Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Google Employees Enjoyed "Revolving Door" to White House Appointed Positions

posted by n1 on Thursday August 11 2016, @08:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the welcome-to-the-club dept.

Jeremiah Cornelius writes:

Resistance, as they say, is futile. According to the Google Transparency Project, and reported by watchdog.org "More than 250 people have moved from Google and related firms to the federal government or vice versa since President Barack Obama took office."

22 former White House officials went to work for Google and 31 executives from Google and related firms went to work at the White House or were appointed to federal advisory boards by Obama. Those boards include the President's Council on Science and Technology and the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

Of additional interest, besides revolving doors between Google and the FCC, 25 officials in national security, intelligence or the Department of Defense joined Google, and three Google executives went to work for the DOD.

I think ordinary discussion of market forces, laissez-faire and the role of Government is irrelevant in regards to a system in which this is normal and institutionalized practice.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Google Employees Enjoyed "Revolving Door" to White House Appointed Positions | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 23 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by n1 on Thursday August 11 2016, @02:10PM

    by n1 (993) on Thursday August 11 2016, @02:10PM (#386595) Journal

    I've seen similar stories in the UK at least, and i'm sure there are others elsewhere.

    It works both for the employees, going from exec mega-corp to government adviser position is about as good job security as you can get moving forward, you have high level experience in public and private sector from the most important organizations. Probably live of making speeches and writing articles for MSM after a reasonable stint in both.

    It also works for Gov and the companies involved, they get the benefit of the experience from the other side, and future meetings, you can be discussing policy moves and consequences with former colleagues, or from common perspectives, rather than an desk jockey jobsworth employee/bureaucrat.

    Beyond that, I think Google has seen it's opportunity, it can be the next Goldman Sachs or McKinsey & Co... There won't be a sovereign state in the world without one of their alumni in an important but unelected and unaccountable position, shaping policy where it matters.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 12 2016, @12:03AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 12 2016, @12:03AM (#386834) Journal

    Beyond that, I think Google has seen it's opportunity, it can be the next Goldman Sachs or McKinsey & Co... There won't be a sovereign state in the world without one of their alumni in an important but unelected and unaccountable position, shaping policy where it matters.

    Underlying assumption: once a googler, always a googler.

    Have indeed the ex-Google employees sworn allegiance to Google's interest forever and they'll explode if they breach their oath?
    Is the idea of "just good professionals changing jobs" so remote it has to be dismissed as totally improbable?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 12 2016, @06:18AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 12 2016, @06:18AM (#386921)

      Is the idea of "we have enough information to ruin you" so remote it has to be dismissed as totally improbable?

    • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Friday August 12 2016, @08:46AM

      by TheRaven (270) on Friday August 12 2016, @08:46AM (#386940) Journal
      There are several issues. The first is that former Googlers likely have share options and so anything that benefits Google remains in their financial interest. The second is that 'revolving door' usually implies movement in both directions. The Goldman Sachs model is to send people off to government positions and then, if they act to the benefit of Goldman, hire them back again a few years later at a much higher salary. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there's the issue that you're hiring people who have a particular view of the industry: do you think that people recruited from Google are more or less likely to be advocates of individual privacy than the general population, for example?
      --
      sudo mod me up

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 12 2016, @09:42AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 12 2016, @09:42AM (#386948) Journal

        The first is that former Googlers likely have share options and so anything that benefits Google remains in their financial interest.

        So, to you, it's more likely that is revolving door than just professional changing jobs.
        You may be right, WTH do I know about US politics. If it is so, then US is doomed - if good professionals to work for govt are corrupt and others can't be found, no wonder the governance is chaotic.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 2) by n1 on Friday August 12 2016, @02:56PM

      by n1 (993) on Friday August 12 2016, @02:56PM (#387041) Journal

      I don't doubt there are many people in there who are just professionals changing their jobs.

      The concern is that only takes a handful out of that 250 in positions across the DoD, NSA, FCC etc for Google faithful to have a tangible effect on government policy direction. And even if they are just good professionals doing their jobs, what is their job description/position now and then, how are they going to implement their goals and what public benefit will it have beyond enhanced cooperation between Google, other corporations and various important unaccountable government departments?

      There's also the possibility they're good professionals switching jobs but are also just willing fools who will not look past their very narrow mandate in a compartmentalized intelligence/defense industry.

      I don't mean to tar everyone with the same brush -- people are just trying to pay the mortgage/student loans -- but the frequency of the revolving door is something to watch very closely, especially when it's between a small handful of international corporations and the key government departments overseeing those corporation's industries and size (DoD budget) that use it the door the most, and international corporations never seem to suffer too bad (at all?) from their top talent moving into government positions.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 12 2016, @10:39PM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 12 2016, @10:39PM (#387216) Journal

        The concern is that only takes a handful out of that 250 in positions across the DoD, NSA, FCC etc for Google faithful to have a tangible effect on government policy direction.

        So you'd better "kill" (figuratively speaking) `250-a handful` of them rather then let `a handful` escape, and this for the better good of the american society?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

        • (Score: 2) by n1 on Friday August 12 2016, @11:38PM

          by n1 (993) on Friday August 12 2016, @11:38PM (#387252) Journal

          I said it's "something to watch closely" and nothing more than that. The individuals should be judged on their actions, but it's not like we'll peronsally get to see those actions or input for the most part.

          I am more familiar with the UK situation... Private Eye has a story on the revolving door every issue.

          Here's some google specific stuff from elsewhere

          According to the data, Google has hired at least 65 European government officials since 2005. The officials include Tomas Gulbinas, a former ambassador-at-large for the Lithuanian government, and Georgios Mavros, an advisor to a French member of the European Parliament. Both men were hired by Google as lobbyists in 2015, it says.

          The data also shows strategic hires made by Google from a host of European state bodies such as Poland’s ministry of economy; NATO; the European Parliament; the British Embassy to the US; the Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Spain’s justice ministry.

          Google has particularly targeted public institutions in the UK. According to the study, it has hired at least 26 public officials from no fewer than 17 state bodies in the UK including 10 Downing Street; the Home Office; UK Treasury; the House of Commons; the Departments of Education and Skills; International Development and Transport since 2005.

          Ankur Vora, a former budgetary advisor from the UK Treasury, was hired to provide the technology giant with policy advice months before George Osborne announced the highly criticised £130m settlement deal with Google.

          [...]The study also claims that In 2013, Google hired Verity Harding, a special adviser to the former Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg. Harding is now the policy manager for Google DeepMind, its artificial intelligence arm. DeepMind recently secured a contract with the NHS to gather personal health records from 1.6 million patients without their knowledge or consent, according to report.

          Sarah Hunter, a senior policy advisor to British prime minister between 2001 and 2005, has also been hired as head of public policy for Google in the UK. Hunter is now the head of policy for Google X, which bills itself as the company’s moonshot factory for new businesses that often require new regulation, such as drones and self-driving cars.

          A number of people from David Cameron’s inner circle have also been hired by Google, according to the watchdog’s report.

          Rachel Whetstone, godparent to Cameron’s son, has worked as Google’s vice president for global communications and public affairs.

          In 2013, Tamas Kenessey left the European Parliament as a political advisor to become a Google fellow, then a legal officer inside the European Commission’s directorate general for communications, networks, content and technology.

          According to the CfA, Google’s government hiring blitz is part of a drive to boost its influence in European policy circles after a tentative deal to settle the European Commission’s antitrust investigation fell apart in 2014.

          http://economia.icaew.com/news/june-2016/google-hired-at-least-26-uk-government-officials-in-since-2005 [icaew.com]

          I have no doubt they are the best people for the job though.

          • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday August 13 2016, @12:23AM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 13 2016, @12:23AM (#387281) Journal

            I said it's "something to watch closely" and nothing more than that. The individuals should be judged on their actions, but it's not like we'll peronsally get to see those actions or input for the most part.

            Agree: the problem stays not with the professionals themselves, but with the lack of transparency in govt dealing (revolving doors is just a consequence of the lack of transparency, we are left to infer possible facts from outside manifestations).

            Other info on the same line: Google's lobbying expenditures [opensecrets.org] (up to 2014, the moment Google restructured) and Alphabet Inc's ones [opensecrets.org] (post 2014).
            And that's for US jurisdiction only.

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford