The Corner

Google Is Still Watching You


A couple of weeks ago, I discovered that my Google Android phone was collecting more information about me than I’d realized. I wrote a short piece about it, which appeared on NRO last Thursday. Google got in touch with me the same day.

In a lengthy phone call, a pair of spokesmen explained that Google takes privacy concerns seriously, and tried hard to convince me that I’d gotten the facts wrong. There is one point I will concede: I said the location-sharing service Latitude was new; apparently it’s been around since 2009 and was merely newly installed on my phone, bundled in a system update that was installed automatically.

Here is an example of Google’s thinking: I had said that “it seemed the only thing I could do with Latitude was turn it on.” Google objected: You don’t have to turn Latitude on, and you can certainly turn it off, so my comment was inaccurate. But I used the word “seemed” for a reason, and explained the process in the piece: While you can launch Latitude like any app (with one touch), you have to go into a different app, and then access a menu and a submenu, to turn it off. At that point, the device warns you that using standalone GPS instead of Latitude can “pose certain risks.” Thus Google nudges its customers: What they want you to do is easy; what they’d rather you didn’t do, isn’t.

Google spoke at length about being “proactive,” pointing out that they were not legally required to send out privacy e-mails like the one that triggered my previous piece. And Google spokesman Eitan Bencuya asked that I print the following statement; I think it frames the issue nicely: “All location sharing on Android is opt-in by the user. We provide users with notice and control over the collection, sharing and use of location in order to provide a better mobile experience on Android devices. Any location data that is sent back to Google location servers is anonymized and is not tied or traceable to a specific user.”

But this left me wondering how I’d started sharing my location without knowing it, and exactly when I’d given Google permission to track my phone.

When I bought my phone, of course. I’d accepted all sorts of things during the initial setup. Somewhere in that jumble was the message about Google collecting anonymous location data continuously and the (according to Google) Verizon-authored warning that standalone GPS could “pose certain risks.”

It is, of course, possible to reject a privacy warning or user agreement. My mom did that with Google’s Android Market. So now, every evening around 11 p.m., the user agreement comes back — just to give her one more chance to think things over. She’s thinking about accepting the agreement just to get her phone to stop badgering her. No doubt that’s exactly what Google wants.

Daniel Gelernter — Dan Gelernter is an occasional contributor to National Review and the Weekly Standard and is CEO of the tech startup Dittach.

Most Popular


Democrats Are Dumping Moderates

The activist base of the Democratic party is lurching left fast enough that everyone should pay attention. Activists matter because their turnout in low-turnout primaries and caucuses almost propelled leftist Bernie Sanders to victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016. Last month, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unseated New ... Read More

Questions for Al Franken

1)Al, as you were posting on social media a list of proposed questions for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, did it occur to you that your opinion on the matter is no more relevant than Harvey Weinstein’s? 2) Al, is it appropriate for a disgraced former U.S. senator to use the Twitter cognomen “U.S. ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Strzok by a Farce

An investigation is one of two things: a search for the truth, or a farce. The House is conducting a farce. That fact was on full display during ten hours of testimony by Peter Strzok, the logorrheic lawman who steered the FBI’s Clinton-emails and Trump–Russia probes. The principal question before the ... Read More
Film & TV

Stalin at the Movies

Toward the end of The Death of Stalin, two Communist Party bosses size up Joseph Stalin’s immediate successor, Georgy Malenkov. “Can we trust him?” one asks. “Can you ever really trust a weak man?” his comrade answers. Good question. Last week brought the news that the head of Shambhala ... Read More