Big Brother or 'way kool'?

The e-mail came into my in-box innocently enough, something about uber-search champ Google winning another award. Hold a moment. Upon further review, it seems that Google is being nominated for Privacy International's Big Brother award -- a dubious honor it probably wouldn't want to flaunt in the trophy case. The nomination came from the folks who run Google Watch, who are on a crusade of sorts to show that Google's Web domination includes questionable tracking of users' surfing habits, and could provide that info to government spooks without your knowledge.

The anti-Google campaign looked like it hit paydirt with a story on PC Magazine's Web site by Cade Metz titled "Is Google Invading Your Privacy?" After a little investigating, Metz found that Google's Toolbar application -- and indeed Google searches on its site -- "collects a good deal of information about your query." But then again, so does every other site that uses "cookies," which are prevalent on commercial Web sites. The worrisome thing is, Metz contends, that Google is used by such a wide audience. The company defended its practices and said it doesn't share surfer data with third parties.

And indeed, in the PC Mag forum, readers quickly defended Google, with one person saying PC Mag's publisher Ziff Davis should get the award instead. For the most part, the media, too, have been downright googly-eyed about the search company and its latest string of successes, from buying up Blogger to getting a patent for delivering relevant search results. After Google won an award for international branding, beating out Apple Computer and Coca-Cola (it was an online survey, duh), TechTV's Becky Worly positively glowed, writing "everyone's gaga for Google."

How far could Worly go? She let Google's flack go the distance, recounting a tear-jerking story complete with violins: "One individual wrote us and told us he was experiencing symptoms of a heart attack. [He] went to Google, saw that he was indeed having those symptoms, was able to find the information very quickly, and called the paramedics. This man claims that we helped to save his life."

The necessary watchdog

Worly admits that bad press is hard to come by on Google, and that's where Google Watch comes in. When AOL dominated, there was AOL Watch. When Microsoft dominated (and continues to dominate), there is Microsoft Watch. So Google Watch continues the long tradition of Web advocacy aimed at putting a check on powerful companies, usually in the tech realm. Worly needed a counterbalance for all the sweetness and light of most of her piece and quoting from Google Watch's site fit the bill to conclude the article with a note of caution.

Not one to blink at privacy concerns -- or a Net phenomenon -- the Media Guardian's Simon Waldman was torn between praising Google and worrying about it. He calls the company "very smart" for buying Blogger, and in its "very smart, very graceful way, Google is becoming to the Internet what Microsoft is to the PC." Too smart for its own good, eh? Waldman doesn't buy into Google Watch's "evil empire" talk, though he admits it might be pushing the boundaries in privacy areas. His hope is that this nouveau empire will not abuse its newfound power.

Two possible abuses arose recently, as Google was accused of censoring a Web site from its search results, and the company sent legal notes over worries that its name could become a common (i.e. not trademarkable) noun and verb for Web searches. In the former case, a bad joke site about molesting girls was lowered in rankings after the town of Chester, in the U.K., was upset that searches for "Chester guide" brought up this page signed by one "Chester the Molester." Even in this case, a special site sprung up to attack Google.

In the latter case, Google was simply trying to protect its name from the Xerox problem, wherein its brand name becomes common usage -- e.g. "She googled the guy to find out more about him online." Uh-uh, say Google lawyers, who had Word Spy change its definition of Google to include the trademark. One expert told InternetNews.com that it's "a tricky business" for companies, who strive so hard for such recognition, but then don't want to lose their very name to competitors and the common rabble.

And in this lies Google's dilemma. With no marketing, no advertising, really nothing but a darned good search engine, the company has become an Internet powerhouse and favorite. But in its flush of success, it comes under the media microscope, with everyone waiting for it to flub it all up somehow. So far Google has fared well and deflected most of the criticism, but the coming storm generated by its domination will show every chink in its armor -- with a specialty Web site dedicated to each miscue.