-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ Homer on Monday 08 Aug 2011 17:17 : \____
> Verily I say unto thee that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>
>> Burson-Marsteller in Germany anti-Google smear campaign sponsored by
>> Microsoft Article in newspaper:
>> http://www.fr-online.de/politik/meinung/der-mensch-denkt--google-lenkt/-/1472602/8736368/-/
>> Covered here too:
>> http://netzwertig.com/2011/08/05/mangelnde-transparenz-uber-lobbyismus-in-der-internetwirtschaft/
>> http://blog.die-linke.de/digitalelinke/anti-google-pr-in-der-frankfurter-rundschau/
>
> [quote]
> Anti-Google PR in the Frankfurter Rundschau
> Written by Juergen Scheele on August 2, 2011
>
> The "Frankfurter Rundschau" today opened its pages for a guest post by
> Christoph Waitz under the title "Man proposes, Google directs" . This
> Google as a "menace to society and to free knowledge" is displayed.
> Waitz himself, from 2005 to 2009 a member of parliament and spokesman of
> the FDP parliamentary group for cultural and media policy, is a
> spokesman for ICOMP (Initiative for a competitive online market) named
> in Germany.
>
> Is not communicated through the leaf, however, that it is ICOMP to one
> run by the PR agency Burson-Marsteller and Microsoft-funded lobbying
> organization for the promotion - so loud self-reported data - the
> competition in online advertising and the protection of intellectual
> property To safeguard Authors 'and publishers' rights concerns.
>
> On the website of the organization chef and waiters are clearly spelled
> out: "ICOMP is funded by membership fees and is funded by Microsoft.
> Burson-Marsteller acts as the secretariat of the initiative. "The fact
> that the initiative specifically runs PR campaigns against Google was,
> most recently at Spreeblick read at the May uncovered, Burson-Marsteller
> on behalf of Facebook executed PR campaign against Google. Previously
> had Spielkamp Matthias pointed out the role of ICOMP and
> Burson-Marsteller to promote the publishers demanded by the press
> service protection rights.
> [/quote]
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4xt59cq [Google translation]
>
> This isn't new though. Microsoft set up this astroturfing group in 2007,
> in response to Google's acquisition of DoubleClick:
>
> [quote]
> Microsoft Funding Anti-Google Trade Group Since 2007
>
> Under the somewhat sensational headline, âDark forces gunning for
> Google,â The Telegraph today shared the story of ICOMP â the Initiative
> for a Competitive Online Marketplace â a European-based trade group that
> appears to exist mostly, or solely, to be a thorn in Googleâs side.
>
> On its website, ICOMP hits all the right notes. Its mission statement
> talks about âsupport for principles that are essential to a healthy
> online environmentâ and âthe adoption of best practices to promote
> creativity, innovation, safety and trust.â
>
> But the group also says that âno single company should be allowed to
> abuse its market power to the detriment of competition or consumers,â
> and that seems to hint at its real target: Google. In fact, ICOMPâs
> Industry News page should be called a âGoogle investigations and
> complaintsâ page: Of the 40 articles listed, only three donât have
> Googleâs name in the headline.
>
> As The Telegraph article points out, Microsoft is listed as ICOMPâs
> âinitial trusteeâ in this PDF available on the groupâs web site, and
> thereâs small print in the site footer that says ICOMP is âfunded by
> member contributions as well as sponsorship from Microsoft.â All of this
> actually goes back to 2007, when Microsoft and PR agency,
> Burson-Marsteller, formed ICOMP and began to fight against Googleâs
> acquisition of DoubleClick.
> [/quote]
>
> http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-funding-anti-google-trade-group-since-2007-57953
>
> "no single company should be allowed to abuse its market power to the
> detriment of competition or consumers"
>
> Says the shill defending the world's worst culprit, Microsoft.
>
> He also failed to explain exactly /how/ Google is allegedly "abusing"
> its market power, since AFAICT there is in fact no barrier preventing
> people using competing search engines, all of which are free, and all of
> which are freely accessible.
>
> This is in stark contrast to Microsoft's near total monopoly on PCs,
> which are preinstalled with Windows without option or recourse, due to
> secret "agreements" between OEMs and Microsoft.
>
> But then I don't seriously expect a paid Microsoft shill to make sense.
> His job isn't to make sense, it's to "kill" his client's competition.
>
> Pamela Jones put this quite succinctly:
>
> "Is your horse *really* faster? If so, why shoot my horse?"
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090619161307529
>
> Because they're gangsters.
What about the "new Microsoft"?
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Dr. Roy S. Schestowitz (Ph.D. Medical Biophysics), Imaging Researcher
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux administration | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Editor @ http://techrights.org & Broadcaster @ http://bytesmedia.co.uk/
GPL-licensed 3-D Othello @ http://othellomaster.com
Non-profit search engine proposal @ http://iuron.com
Contact E-mail address (direct): s at schestowitz dot com
Contact Internet phone (SIP): schestowitz@xxxxxxxxx (24/7)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk5A5SYACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5ONQCfXCxLP5ceCL8c2B3/l/idYJMx
47cAnikSA4V6tBc2Uble42erbd94xABc
=x9Lz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
