FTC vs. Google: Spam Filters & Free Speech Concerns
Summary of techdirt Article: GOP Claims of Google Bias & Political Spam
This Techdirt article dissects Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s inquiry into Google, spurred by Republican claims that Google unfairly filters their political emails into spam. The article argues the investigation is legally weak and primarily serves as political theatre.
Key Points:
Public Dislike of Political Spam: People generally don’t want more political emails and find them annoying.
Unused Whitelisting Option: Google offered Republicans a system to avoid spam filters, but they haven’t utilized it. Legal Weakness: Tech lawyer Berin Szoka argues the investigation violates the FTC’s authority. The FTC can’t weigh a spammer’s “right to speech” against a website’s right to control its content (editorial control).There’s also no evidence Google made and broke promises about spam handling.
First Amendment Concerns: Forcing Google to carry political emails would be considered “compelled speech,” violating the First Amendment. Google has the right to decide what content it hosts and how it’s organized.
Political Motivation: The investigation is likely a response to pressure from the White House and conservative claims of “censorship.”
The Real Problem: The article suggests the issue isn’t Google’s algorithms, but rather the spammy tactics used by Republican fundraising organizations. Political emails are exempt from the CAN-SPAM Act, allowing them to employ practices that would be illegal for commercial senders.
* Solution: political organizations should stop using spam-like tactics, not pressure tech companies to lower their spam filter standards.
In essence, the article frames the situation as a politically motivated attempt to undermine Google’s spam filtering practices, rather than a legitimate legal concern about bias or censorship. It highlights the hypocrisy of the administration and points to the responsibility of political organizations to avoid spammy behavior.