<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google and political campaign consulting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://madisonian.net/2010/02/18/google-and-political-campaign-consulting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://madisonian.net/2010/02/18/google-and-political-campaign-consulting/</link>
	<description>a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 20:32:56 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Frank Pasquale</title>
		<link>http://madisonian.net/2010/02/18/google-and-political-campaign-consulting/comment-page-1/#comment-307832</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Pasquale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://madisonian.net/?p=3938#comment-307832</guid>
		<description>By the way, I think that concerns about political bias are serious enough that Google (and any media company that gets political ads) should be sure to release, in real time, data about who is paying what to them.  That way, researchers could determine whether paying for prominence on Google Ads does anything to affect organic results on YouTube, Google, Orkut, or their many other subsidiaries and business partners.

OF course, I predict that even if a researcher did find a correlation between paid ads and prominence in other venues, Google would say the researcher had a &quot;biased sample&quot; of organic content (given the personalization of search).  And it might well refuse to disclose, on trade secret grounds, the baseline of results that its algorithm personalizes.  It may well refuse to even admit or deny whether there is any such thing as a baseline that is personalized!  We are completely adrift in the absence institutions designed to guarantee &quot;qualified transparency.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, I think that concerns about political bias are serious enough that Google (and any media company that gets political ads) should be sure to release, in real time, data about who is paying what to them.  That way, researchers could determine whether paying for prominence on Google Ads does anything to affect organic results on YouTube, Google, Orkut, or their many other subsidiaries and business partners.</p>
<p>OF course, I predict that even if a researcher did find a correlation between paid ads and prominence in other venues, Google would say the researcher had a &#8220;biased sample&#8221; of organic content (given the personalization of search).  And it might well refuse to disclose, on trade secret grounds, the baseline of results that its algorithm personalizes.  It may well refuse to even admit or deny whether there is any such thing as a baseline that is personalized!  We are completely adrift in the absence institutions designed to guarantee &#8220;qualified transparency.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Pasquale</title>
		<link>http://madisonian.net/2010/02/18/google-and-political-campaign-consulting/comment-page-1/#comment-307831</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Pasquale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:14:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://madisonian.net/?p=3938#comment-307831</guid>
		<description>Excellent points, all.  You might enjoy Cory Doctorow&#039;s story Scroogled, which plays out the implications in a little more detail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent points, all.  You might enjoy Cory Doctorow&#8217;s story Scroogled, which plays out the implications in a little more detail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

