Google: Privacy Policy Profiling and The Future of the Web

Google is grouping all its services under one privacy policy. That is all of your information, every search you make on Google, all the videos you watch on YouTube, every blog post or comment you make on Blogger (such as this blog), every entry you make on Google Plus, every email you send or receive via G Mail, etc. will all come under one handy umbrella...handy for Google, that is. They try to make it look as this is convenient for you, but lets be clear: its for them and the large powers that are behind Google. Google CEOs are regular attendees at the Builderberg meetings. Like Facebook, Google is the digital face of the Machine.

Yes, from now on all of the information about you and your online Google related activities will be stored in one place under your Google name/account. Basically, if you use a Google service you will be profiled. Now, this was, of course, happening anyway. Now however they are putting it out there in the open. They are telling you in their terms of service and if you use any Google services, you are, by default, agreeing to this new privacy policy....user profiling. That is they are now doing it with your permission. By using any Google product you are signing on the dotted line.

Google says to privacy advocates that one can always cancel their account or not use Google products. However this would mean that people who are not on board with the profiling , like many activists, should no longer use Blogger, no longer use YouTube, which is where much of the " info-war" takes place. This is another clever way to deter people from being "active" online. This is an intimidation tactic, to make people feel watched. You don't need a law to stop people from posting controversial truths on the web. You can just make people feel very uncomfortable and exposed. Many may think twice about having a Blog or Google account or YouTube page, for privacy reasons.

This and other changes being made to YouTube that are causing non corporate video uploaders to lose viewers and subscriptions (see new YouTube design debate),  are all sideways maneuvers to change the way people see the web. Many of us use the web as the main place where to post and gather information. The PTW's don't like this and have been maneuvering for some time for a new web that is highly monitored, controlled and no longer anonymous. Anonymity being at the very basis of the free speech atmosphere of much web debate. Also they want it to be a place for corporate business and big media only. They really don't like the citizen journalism of the past decade or so. Its been a major pain in their backside. We have been effective.

On the same vein, after the Megaupload debacle, many sites that share free media have been self regulating. The fear of copyright infringement is already in the air, even without the copyright bill passing. A torrent site I visited today had voluntarily shut its doors and on the only remaining page it said "2005-2012. It was good while it lasted". Other file sharing sites I used on occasion have virtually shut down. While it is understandable that big media is lobbying to protect its commercial interests and there is a genuine need for limitations on digital theft, we all know copyright its not what this is all about. Its about finding more legal pretext for the control, restriction and monitoring of information. Already copyright infringement is used as a way to shut down unwanted YouTube channels. Imagine what will happen when this extends to everything one does on the web.

Know that the next move is going to be the introduction of a Internet ID Card, which can be revoked for infractions, real or fabricated. We can see this even in the original version of ACTA, the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which has been object of private international meetings between gvt representatives from various nation states for the last few years. The original ACTA documents had a three strikes and you are out policy, where three instances of "suspected" copyright infringement were all that was needed for someone to be blacklisted and lose internet surfing rights. "Suspected" being the operative word as proof was not required, although it could be discussed after the fact in a court of law. Guilty until being proven innocent. Its the new way. And to enforce this, all computer activity would have to be monitored.And people would only be able to access the web with ID cards.

Expect more bills like PIPA and SOPA to gradually be pushed through, as the various items of the original ACTA are pushed forward one small morsel at a time. Which is a very clever technique, by the way, as most people are not aware of the bigger picture implications when things are broken down in small separate items in this way. But lets be clear that all the changes happening with Google, Facebook, MySpace a few years back, YouTube, etc, as well as all the new laws that will be coming are just a way to gradually shut down the web as we know it, one little piece at a time, so we don't protest too much or don't notice, as the web as is is a major chink in the armor to the big kahunas.

The web is one of the biggest tools we have for change, aside from energy work. It keeps us connected  as a collective human group consciousness and it is the tool via which we keep each other informed, instantly, in the moment. While it was set up to be just another programming and monitoring tool, a way to keep tabs and shape the collective herd, we have used it in counter-intuitive ways to those they were expecting and it has backfired. It has moved many of us away from the TV and together we have discovered that maybe we are not so dumbed down after all. In fact, it appears that we humans, when we have all the information and we work as a team, are remarkably smart and resourceful. Regulating web access, monitoring all web activity, making the web corporate on the other hand is an NWO's wet dream. Let's not allow it to happen. Do your research and read up, while you still can, and make your voice heard.

Oh...and in closing...notice how in the video clip above , the usual controlled fake debate is presented. The opposing views are presented, but the lawyer holding the view against web monitoring presents the argument that this is bad as his wife may catch him watching a Victoria Secret site. The true debate about freedom of speech and freedom of thought (as search engines pieced together can truly give an idea of what we are thinking about most of the time) is skipped all together. This is typical of how information of this kind is presented. The kind of viewer that is susceptible to programming (and there are more, unfortunately, than one may think), will come away from watching this news segment thinking that all privacy advocates are just people trying to sneak around doing bad things and blocking the tide of progress.

Pay attention to this trend in the months ahead, as the war for the web is on. And lets start thinking laterally for solutions and alternatives.

Much love

Katie Gallanti