die, too. And they don’t die like the rest of us. What’s unusual about them is not how much treatment they get compared to most Americans, but how little. For all the time they spend fending off the deaths of others, they tend to be fairly serene when faced with death themselves. They know exactly what is going to happen, they know the choices, and they generally have access to any sort of medical care they could want. But they go gently.
Of course, doctors don’t want to die; they want to live. But they know enough about modern medicine to know its limits. And they know enough about death to know what all people fear most: dying in pain, and dying alone. They’ve talked about this with their families. They want to be sure, when the time comes, that no heroic measures will happen—that they will never experience, during their last moments on earth, someone breaking their ribs in an attempt to resuscitate them with CPR (that’s what happens if CPR is done right). …

Today I read in What Do Divorce Lawyers Do In Their Own Divorces? (also worth a read) that divorce lawyers in that situation (it must happen all the time) avoid fighting and try to negotiate!

… They try to stay out of court. Despite their familiarity with the system, and despite any perceived advantage they are believed to have, they do everything they can to settle their case before it reaches the court system.
Divorce insiders try to resist the inclination to fight. They think going to court is a losing proposition. It wastes energy, time, and money and is a last resort; it is something they will consider only when there is no other choice.

Well! What to think about anybody’s ‘advice’?

– P

PS As far as I know I’m not ill or getting divorced. (In case you wondered.)

Encouragement
,

Study: Right-wingers are dumber. Preposterous!

Posted in 7 February 2012
6 Comments »

From the RadioLIVE website:

A paper, published in Psychological Science, claims that people with ring-wing views tend to be less intelligent than those on the left. It claims that people of lower-intelligence tend towards right-wing views as they make them feel ‘safe’.
…. Children on the study were assessed for innate intelligence aged 10 or 11, then assessed politically at the age of 33.
… It found that people with a low childhood intelligence gravitated towards racist and anti-gay views as they grew up.

Here’s a link to the original ‘Daily Mail’ story for more detail. (If you care.) It includes this …

Individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate towards more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo. …
The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics.
… ‘Conservative ideology represents a critical pathway through which childhood intelligence predicts racism in adulthood,’ says the paper.
‘In psychological terms, the relation between intelligence and prejudice may stem from the propensity of individuals with lower cognitive ability to endorse more right wing conservative ideologies because such ideologies offer a psychological sense of stability and order.’

Somebody’s having a laugh. But what if it’s true?

– P

Encouragement - Humour - Politics
 Page 69 of 132  First  ... « Previous 67  68  69  70  71 Next » ...  Last