This Hour in Google Government Affairs

Last October, The Guardian covered Google's initial European government affairs steps in London.  Now, FT reports that the company is hiring lobbyists in ten different European capitals.   Regardless, The Register says that Google "snubbed" a Westminster Net Neutrality debate.

Speaking of Net Neutrality, somehow this blog has missed heralding the hire of ex-MCI regulatory lawyer Rick Whitt to the DC team even though we saw him with a hand-written Google badge at the Internet Caucus conference back in early February.  Yesterday, Whitt re-explained Google's Net Neutrality position as covered by GigaOm's Paul Kapustka and as dissected by tech policy watcher Drew Clark.  Clark also shames this site's occasional Google-obsession by taking the time to comment under the GigaOm piece about the "different cultures" and backgrounds that exist on the Google government affairs team and says that this will be will be "one of the more interesting stories in Internet policy for months or even years to come." 

Yes, fascinating times, indeed.  I can just see a reality-TV producer pitching the can't miss show of the season...

"It's the perfect office conflict reality show.  We've got a Harvard Law School guy who helped run a quasi-Internet regulatory body mixing it up with a guy, who, get this went to Yale Law School!!!  And, the Yale Law School guy worked at an Internet policy advocacy think tank!  I know, it's pretty crazy, but wait, it gets even better.  The leading lady role goes to ..... drum roll, please .... a Republican!  And, she even worked in the White House.... Okay, you really need to get off the floor so I can finish this pitch.... You good?  Need water?  Okay.  Finally, in walks a guy from a telecom company and he went to Georgetown Law!  I know.  Whoa...

...Wait, wait ... did I tell you that they have a DC PR guy who is also a blogger?  And, even better, what's sexier than Net Neutrality?

I, for one, can't wait to program my Tivo for this. 

(We kid because we love, Drew ;).

Comments

[cheap nfl jerseys]

This is a good,common sense article.Very helpful to one who is just finding the resouces about this part.It will certainly help educate me.

[NFL Shop]

Good article, Each and every point is good enough.Thanks for sharing with us your wisdom.

[NFL Jerseys]

I am totally agree with your oppinion.this blog post is very encouraging to people who want to know these topics.

[polo shirts]

I love it,Excellent article.I am decide to put this into use one of these days.Thank you for sharing this.To Your Success!

[oakley sunglasses]

I was actually looking for this resource a few weeks back. Thanks for sharing with us your wisdom.This will absolutely going to help me in my projects .

[ray ban sunglasses]

Ha, that’s actually a really good suggestion. Thanks so much for this!

[gucci sunglasses]

The perfect!These articles written too great,they rich contents and data accurately.they are help to me.I expect to see your new share

[louis vuitton outlet]

I was actually looking for this resource a few weeks back. Thanks for sharing with us your wisdom.This will absolutely going to help me in my projects .

[Microsoft Office 2007]

This is a good,common sense article.Very helpful to one who is just finding the resouces about this part.It will certainly help educate me

[Supra skytop]

maybe it could be easy or difficult..

[air yeezy]

Go its own way, just referring to someone else..

[Michael Jones]

I can just see a reality-TV producer pitching the can't miss show of the season.

[Andre]

about corporate lobbniyg of late, criticizing such activity, equally important is how Google and other companies deal with their political spending.Does Google disclose to its shareholders its political spending? Does it disclose its political giving policies to shareholders? Is there any sort of oversight of political giving at the executive and board levels?Transparency is the key here. The risks to shareholders by failing to disclose this information are significant.

[Sheikh]

Posted on Haikel Amigo te FELICITO !!!! no sabes la alegria que me da, se que te esfrazoste mucho y estabas muy entusiasmado con lo del concurso, me parece lo maximo que hayas ganado.FELICIDADES

[Leandro]

Curtis,There’s no dispute from me about hinisrtaos on an ad hoc basis for the simple reason that it’s too obvious a thesis to contradict. The only real question is whether a case can be made for an institutional role on the basis of what history does as a discipline (that’s what I meant by... Curtis,There’s no dispute from me about hinisrtaos on an ad hoc basis for the simple reason that it’s too obvious a thesis to contradict. The only real question is whether a case can be made for an institutional role on the basis of what history does as a discipline (that’s what I meant by “as a rule”). I don’t see an institutional role for history because there is no official or state of the art history. Sure, one historian can come in (i.e., as in the Arctic conference example) and summarize what everyone already knows in part, in whole or implicitly. No doubt the participants’ familiarly with the account presented by this historian had a lot to do with the plaudits. But, as I pointed out before, the party’s over when the second historian comes in and offers another take on events. As for the Enros case, it’s not really a historian informing bureaucrats, it’s a bureaucrat who happens to be a historian writing down what he learned as a bureaucrat. It’s really a record of his institutional knowledge, and he and others will add his findings to their background knowledge. Maybe a case can be made for hinisrtaos collecting and synthesizing the institutional knowledge of an organization, but such a historian would be acting as an archival specialist and an agent of the institution, not in his capacity as a historian.The same conclusion applies to finding a role for hinisrtaos on a case by case basis. The usefulness of hinisrtaos or history will be open to interpretation, so it’s hard to see how an institutional role could, in principle, materialize out of such an analysis when any subsequent meta-analysis will likely show that the conclusions were contingent on certain assumptions. In other words, the result would look like every other history of x, which really only makes it interesting for hinisrtaos as hinisrtaos.At any rate, here's my positive suggestion, which I note is not worth much because hinisrtaos do it already: if a historian has an important contribution to make to a particular science policy, he (and if possible his peers) should write a book about it.