This is just that Greenpeace survey again which rated Nintendo zero in everything because they didn't send any information to Greenpeace. Google decides it has better things to do than fill out forms for One World Trust, whoever the fuck they are, so One World Trust rates them zero in transparency and evaluation and gleefully releases a press release which they know will get them attention. Really the only thing Google scores zero in is "Responding to surveys by One World Trust", but that doesn't grab the headlines so well.

Even putting that aside, rating multinational corporations on the same scale as governmental and non-governmental bodies is manifestly stupid. Governmental organisations and NGOs should be accountable to make up for the fact that they're not reliant on satisfying consumer demand. Companies, from Google down to Joe Bloggs & Son Plumbers, don't have to be accountable, there is only one thing they have to be: profitable. Publicly traded companies must fulfill some openness obligations for the sake of their shareholders, but that's it; clearly Google shareholders are happy with Google's openness or they wouldn't be buying the shares.

The only people who are unhappy are these jumped-up dickheads who think that companies have an obligation to go "Tell the customers to wait, Clarice, I've got to fill out this form for Greenpeace/One World Trust/Busybodies United" because they've latched on like leeches to some fashionable cause.

umm, makes you wonder about their research

http://www.google.co.uk/contact/index.html

O rly?

Yes, there's a page with 'Contact Us' at the top but there is no general way to actually contact them save from the Address and Phone number (both of which are mentioned in the report).

I've just seen a third instance of a pressure group mass-mailing companies with pointless questionnaires on their ethical or environmental behaviour, waiting for some of them not to reply, then ringing up the press to tell them that "A recent study shows that <Popular Brand Name Here> is one of the worst companies for the environment/accountability/cuddling pandas" for not sending back their forms.

The WWF has pulled the same trick and given Bulgari & Tod's an F for "social and governance performance and reputation" because, you guessed it, it failed to respond fully to the questionnaires they sent them. See http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ed3ab118-9e1e-11dc-9f68-0000779fd2ac.html.

Presumably the "F" stands for "Fuck off and mind your own business, we're a jewellery maker not a logging company or a coal power station and have no obligation to fill in forms for pro wrestlers".

Greenpeace, The One Trust and now WWF. Is this a new thing or does it go on all the time and I've only just noticed it?

... where the Metropolitan Police stand on accountability?

The Met's very easy to contact, however - all you need is a sallow complexion and a tube ticket from Stockwell.

With anything but the vague "do no evil" slogan?

Has anybody succeded in getting google to show what they have collected as information on them, and thus gotten a chance to correct any wrong info?

No?

THEN STOP DEFENDING THEM! Period.

//Svein

In the US corporations are given similar rights as individuals (referred to as Corporate personhood). It could be argued that this gives them a responsibility to be held accountable in the way governmental organisations are. Either that or they should lose their priviliged status.

This bizarre law acts against the public interest (see http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=183&Itemid=38&mosmsg=Thanks%20for%20your%20vote!)

Nevertheless, even if Google was an unethical company, most of the planet would still use it. Yahoo's recent activity in cooperating with Chinese law didn't do it any real harm - there are many other American corporations actively 'collaborating' with the Chinese government to provide them the means to spy on their citizens (to who knows what end) that aren't hauled over the coals like Yahoo was.

Quite often using a 'contact us for help' form degenerates into a python script offering help for topics unrelated to a specific request. Google prefers to feed users into generic 'you may get help' user groups, rather than get yet-another-silly-email-request, which is the only gripe I have with their overall technology.