|
|
President of Precursor LLC
Scott Cleland is a leading advocate of Google transparency and accountability. He addresses these issues on his website, GoogleMonitor.com, which he said was founded to close the information gap for citizens. Scott Cleland’s component site, Googleopoly.net, shares extensive research, information, and Congressional testimony on fairness and antitrust issues as related to Google. Scott Cleland was the first analyst to warn Congress and testify on concerns about Google concerns. GoogleMonitor.com calls for the search engine to be as accountable, transparent, and ethical as it expects of its users. Scott Cleland coined the term “publicacy,” to describe the radical movement that the promotes of transparency over privacy on the Internet. Scott Cleland’s watchdog website addresses what it considers to be algorithm secrecy, anti-competitive behavior, and abuse of power. Unfair representation, insufficient security, and censorship are other issues Scott Cleland addresses at GoogleMonitor.com. Operating on the premise that over 80 percent of the world use Google as their search engine of choice, Scott Cleland questions whether users have objective access to information. Scott Cleland also criticizes what he says is a lack of government oversight. Scott Cleland, President of the telecom consulting firm Precursor LLC, graduated from Kalamazoo College with a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science in 1982. He was recipient of the Distinguished Achievement Award, an alumni award for career achievements. In obtaining his Master’s degree from the University of Texas LBJ School of Public Affairs, Scott Cleland completed his thesis on the topic of coal trade in Krakow, Poland.
Scott Cleland's Companies
Scott Cleland's Publications
-
|
GoogleMonitor.com: Ensuring Minimum Standards of Transparency and Accountability for Google
April, 2011
As an independent research broker and President of the consulting firm Precursor LLC, Scott Cleland maintains an active interest in the issues surrounding broadband Internet and search engine firms, particularly with regards to antitrust and privacy concerns. He is the publisher of GoogleMonitor.com, a website focused on ensuring that Google, Inc., meets minimum standards of transparency and accountability.
As one of the most influential companies worldwide, Google’s power derives not only from its monetary assets, but from its position as the search engine of choice for the majority of Internet users today. Because of the transnational nature of the Internet, Google’s unchecked dominance stretches across international boundaries, threatening traditional concepts of privacy, security, and limits to monopolistic power. GoogleMonitor.com offers visitors access to a comprehensive range of news articles focused on Google in areas such as privacy, security, intellectual property, transparency, neutrality, ethics, and public policy. GoogleMonitor.com maintains a “Google Gets it Right” section as well, which focuses on the things Google does well. The “Tell Your Story” section allows individuals to post their own experiences and concerns about Google. The “Complaints/Lawsuits” page on GoogleMonitor.com provides an excellent primer on Google practices that are actively being challenged in courts of law and regulatory commissions worldwide.
One recent case involves the French Internet company 1plusV, which recently filed evidence of dominant market position abuse before the European Commission. In particular, Google is accused of leveraging its dominant position in requiring non-Google thematic search engines to adopt its technological platform if they wish to access its advertising services. In addition, 1plusV claims that Google gives priority to its own searches over those of competitors during vertical, or thematic, searches for books, without clearly distinguishing its self-generated results from others. This is critical, as 1plusV views vertical searches as one of the few search engine arenas in which viable competition still exists. Lastly, 1plusV alleges that Google is actively seeking to hinder the development of alternative search engine technologies. Whether or not the 1plusV case is one with compelling merits remains for the European Commission to decide, but this and other claims of Google’s abuses of power are easily accessible at GoogleMonitor.com
|
|
