A Google Health Advertising Blog recommendation that healthcare companies buy advertisements linked to searches involving Michael Moore's Sicko has stirred controversy and raised concerns over Google's power in shaping public debate.
On the blog, Google employee Lauren Turner said Moore's polemic on the failings of American medical care "portrays the industry as money and marketing driven, and fails to show healthcare’s interest in patient well-being and care."
Predictably, the post angered a lot of people: since when did Google, famous for its "Don't Be Evil" ethos, start using its enormous power as an advertising platform to defend a health care industry widely acknowledged, by liberals and conservatives alike, as broken?
Turner quickly issued a retraction, saying the post reflected her own views, not Google's. The apology rang hollow, though -- if a Google employee makes suggestions directly related to Google's business on a
Google-run blog, it's hard not to see it as a reflection on the company.
Moreover, whether or not you agree with Moore or like Sicko -- and the reviews have been decidedly mixed-- it's disturbing to see Google taking sides on such a controversial issue. The company exerts enormous influence over the flow of information in digital society, and needs to be very careful in how it uses that power.
Related the Epicenter blog's contrarian take here. More Wired coverage here and here.
Does negative press make you Sicko? [Google Health Advertising Blog]
Google apologises for Sicko outburst [The Inquirer]