←back to thread

How Google spent 15 years creating a culture of concealment

(www.nytimes.com)
156 points tysone | 2 comments | 20 Nov 24 11:45 UTC | HN request time: 0.417s | source
Show context
getpost ◴[20 Nov 24 23:05 UTC] No.42199072[source]▶
If anything you ever say during routine business operations can end up as evidence, clear and honest communication will suffer. The effectiveness of organizations, including the ability to act ethically, will be seriously degraded.

There needs to be some kind of work product doctrine, which protects the privacy of routine business communication. Defining that, while allowing the collection of evidence of criminal activity, won't be easy, but the current state of affairs is unworkable.

I don't wish to facilitate corporate crime, and it's obvious that some of Google's anti-competitive behavior is unlawful. But, I don't see any realistic alternative to what Google is doing in the current legal environment.

replies(12): >>42199118 #>>42199195 #>>42199223 #>>42199254 #>>42199476 #>>42199565 #>>42199605 #>>42199877 #>>42199883 #>>42200785 #>>42201087 #>>42201671 #
Retric ◴[20 Nov 24 23:26 UTC] No.42199223[source]▶
It ends up as evidence when routine business operations are breaking the law. Everywhere I’ve worked hasn’t had an issue with this stuff being tracked and several places actively preferred when stuff was recorded. Most companies don’t have an issue with clear communication because they’re not worried about what’s being said will end up part of a criminal investigation.

So this is something that’s almost exclusively going to harm criminal organizations by making them less efficient.

That sounds like a win win.

replies(2): >>42200054 #>>42200549 #
1. crazygringo ◴[21 Nov 24 01:23 UTC] No.42200054[source]▶
> Most companies don’t have an issue with clear communication because they’re not worried about what’s being said will end up part of a criminal investigation.

Only if you count "most companies" by company, i.e. most companies are therefore small businesses. And of course they're not worried because they're small and not subject to these kinds of investigations. They're not profitable enough to be targets.

But if you count "most companies" by where most people work, you're talking about medium-to-large corporations. And it's standard these days to have policies exactly like Google's, to not retain instant messages for example, and delete e-mails after a short number of years. Because they're big juicy targets for frivolous lawsuits.

So no, this isn't a win-win. People say dumb stuff all the time that a lawyer can take out of context. That doesn't mean a corporation is a criminal organization, as you suggest.

Corporations sue each other all the time, not because the corporation being sued is criminal, but because the corporation suing thinks it'll be able to get away with it. But you seem to be ignoring that.

replies(1): >>42200492 #
2. Retric ◴[21 Nov 24 02:32 UTC] No.42200492[source]▶
I’ve worked at and seen multiple companies with 10+k employees that have the attitude I was talking about, it’s not just a small or mid sized company thing.

I have also been told internal communication is more likely to be beneficial in lawsuits. It’s not because you’re intentionally hiding stuff, but because your employees have a viewpoint that is more likely to align with your interests than a 3rd party.

> People say dumb stuff all the time that a lawyer can take out of context.

Stuff taken out of context is rarely very persuasive when you can provide that context. It’s far more damaging to their credibility than your case.