You are here

Google Profiting from Hacked Celebrity Women Photos is “How Google Works”


Google executives are on tour selling their new book: “How Google Works,” which actually tells very little about how Google really works when it comes to Google’s effect on people, and the protection of their well-being, property, privacy, safety, and dignity.

To really learn “How Google Works:”    

Ask the women celebrities victimized by the hacking and theft of their private property and privacy from iCloud (like Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, and Rihanna), whose stolen photos are most accessed via Google search, and who are reportedly threatening Google with a $100m lawsuit for profiting from the stolen goods and “the victimization of women,”  – for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the National Association of Human Trafficking Victim Advocates why it has written a letter to the National Association of Attorneys General urging them to investigate Google for profiting from the sale of online ads that contribute to the trafficking of women and girls, – for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the petitioners who have signed’s online petition from the Women's News Network why they have to urge Google's CEO and top leadership to "Stop Google AdWords from all involvement in the sexual exploitation of women and girls," – for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the Congressional lawmakers who have written a letter to Google CEO Larry Page to stop sexually exploitative advertising and marketing that harms women and girls, – for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the parents of little girls and boys who have long complained to Google to no avail for Google allowing its social network Google+ to become a virtual playground for online predators to post explicit sexual content without oversight, and why Google still allows predators and other unwanted people to join anyone’s Google+ Circle with no way to disassociate with them -- for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the families of those harmed or potentially killed by Google knowingly marketing $500m of illegal imports of illicit prescription drugs like steroids and barbiturates to Americans and teenagers over several years, or ask the Rhode Island U.S. Attorney who told the WSJ that Google’s “Larry Page knew what was going on” with the illegal drug marketing --  for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the parents of children on which Google has been secretly and illegally collecting private student data for advertising purposes, in violation of their privacy representations and the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), -- for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask anyone who has lost a loved one to a distracted driver, or any State Legislator, State Attorneys General, or State/Local Police Chiefs what they think of Google’s lobbying to exempt drivers using Google Glass from distracted driving liability -- for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask the Digital Citizens Alliance about their 2014 investigative report entitled “Digital Weeds: How Google Continues to Allow Bad Actors to Flourish on YouTube,” which shows evidence of how Google continues to present advertising for searches such as these: “Buy Percocet without a prescription;” “buy steroids online;” and “find underage prostitute;” -- for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask any of the many websiteowners whose online livelihood has been randomly harmed or wiped out without explanation or recourse from a Google Panda search algorithm update, -- for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask any of the following victims of Google’s piracy and theft who have sued Google for profiting from their property without compensation: Overture, eBay-Paypal, BuySafe, Skyhook Wireless, CamUp, Viacom, Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, wire services, newspapers, broadcasters, movie studios, authors, publishers, visual artists, software providers, photographers, artists, graphic designers, illustrators, and filmmakers – for their thoughts on “How Google Works.”

Ask Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, the State AG who has most investigated Google wrongdoing, why he wrote Google CEO Larry Page (11-27-13) and said: “In my 10 years as attorney general, I have dealt with a lot of large corporate wrongdoers. I must say that yours is the first I have encountered to have no corporate conscience for the safety of its customers, the viability of its fellow corporations or the negative economic impact on the nation which has allowed your company to flourish;” – for his thoughts on “How Google Works.”


Why is there such a difference between Google’s claims about “How Google Works” and how Google works in actuality?

In other words, how can Google routinely get away with publicly saying one thing and doing another?

Cynically Google has learned that its billion users of Google search, YouTube, Android, Maps and Chrome, have effectively bought into, or chosen to depend on, the Google platform, and in turn have chosen practically to believe what Google says it does. And Google’s PR is also expert in reinforcing that belief via telling users exactly what they want to hear, like Google  claiming to be “the safest place to put your data,” when Google knows that it is not true (see here, here and here).

Even more cynically, Google knows that the vast majority of global web properties, online news sites and blogs (outside of China, Russia, and South Korea) -- that normally would or could provide some public, or competitive, accountability to keep Google honest --- are effectively on the Google payroll, and thus have a strong financial conflict of interest to “not bite the hand that feeds them.”

More specifically, Google knows that the ~$13b Google pays to its surveillance syndicate partners annually in “traffic acquisition costs,” to exclusively use Google search, YouTube, Maps, Analytics, DoubleClick, etc. on their web properties, comes with an implicit expectation that the site will not bite the hand that feeds them more Internet traffic and advertising revenue than any other entity in the world.

Moreover, Google is known to make public examples of those who challenge Google’s power and treatment of them, like Google did last week by removing the snippet summaries and thumbnail images of German publishers for having the audacity to challenge Google’s market power. This Google retribution confirms German publishers’ fear of Google is well-founded.

Furthermore, Google knows that websites have learned from past Panda search algorithm updates that they themselves could be one Panda update from search result oblivion. Again the implicit message intended or not, is clear: don’t get on the bad side of Google or get punished swiftly without appeal.

Google’s “huge, huge, huge, market share” and consequent dominance empowers Google to say one thing publicly and do another with impunity.

Finally, Google acts like it believes that “history is written by the victors.”




Google Unaccountability Series


Part 0: Google's Poor & Defiant Settlement Record [5-1-12]

Part 1: Why Google Thinks It Is Above the Law [4-17-12]

Part 2: Top Ten Untrue Google Stories [5-8-12]

Part 3: Google's Growing Record of Obstruction of Justice [6-21-12]

Part 4: Why FTC's $22.5m Privacy Fine is Faux Accountability [7-12-12]

Part 5: Google's Culture of Unaccountability: In Their Own Words [8-1-12]

Part 6: Google Mocks the FTC's Ineffectual Privacy & Antitrust Enforcement [8-10-12]

Part 7: An FTC Googleopoly Get Out of Jail Free Card? [8-30-12]

Part 8: Top Lessons to Learn for Google Antitrust Enforcers [9-14-12]

Part 9: Google Mocks EU and FTC in Courting Yahoo Again [9-26-12]

Part 10: FTC-Google Antitrust: The Obvious Case of Consumer Harm [11-25-12]

Part 11: Why FTC Can't Responsibly End Google Search Bias Antitrust Investigation [11-27-12]

Part 12: Oversight Questions for FTC's Handling of Google Antitrust Probe [11-30-12]

Part 13: Courts Not FTC Should Decide on Google Practices (The Hill Op-ed) [12-10-12]

Part 14: Troubling Irregularities Mount in FTC Handling of Google Investigation [12-17-12]

Part 15: Top Ten Unanswered Questions on FTC-Google Outcome [1-3-14]

Part 16: Top Takeaways from FTC's Google Antitrust Decisions [1-7-13]

Part 17: Google's Global Antitrust Rap Sheet [1-31-13]

Part 18: Google's Privacy Words vs. its Anti-privacy Deeds [3-8-13]

Part 19: Google's Privacy Rap Sheet Updated - Fact-checking Google's Privacy Claims [3-13-13]

Part 20: DOJ & FTC Report Cards [4-12-13]

Part 21: The Evidence Google Bamboozled EU Competition Authorities [4-19-13]

Part 22: EU-Google: Too Powerful to Prosecute? Problems with Enabling Google [5-1-13]

Part 23: Google's proposed EU Search Bias Remedies: a Satire [5-17-13]

Part 24: Google's Antitrust Rap Sheet Updated [5-27-13]

Part 25: Is This the Track Record of a Trustworthy Company? See Google's Rap Sheet [6-6-13]

Part 26: Top Questions as DOJ-Google Criminal Prosecution Deadline Approaches [7-12-13]

Part 27: The Evidence Google Violated the DOJ Non-Prosecution Agreement [8-8-13]

Part 28: Implications of EU Ruling Google Abused its Search Dominance [9-27-13]

Part 29: Google-YouAd is a Deceptive and Unfair Business Practice [10-24-13]

Part 30: EU's Google Antitrust Problems Not Going Away [12-16-13]

Part 31:  How the Google-EC Competition Deal Harms Europe [2-10-14]

Part 32: Open Letter to European Commissioners to Reject EC-Google Settlement [2-16-14]

Part 33: Google’s Extensive Cover-up [2-25-14]

Part 34: An Open Letter on Google’s Opposition to Distracted Driving Legislation [2-27-14]

Part 35: Google’s Widespread Wiretapping  [3-20-14]

Part 36: The Growing EC-Google Competition Settlement Scandal – an Open Letter [3-31-14]

Part 37: Google’s Glass House [4-14-14]

Part 38: Google’s Titan Spy-Drones Mimic Military Spy Planes [4-17-14]

Part 39: Google’s Anti-Competitive Rap Sheet Warrants Prosecution not Leniency [4-30-14]

Part 40: Google Apps for Education Dangers [5-17-14]

Part 41: Google AdSense Lawsuit Spotlights the Corruption of Unaccountability [5-23-14]

Part 42: Six Ways the FTC is AWOL on Google [7-16-14]

Part 43: Fact-checking Google’s Public EC Competition Defense [9-21-14]


Part 44: Top 10 Reasons Why Google is Causing EU More Problems than Microsoft Did [10-1-14]