Category Archives: Google

Big tech stocks have seen their stellar pandemic-era run abruptly end in early 2022.

With geopolitical turmoil in Ukraine, high inflation around the world, and expectations of rising interest rates, the entire market has started the year sharply lower. But shares of Meta (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NLFX), and Alphabet (GOOGL) are faring even worse than the rest of the market, begging the question: are these top growth stocks now cheap enough to buy?

For JPMorgan, the answer is no. Strategists Mislav Matejka, Prabhav Bhadani, Nitya Saldanha and Karishma Manpuria have examined the market in forensic detail for their latest equity strategy report.

The FAANG stocks or Meta (n Facebook), Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Alphabet (Google) are all lower, even relative to the wider US equities market, which is down over 9% so far in 2022.

Shares of Meta crashed after the company reported its first-ever decline in daily active users last quarter, while Netflix took a similar dive when the company announced it believed subscriber growth will slow next quarter. As a result, shares of Meta are down over 39% year-to-date, while Netflix is down 36%. Meanwhile, Apple shares are down 7%, while shares of Amazon and Alphabet are both down over 9% this year.

But according to the team at JPMorgan the issue isn't the price of these high-growth stocks it's the timeframe. When looking at the big picture the JPMorgan team is unconvinced growth stocks are a bargain right now.

"Despite recent underperformance, growth continues to trade near highs, in a multi-year context," they wrote. "In a longer term context, the recent underperformance of growth is much less stark, as it comes on the back of years of outperformance."

"Similarly, the recent underperformance of FAANG relatively also appears muted, considering its large outperformance over the last decade. In fact, the price earnings differential between technology and banks is still close to the widest on record."

Given this, where should investors put their money? The JPMorgan team said that despite its recent rally, value investments continue to trade "outright cheap relative to growth."

"As growth stocks weakened of late, they derated, but are still not outright cheap," they wrote. "On the other side, financials and commodities in particular had a strong rally, but are far from expensive, especially relative to underlying commodity prices and relative to the magnitude of potential rate changes by central banks."

JPMorgan noted that the earnings of growth companies "might not be exceptional anymore," while the earnings of certain value sectors are "bouncing." They also said the forward earnings of value appear to be "bottoming out" versus growth stocks.

"The big driver remains the direction of bond yields," the JPMorgan team explained. "Over the past 10 years, growth style benefitted from negative real rates and subdued bond yields, rerating vs value sectors. If bond yields show a more persistent upside, as central banks undergo a series of rate increases, and as the demand-supply for bonds changes, then the large valuation premium that growth sectors have over value will keep reducing."

Inflation peaking might not be a "durable reason" to go back and buy growth stocks, they warned, but it could offer a short-term tactical bounce.

"We believe one should look through the widespread 'slowdown' calls that are currently in vogue, and stay bullish on banks, mining, energy, insurance, autos, travel and telecoms. The year-to-date market performance is tracking these well."

"The question is whether one should buy back quality, especially if one sees a potential peak in inflation," the team continued. "In our view the key is the direction of bond yields we expect them to continue moving higher, and that was always consistent with cyclical leadership."

The team also gave a nod to one geographic part of the equities market that looks attractive. "Regionally, we reiterate our upgrade of the UK to overweight, after six years of a cautious stance."

Read more:

Are Google, Amazon, Apple and Meta Cheap yet? JPMorgan Has the Answer - Business Insider

Googles quest to find a way forward for targeted advertising in a more privacy-centric world continues unabashed, despite its many (and vocal) detractors. After its previous proposal to replace the third-party cookies ad targeting capabilities came under fire for being potentially too invasive, Google has introduced an alternative cookie alternative called Topics that swings the pendulum in the other direction.

Topics is among Googles attempts to replace the third-party cookie as a means of identifying people online by striking a balance between preserving peoples privacy and preserving companies abilities to buy and sell targeted ads.

Third-party cookies have been the connective tissue for the online advertising ecosystem since its very inception in the 1990s, but Google has decided to disable third-party cookies in its popular Chrome browser in 2023. However, establishing consensus on how the industry can move ahead has proven tricky.

Yes, kind of, but its probably best that we provide some context here.

The simple fact is that Googles previous cookie-replacement proposal Federated Learning of Cohorts really did put the cat amongst the pigeons if we are to stick with the aviary-themed wording. Why? Simply put, the concept of FLoCs was laden with privacy concerns (ironic, no?) and didnt even pass muster under laws such as the European Unions privacy law, the GDPR.

Rather than the cookie-based approach of targeting people at the individual level based on their browsing behaviors, the FLoC approach would clump people into specific interest groups cohorts such as people in the market to buy a car or impulse shoppers, based on their browsing history. These clusters were supposed to provide cover and give people a greater degree of anonymity online. But that privacy shield was found to be permeable.

For instance, during a trial phase, researchers raised concerns that FLoC data could be combined with peoples personally identifiable information. This meant that bad actors could expose information about peoples webpage visits and interests, raising further concerns that cohort-based targeting could be used to discriminate against particular groups of people.

However, what FLoC did introduce was the concept of using machine learning to categorize users into specific interest groups based on their browsing history. Also importantly, FLoC proposed performing this categorization on a persons computer or phone, rather than sending the underlying data to Googles or another companys computers, which went some way to better preserving peoples information.

So, after the FLoC blowback, Google went back to the drawing board and came up with Topics. Like FLoC, Topics proposes targeting ads to people based on the categories of content they check out online and containing this categorization to the device. Unlike FLoC, though, Topics proposes a much more general level of categorization.

A web browser like Googles Chrome will use the Topics API short for application programming interface and effectively the means of using the Topics toolset to determine a number of topics that best reflect a persons interests based on their browsing behavior, such as autos & vehicles, basketball, news, and womens clothing. The browser will determine the topic of sites based on sites hostname ex. dogs.com would be categorized under the dogs topic but companies may be given the option of declaring which topics to associate with their sites.

Each week, a browser would select five topics per person including one random topic that is meant to throw off any companies attempting to wrest a persons identity from Topics and then choose one topic, or interest category, to assign to that person for the week. People may be given the option of adjusting the topics assigned to them and will also be able to disable this ad targeting feature.

Each topic is then kept for three weeks so when a person visits a website, the website or the ad tech firms it uses to target ads can use the Topics API to access up to three topics for that site visitor. However, the website and its ad tech firms can only access topics that are related to the given website or other websites carrying the ad tech firms code.

In other words, if a person assigned the topics dogs, theme parks and weddings visits a political news site, that site may not be able to access any topics for that person that week. But if that person is assigned the topic politics the following week and returns to the site, then the site would be able to access the politics topic at the least.

Currently, there are 350 interest groups classified by the Topics API. Compare this with the 30,000-plus user classification groups that featured in the FLoC trials. Critics said the granularity of the FLoC API made it possible to reverse-engineer data and pinpoint user data. The initial 350 topics are only a starting point, though. The list may eventually number into the thousands, though Google plans to come up with a number of sensitive topics to exclude from the list and to have an outside party be responsible for providing the list of topics to be included.

Mostly, its been speculative. Trials have not yet begun, and Google hasnt publicly said when it will start letting third-party developers experiment with the Topics API.

However, advertisers and media owners alike have voiced concerns that Topics lack of granularity will limit the specificity of ad targeting and, as a result, limit or even lower ad prices, with advertisers typically paying more money for more targeted ads.

Ad tech execs who work with publishers have also asked for greater clarity from Google over the extent to which they will be able to control the flow of their user data should they integrate the Topics API. One concern is whether a third-party website could capitalize on the data extracted from a publishers website via the API to boost the third-party sites own ad sales. And, after all, there is the potential for that third-party website to be a direct competitor.

For advertisers and publishers, the idea is still the same as it was in January 2020 when Google Chrome confirmed plans to withdraw support for third-party cookies: collect as much consented first-party user data as possible.

Publishers with a glass-half-full outlook on Chromes deprecation of third-party cookies view the move as offering the potential for them to charge advertisers more money for access to their first-party data. Meanwhile, advertisers are under pressure to adapt to a post-cookie landscape or risk missing out on reaching potential customers online. For ad tech companies, arguably those who are most exposed to the whims of the Google Chrome team, the best possible advice is to roll with the punches, be agile, and prepare to pivot if necessary.

Ultimately, every tier of the online advertising industry needs to participate with Google as it prepares to forge a path forward. Simply pointing the finger and complaining over Googles dominance of the sector is unlikely to yield dividends any time soon.

https://digiday.com/?p=440061

Excerpt from:

WTF is Googles Topics? - Digiday

When you are searching online for some of the remotest islands on the planet, it helps to get the name right. But a row has broken out over the labelling of the Chagos Islands on Google maps.

The UK maintains that it still holds sovereignty over what it terms British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) one of the smallest of red dots on the traditional cartographic globe.

But Mauritius, which has been recognised as legitimate owner of the archipelago in a series of international court judgments and United Nations votes since 2019, has formally asked Google to re-describe the islands as part of its territory.

Letters seen by the Guardian have been sent to the search engines California headquarters requesting that BIOT, which includes the strategic US military base of Diego Garcia, be wiped off the map.

Mauritius first sent a request in January 2020 to Sundar Pichai, the chief executive officer at Google. It asked the company to rectify this error immediately and included as evidence references to the advisory opinion of the international court of justice in The Hague.

The judgment said the UK unlawfully detached the Chagos Islands from Mauritius prior to granting it independence in 1968. Mauritius said that an overwhelming majority vote by the United Nations General Assembly adopted the courts opinion and demanded that the United Kingdom terminate its unlawful colonial administration.

The letter said the error could be interpreted as tacit approval of the UKs unlawful administration. The islands, it added, should be marked Chagos Archipelago (Republic of Mauritius).

Two further requests were sent by Mauritius criticising the mislabelling, but no change has yet been made online. Legal proceedings, Mauritius has warned, could be brought against Google.

Jagdish Koonjul, the Mauritian ambassador to the United Nations, said: We never received a reply. Its disappointing. One would have assumed that Google would be the ideal place to obtain information and that whatever they are [displaying] would be accurate. What they are showing is incorrect.

The Google Maps search engine, when it locates BIOT, merely explains that it is a disputed British Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom situated in the Indian Ocean halfway between Tanzania and Indonesia.

After being approached by the Guardian, Google said it was looking into the matter.

Apple Maps, by contrast, agreed to change its labelling. Searches for both BIOT and British Indian Ocean Territory on Apple Maps produce the response No results found.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) said: The UK has no doubt as to our sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory, which we have held continuously since 1814. Mauritius has never held sovereignty over the territory and the UK does not recognise its claim.

Meanwhile, the former Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn, a longtime supporter of exiled Chagossians, has published a letter of support following Mauritiuss first expedition to the Chagos Islands to assert its sovereignty.

He declared: The British government must now engage with Mauritius and negotiate a settlement of these issues. I call on the government immediately to restore the right of return of the Chagossians to their homeland and work with Mauritius on a trial resettlement programme.

Alyn Smith MP, foreign affairs spokesperson for the SNP in Westminster, said: The SNP stands four-square behind international law and it is clear that the Chagos Islands are not UK territory. In 2019, the UN general assembly voted overwhelmingly to condemn the UKs continuing, systematic occupation of the Chagos Islands. In the same year, the international court of justice also ruled the occupation illegal. Last month, the UNs international tribunal for the law of the sea upheld this verdict.

It is high time for the UK to end its illegal occupation of the Chagos Islands. The SNP will continue honouring its longstanding manifesto commitment to supporting international efforts for the Chagos Islands to be returned to their rightful owners and raising the issue at home.

Read more:

Mauritius asks Google to label Chagos Islands as part of its territory - The Guardian

Google

Tired of coming home to a freezing house after work? We've got a great deal on a simple solution that you won't want to miss. As a part of its massive ongoing Presidents Day sale, Best Buy is offering $80 off this bundle featuring Google's Nest smart thermostat and Nest Hub Max smart display so that you can easily control your home from just about anywhere. The sale only runs until tomorrow, Feb. 21, so be sure to get your order in before then.

The only think simple about the Nest thermostat is its design. This easy-to-install smart thermostat allows you to control your home's temperature from anywhere through the Google Home app, so you can turn on the heat from your office, and have a warm house by the time you get home. You can built custom heating schedules, and it's equipped with a built-in motion sensor so it can detect when you're not at home and save you money on your energy bill by automatically lowering the heat.

And using the Nest Hub Max smart display, you can also control the thermostat using the sound of your voice. Featuring a built-in microphone, the Nest Hub Max allows you to activate and control any Google Assistant-enabled smart device, from locks to plugs to light bulbs, with hands-free voice control. It's equipped with a 10-inch HD display with Chromecast for video streaming, and an auto-framing 6.5MP camera so you can easily use it for video calls. And the stereo speaker system with a 30W subwoofer allows for convenient music streaming with high-quality audio.

Subscribe to our daily spotlight on the best tech deals on the web from phones to gadgets and more.

Read more here:

Save $80 on This Google Smart Home Bundle - CNET

For years, the business model of Internet giants that provided free services hinged on collecting user data and monetising the information in the form of advertisements. The global spotlighting of data privacy issues has, however, forced the companies to change their ways of working. At the same time, the big tech firms Facebook, Apple, Google, Amazon have come under increasingly intense antitrust scrutiny for attempts to monopolise their businesses.

Decisions made recently by Apple and Google to give users greater control over the use of the data they generate online can be seen both as a boost to user privacy and as a step towards consolidating further the position of these companies.What have Apple and Google done?

Last year, Apple added the app tracking transparency (ATT) feature to iPhones and iPads, which requires apps to seek users permission to track their activity across other apps and websites. This impacted companies who were dependent on advertising as a revenue model, because the ATT feature cut their access to the data of iPhone users, which they harvested and used for targeted advertising. Meta, Facebooks parent, said the financial hit from Apples move could be in the order of $10 billion for 2022.

Earlier this month, Google announced that it would bring the Privacy Sandbox the privacy solution that it is building for the web to Android devices. The new solution would limit the sharing of user data with third parties, and operate without cross-app identifiers, including advertising IDs. The advertising ID is a unique, user-resettable ID for advertising provided by Google Play services.

The Privacy Sandbox on Android could go live in two years.But what is the Privacy Sandbox?

In the context of the web, Google has said that the Privacy Sandbox will phase out third-party cookies and limit covert tracking. A cookie is a small piece of data stored in the browser when a user visits a website.

Third-party cookies are stored by a service that operates across multiple sites. For example, an ad platform might store a cookie when you visit a news site. First-party cookies are stored by the website itself.

So, if the news site is storing a cookie, it will use it to offer curated news items the user is more likely to read. But if an ad platform like Facebook stores a cookie when one visits a news site, it is likely to use that information and categorise the user in certain buckets based on preferences, and will offer advertisers the ability to target the user with specific ads. This can also be used for political advertisements.

How do cookies work, in plain terms?

Imagine you are flying with a friend, and you have a check-in bag each. Imagine that before putting the bags in the aircraft belly, airline personnel go through their contents. They find a bottle of Chanel perfume and Tommy Hilfiger clothes in your bag, and put a red sticker on it. In your friends bag they find a camera tripod and books on photography, and put a blue sticker. (These stickers are cookies.)

At the destination, the driver of your cab notes the stickers, and hands you separate advertisement flyers: to you for Hermes bags, and to your friend for Canon DSLRs. Brands and local businesses have paid the cab company to hand over pamphlets to passengers, and your ride is now free.

How has Meta been hurt?

Having got the choice to opt out of app tracking, many iPhone users have done so for apps such as Facebook, stymieing the primary channel for the companys online advertising business, according to a report in The New York Times.

With the reduction in the volume of data gathered from users online activity such as e-commerce and search engine queries, and other social media activity, it has become more difficult for Facebook to target specific ads, potentially cutting the incentive for advertisers to run promotions on the platform. Online ads targeted at iPhone users typically have higher conversion rates than Android, so these users opting out of app tracking is especially damaging.

While Privacy Sandbox on Android could have a deeper impact on Meta given the larger global market share of Android devices, even the implementation of the solution on the web could hurt Meta. Unlike Google and Amazon, Facebook depends heavily on tracking the third-party activity of users to generate data. In the case of Google or Amazon on the other hand, users help generate first-hand data through their queries.

How could these developments lead to further concentration of data?

Solutions such as the Privacy Sandbox mean the phasing out of cookies, currently the go-to tech for online advertisers.

Google had proposed that cookies should be replaced with FLoC (Federated Learning of Cohorts) which meant that instead of interest-based advertising that was enabled by cookies, users would be bunched into groups with comparable interests. But privacy advocates argued that rather than stopping the tracking of users online activity, FLoC put the tracking directly into Googles hands. Antitrust investigations were opened in the UK and the European Union.

Google gave up the FLoC project, and last month announced Topics, through which the companys Chrome browser would curate a users top interests in a week based on browsing history. A key difference between FLoC and Topics is that the latter will exclude categorisation based on sensitive categories such as race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. A developer trial will launch soon, Google said.

While Topics would give users greater choice to limit the gathering and use of their data by third-party apps, it would still continue to track these users through its bouquet of apps such as Search, Gmail, Google Maps, GPay, YouTube, etc.

Additionally, Apples move to limit tracking by apps has tipped the scales in favour of Google as far as online advertising is concerned. Notably, online advertising is Googles core business, unlike Apple.

A report in The Wall Street Journal has pointed out that after Apple introduced its privacy feature last year, the cost of acquiring customers for small businesses advertising on Metas platforms Facebook and Instagram went up and some of these small businesses moved their whole ad budget to search ads on Google.

Newsletter | Click to get the days best explainers in your inbox

Go here to read the rest:

Explained: Why Apple and Google privacy changes have hurt Meta - The Indian Express

During Googles I/O event last year, the company laid out plans to significantly revamp the look and feel of its Workspace cloud apps (they were called G Suite until a 2020 name change). That includes a new look for Gmail thats starting to roll out this month, search chips (you can just call them filters) for Google Drive, and a set of changes that are about to arrive for Google Docs and Google Sheets.

The theme of this approach is called smart canvas. It takes some hints from productivity apps like Notion to give you more options for blending the features of multiple tools in one screen and to promote ways that you can collaborate remotely with coworkers, powered by Googles AI. Integrating its various office apps is an approach that conveniently helps Google increase corporate lock-in to its services, which is a good enough idea that Microsoft is working in a very similar direction with Fluid framework updates in its own Office suite.

Last fall, Google added AI-generated formula suggestions that we called autofill for math, and now, Google says its next step is more like autocorrect. The feature is coming soon to Sheets, with promises to help users troubleshoot their formulas and catch errors.

Features described during the May I/O presentation are going to be rolling out to Workspace accounts gradually over the next couple of weeks, including a pageless format for Google Docs. Instead of defaulting to a view that replicates a standard-size printed page, Google Docs content has no boundaries, which the company says will make it expand or shrink to fit whatever kind of screen you happen to be using. According to Googles support document for the feature, [w]hen you view a pageless document, you can select a text width of narrow, medium, or wide. Youll see the same text width on all pageless docs that you view. Your text width choice wont affect how collaborators see your docs.

You can switch back to a view with page breaks if you need to print something out or convert it to a PDF, but Googles bet is that in connected, remote workplaces, that wont be as necessary in the future.

Instead, people will interact directly with documents that include interactive elements to surface whatever information is relevant at the moment, like embedded Google Maps links that you can click to quickly see a preview without opening another page or app. Another new feature enables Google Docs to auto-generate summaries of documents using its own intelligence to find the main points that appear in the left rail. Once its live on eligible Workspace accounts, just click View at the top, then Show document outline to bring up the summary.

One feature that isnt available yet is an easy-access email draft template so that you can click one button to output all of the content into a draft in Gmail. Thats rolling out in the coming weeks.

Go here to read the rest:

Googles smart canvas vision for Workspace is bringing a pageless interface to Docs - The Verge

Has your Google Nest Doorbell been draining its battery faster than normal or stopped working altogether, even when hooked up to your doorbell wires? Thats because it doesnt like being left out in the cold. A new support page published this week by Google, confirms that Googles newest smart video doorbell, the Google Nest Doorbell (Battery), and its Google Nest Cam (Battery), cant charge at temperatures below 32 degrees Fahrenheit.

The update comes on the heels of complaints by users in the Google Nest forum that their Nest Doorbells were draining their batteries faster than normal this winter, even when hooked up to doorbell wiring to maintain their charge. Cold weather will also affect the batteries in the new Google Nest Cam. But Google says if the camera is connected to a wired power source (it sells a weatherproof power adaptor for $35), there wont be any charging issues at lower temperatures, as the wire powers the camera directly.

The reason for the doorbell problem is based on a small but important distinction between battery-powered and true wired doorbells. Battery-powered doorbells hooked up to doorbell wires arent being powered by your homes electrical wiring; the battery is being trickle charged by the power from the doorbell wiring. If that battery is too cold to hold a charge, it will eventually run down. The same is true if you use a solar panel to keep your Google Nest Cam charged. That trickle charges and doesnt power the camera directly, so it will run out of juice in the cold, says Google.

While its battery-powered cameras (Nests first in the category) can operate in temps as low as -4 degrees Fahrenheit, Googles new support page now lists a minimum charging temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit. The support article states that the battery can still power the device at lower temperatures, but it wont charge and may drain faster. Google warns that at the minimum operating temperature, the battery could have less than half the life it does in warmer weather.

So what can you do if you bought a Nest Doorbell and live in a part of the country with sub-freezing temps? Google says you should take the entire doorbell down and bring it inside to a warm place to charge (something you likely already do if its not hooked up to doorbell wiring).

If youre not sure if your device is affected, you can check in the Google Home app where the device will say charging paused or charging slowly with a long estimated charge time if your doorbell is too chilly.

This is not a problem unique to Nests battery-powered cameras. Rechargeable lithium-ion batteries struggle in colder weather. Ring has a support article on its site detailing how its doorbell and camera batteries are affected when temps drop. However, most Ring cameras have the advantage of swappable, removable batteries that are easier to bring indoors to charge.

For those of us in warmer climes, Google says not to worry: the Nest camera batteries can still be charged up to 104 degrees Fahrenheit.

Read the original:

Googles Nest Doorbell and Nest Cam will stop charging when its too cold outside - The Verge

The medical journal Health Affairs spent years planning its special issue on health and racism, which it published at the beginning of February. The journal wanted to reach new readers by promoting the issue through targeted advertisements on Twitter and YouTube.

Thats why it was so frustrating when Twitter and Google blocked its ads before they could go up, says Patti Sweet, the director of digital strategy at Health Affairs. The journals Google ads account was also suspended. Sweet wrote a blog post outlining that frustration last week, saying she thought the use of the word racism was the trigger for the rejections.

But Twitter and Google say the ad rejections didnt have to do with the language around racism rather, they were blocked due to policies around advocacy and COVID-19, respectively. The confusion highlights how health research sometimes doesnt fit neatly into categories used by tech companies to flag potentially problematic content, making it challenging for them to push out credible information when certain keywords pop up.

Health Affairs is a reputable peer-reviewed journal widely read by people working in public health and public policy. The journals health and racism issue, released last week, includes articles on sexual and reproductive health of Black women in the South, racial bias in electronic health records, health and police encounters, and inequity in the use of home health agencies. It hoped to use the ads to draw in a new audience to the special issue, Sweet says.

Google blocked the journals ads because the video the advertisements were for discussed COVID-19, communications and public affairs manager Christa Muldoon told The Verge. Ads for content that mentions COVID-19 have to follow the companys sensitive events policy, which blocks ads that potentially profit from or exploit a sensitive event.

Twitter said in a statement that the ads were blocked under the cause-based policy, which requires advertisers get certified before publishing ads that educate, raise awareness, and/or call for people to take action in connection with civic engagement, economic growth, environmental stewardship, or social equity causes. Twitters caused-based ad policy was put into place in November 2019 as part of its regulation of political ads aimed at protecting against bad actors co-opting the platform and covers topics from climate change to animal rights.

Sweet says shes familiar with Twitters policies but wouldnt have assumed the journals content would fall under cause-based policy. Were not advocating on behalf of something. Were just putting the information out there, she says.

Health Affairs also got one notice for an ad taken down by Twitter under the inappropriate content policy, according to screenshots Sweet shared with The Verge. The ad was similar to the ones flagged under the cause-based policy and described how the special issue focused on racism and health. Twitter spokesperson Laura Pacas said in an email to The Verge that any ad would have been denied under the same cause-based policy.

Sweet says she thinks the tech companies policies around ads are important, but that theyre applied to small groups like Health Affairs in an inequitable way. She wasnt able to easily contact someone at Google or Twitter to address the issue quickly the same way she might have at a large media agency. As a result, she had trouble getting information from the companies about why the ads were blocked. Sweet also doesnt think Health Affairs even falls under the type of advocacy category that Twitters policy, for example, is set up to target.

Were not a political organization, but when a machine sees health policy, they might assume politics, Sweet says. And when they see us talking about racism and health, they might assume we are advocating on behalf of something for politicians. So, the brand is awkwardly in a nowhere land.

Health Affairs got its caused-based certification for Twitter this week and plans to resubmit its ads. Sweet says the Google ads account is also back on after she submitted appeals. Shes hoping her team can now redirect the spotlight to the research, rather than the conflict with the tech companies.

Were not able to share it with the world as much as we want to, she says. Instead, were talking about Google and Twitter.

Correction February 18th, 5:24PM ET: An earlier version of the story said that the Health Affairs YouTube account was suspended. The Google ads account was suspended. We regret the error.

More here:

Twitter and Google blocked ads from a medical journal about health and racism - The Verge

Ruth Porat, CFO of Alphabet and Google, announced on Sunday that Google is funding a $25 million skilling initiative over five years to increase opportunities in Israels hi-tech sector for underrepresented groups, including women, Arab citizens, ultra-orthodox Jews and residents of the geographic periphery. Google will also announce an initiative for the Palestinian tech sector later this week.

Porat arrived in Israel Saturday evening and will be meeting with Israeli and Palestinian entrepreneurs and business leaders, policymakers and Google employees during her visit. Along with the United States Ambassador to Israel, Thomas R. Nides, she met today with women and Arab entrepreneurs, engineers and investors to hear about the challenges they have faced integrating into Israels hi-tech industry.

Porat joined Google as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in May 2015 and has also held the same title at Alphabet since it was created in October 2015. She is responsible for Finance, Business Operations and Real Estate & Workplace Services. Before joining Google, Porat was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Morgan Stanley and held roles there that included Vice Chairman of Investment Banking, Co-Head of Technology Investment Banking and Global Head of the Financial Institutions Group. Ruth is a member of the Board of Directors of Blackstone Inc., the Stanford Management Company and the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Board of Trustees of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. She previously spent ten years on Stanford Universitys Board of Trustees. Ruth holds a BA from Stanford University, an MSc from The London School of Economics and an MBA from the Wharton School.

At Google, we believe that to have sustainable economic growth, you must have inclusive growth, said Ruth Porat, Alphabet and Google CFO. By providing members of underrepresented groups with a path into tech, we hope to help create a more diverse workforce, and increase opportunities for a broader group of people. We look forward to deepening our commitment to Israel as we work to support the government's ongoing efforts in this area.

My first meeting as Ambassador was with Arab business leaders in Israel to talk about increasing access to greater economic opportunities, and Googles announcement today is a strong practical step toward that goal, said U.S. Ambassador to Israel Thomas Nides.

Follow this link:

Google to invest $25 million over next five years to diversify Israeli tech workforce | Ctech - CTech

Legal and court losses are piling up across Europe for American ad tech companies and for Google.

Turns out navigating the GDPR and last years Schrems II decision, which invalidated Privacy Shield, the former data-sharing agreement between the US and the EU, is far from straightforward.

In January, the Austrian data protection authority (DPA) ruled that sites cant use Google Analytics if the service shuttles data back to US servers. Which Google does.

The French DPA, called the CNIL, released its own judgement last week agreeing with the Austrian DPA. One decision in Austria might be considered an outlier. But with the French CNIL the bellwether of European data regulators backing up Austrias ruling, this is starting to look like a consensus among European DPAs and a full-on siege of Google Analytics.

The Belgian DPA, meanwhile, ruled last week that IAB Europes Transparency & Consent Framework (TCF), the online advertising industrys mechanism for conveying a persons consent status to use data for advertising, is illegal under GDPR. The DPA gave IAB Europe six months to rework the framework so that the IDs can be audited.

IAB Europe has appealed another part of the ruling classifying it as a data controller for the TCF, which would effectively make the trade group legally responsible for how any publisher or ad tech company uses the framework to target ads.

If the ruling stands, IAB Europe would face a huge increase in costs and legal liability.

Google Analytics under fire

Google Analytics and other web infrastructure services collect data, namely IP addresses, that are considered personal information in the EU.

But the problem in this case isnt GDPR, because the data isnt being used for targeting ads, at least per the allegation. The issue, rather, is that the data of European citizens could be transferred to American systems and thats not okay as a result of the Schrems II ruling.

The Schrems II suit was against Facebook, but not anything to do with Cambridge Analytica or other ad targeting issues. Facebook lost the case because of Edward Snowdens NSA leaks, which revealed that the US government collects user-level information from internet services. Individuals have no idea if and when their data is collected and have no legal redress regardless.

Although someone browsing an Austrian news site may not fall under NSA surveillance, in theory, it could happen and that means the data cant be transferred at all, even if its innocuous and collected legally under GDPR.

None of Your Business, Schremss advocacy group, brought both of the cases against Google Analytics decided by the Austrian and French DPAs. Schrems has parallel suits in practically every European country so more dominos are likely to fall.

Theres clearly a coordinated effort by regulators to settle on an interpretation of the law, rather than have a hodgepodge of different inter-EU standards, said Wayne Matus, co-founder and general counsel of SafeGuard Privacy, a data privacy compliance startup.

The most straightforward solution for Google Analytics is to localize data in Europe, Matus said.

But thats not the only consideration. If Alphabet localizes in response to DPA rulings it could set a tough new precedent, since Google might be able to derive greater economic benefits from globally consolidating data. There may also be technical difficulties that prevent setting up local data systems.

Even if Google Analytics kept data in Europe, however, theres still a Microsoft case from 2018 to contend with, when the company was ordered via FBI warrant to hand over email data stored in Ireland, Matus said. The lower courts disagreed, and by the time the case was argued before the Supreme Court, President Trump had signed a new law granting investigators powers to compel such extraterritorial data. The previous decision which favored Microsoft was rendered moot.

In other words, even if Google Analytics set up local data services that never transferred to the US, the data could still be compelled by warrant.

Matus said Google would still have options, like establishing an independent business in Europe that couldnt be compelled by the FBI that trick only works on US companies.

A likelier solution is geopolitical. The problem could be resolved by a new US and EU data-sharing agreement. (The previous two, Safe Harbor and Privacy Shield, were both overturned in cases brought by Schrems.)

Consent on the ropes

IAB Europes TCF is now working against a six-month deadline to prepare an alternative that meets the Belgian DPAs stipulations.

For one, the framework may not collect data based on legitimate interest (whereby data can be collected without a users explicit approval, such as for fraud detection, cyber security and web infrastructure services like logging traffic). Also, TCF ID strings need to be audited for use in programmatic.

Moving away from legitimate interest is the (relatively) easy part. Publishers, consent management platforms (CMPs) and ad tech companies can simply be forthright about exactly how data will be used, rather than popping up broad cookie opt-in notices that dont explain much of anything, Matus said. Legitimate interest doesnt mean data cant be collected, just that it cant be used in any ways an individual would not have expected when they provided consent.

A more intractable problem is auditability of the TCF. After all, TCF strings are visible to any DSP bidding on any programmatic inventory within the framework, and whether theres consent to use data for targeting determines how much DSPs bid.

A rogue employee at a publisher or CMP could falsify consent data with no easy way to identify the violation in the fraction of a second before an ad is served, or even retrospectively.

Auditing the TCF seems like an impossibility.

Let me stop you right there, Matus said. It is 100% possible.

Its just not practical to audit OpenRTB impressions in real time, Matus said.

But the Belgian and other DPAs could still get behind the framework if supply-chain vendors CMPs, ad tech companies and data providers agree to audits by the IAB Europe and by advertisers within the context of a campaign. An agency or brand marketer, for example, could insist that vendors agree to transparent auditing as a prerequisite before buying through them.

The DPA wouldnt offer a six-month window and agree to work on an updated version with IAB Europe if it didnt expect to resolve the issue, Matus said. If the regulator thought it wasnt feasible, the TCF would have been ruled flat-out illegal with appeal as the only recourse.

What happens next?

Its difficult to predict how GDPR and European data privacy case law will play out.

Google is lobbying in the EU and US to allow for basic global data transfers. IAB Europe is appealing the Belgian DPAs classification of the trade group as a data controller and working with the same regulator on a potential TCF fix. Until then the framework is a bit like a cat in Schrodingers box we dont know if its alive or dead, but well find out in six months.

One irony of these various EU suits is the different ways in which they affect the competitive digital advertising market.

For example, in addition to harmonizing European data protection laws, the GDPR was meant to empower European tech companies and publishers, which have been beholden to US tech giants. But the GDPR suits targeting the TCF are a major boon to Google. If the TCF crashes, Googles AdBuyers protocol is the only way to programmatically target ads using consent information.

And whereas the purpose of the Schrems II decision is to target US government surveillance, not crack down on anticompetitive big tech practices, its Schrems II that could deal a major blow to Google. If Google Analytics is severely hampered in Europe, the only apparent solution will be to find a local data server system.

But European regulators are hard at work trying to get Google to change its business practices, Matus said. And if that doesnt work, theyll target Google customers. For instance, also last week, a German court levied a token fine of 100 Euros against a news publisher because Googles web-hosting service transferred IP addresses outside of the EU.

It will start small and theyll crank up the fines, Matus said. But this isnt stopping until the behavior stops.

View post:

Google And IAB Europe Are Losing Data Privacy Lawsuits In The EU, But What Does It Mean? - AdExchanger