Google Gives In To Republican Political Spammers: Launching Pilot Program To Whitelist Them Out Of Spam
from the spam-spam-spam-spam dept
What a dumb news cycle. As we noted, mainly driven by the preferred political spam mongers for Republicans, a study from some computer scientists was completely misrepresented to argue (falsely) that Google was deliberately censoring Republican politician emails. As we’ve repeatedly noted, the study actually found that while a clean Gmail account would flag more Republican emails as spam than Democrats, (1) the reverse was true of the two other most popular web-based email providers, Yahoo and Outlook, and (2) the researchers found that if someone actively manages their spam flags, that this discrepancy disappears in Gmail.
But, Republicans and their favorite spammer can’t let facts or accuracy get in the way of a moral panic. So they got Fox News to spin it into a bullshit, inaccurate story about Google censoring conservatives, then got some Republicans to file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission arguing that this was an unfair advantage that Google was giving Democrats. Finally, they got an incredibly stupid bill introduced in both the House and the Senate to basically say that email providers can no longer mark political emails as spam.
Apparently, this stupid misleading culture war, that anyone with even the slightest understanding of how spam filters work could have debunked for anyone, was apparently gaining steam. And in this ridiculous world we live in, once “the narrative” takes over, facts and any sense of reality go right out the window.
So, just after Google CEO Sundar Pichai visited Capitol Hill, where he was apparently yelled at by a bunch of Republicans, Google has announced a “pilot program” to whitelist candidate emails. The program is not live yet, but Google has first asked the FEC for the greenlight, to make sure that this program doesn’t run afoul of any election laws.
Google’s pilot program, per the June 21 filing, would be for “authorized candidate committees, political party committees and leadership political action committees registered with the FEC.”
- It would make campaign emails from such groups exempt from spam detection as long as they don’t violate Gmail’s policies around phishing, malware or illegal content.
- Instead, when users would receive an email from a campaign for the first time, they would get a “prominent” notification asking if they want to keep receiving them, and would still have the ability to opt out of subsequent emails.
Basically, because a bunch of Republicans (1) are bad at political emails, (2) can’t take any personal responsibility at all, (3) love any kind of moral panic about big tech not liking them… we all now will have to deal with more political spam in our inboxes.
What a stupid world.
Filed Under: elections, email, filtering, politics, spam
Companies: google
Comments on “Google Gives In To Republican Political Spammers: Launching Pilot Program To Whitelist Them Out Of Spam”
So now I have to Opt Out of EVERY GD repub/dem email?
You know they are going to play the system where the emailer just makes a slight change to the campaign name/email domain and bang… you get another email.
Re:
‘Oh no no no, you opted out of messages from giveusyourmoneyandvoteforus(at)politicalparty1, this message is from giveusyourmoneandvoteforusy(at)politicalparty2, totally different so the original opt-out choice doesn’t apply. If you want to opt out of this sender’s emails that’ll require marking this sender’s messages as undesirable, and this opt-out will of course not apply to tomorrow’s messages which will come from a totally different group that just so happens to have a very similar email address as ours.’
Re:
I run my own email server for my friends and family. I’ve had to institute spam filters because some were hit with Republican spam runs. No one I associate with is Republican/Trumpist/Reich Whinge. It is one thing to block unsolicited bulk email. It’s another to force others to allow you to use my property and cause me additional costs so you can force your unsolicited opinion on people that never asked for it.
And here we thought Republicans were so against communism. They keep telling us that. What’s that word I want for when someone says one thing, but does another?
Closed loop, unique token, confirmed opt-in. Not one email sent without someone specifically and provably requesting it for ANY bulk mail list. I don’t really care what it is.
Re: Re:
What they are doing is not communism, but right wing terror tactics to at least force people to acquiesce to their policies.
Re: By Design,...
that “OPT OUT” is by OBVIOUSLY by design,..
to PROVE! BEYOND ANY SHADOW of DOUBT!
That a real, living, breathing, person resides at the end of that purchased email address,…
that,..
they were not entirely sure was real,.. but NOW! muhuhahahaha!!!
RELEASE THE FLOOD GATES!!!
WE GOT A LIVE ONE!!!!
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
I see. The port said GMail did exactly what they claimed – flagged more republican Emails. But some other sites did something different, so IGNORE the FACT that GMail was anit-republican, and replace that FACT with some other horseshit democratic talking points about other shit that means nothing. I see. I see exactly what you are saying. Ignore the facts. Accept the bullshit. Get in line like the others and stare at the dirt while I tell you what to think.
Re:
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
Re: Re:
What are you talking about, the evidence was laid out clear as day. The report said that Gmail impacted emails from republican sources more, and given republicans never screw up or hold a position that anyone might disagree with the cause of that couldn’t have been on their end or due to the recipients making clear they didn’t want those emails and therefore training the filter to catch those emails more often, which means it simply must have been due to Gmail having it out for republicans.
Re:
They’re not “anit-republican”, they’re “anit-spam”, and apparently Republicans tend to spam more.
Not much of a surprise, really.
Re: Re: Google Famous Pink Hosting
Considering the amount of spam I get from Google, promoting (during June 2022)
I might conclude that they are in fact very much pro-spam. That appears to be an important part of their business model. They also provide spammer MX concealment so spammers might appear to have somewhat legitimate domains, while sending spam through Google servers and using Google scammer maildrops.
I might even reach that conclusion even though their most recent promotion offering spam lists lera.kirlin@targetlistinfo-usa.com was way back in early May.
Re: Re: Re:
Can you unequivocally say that each of those accounts are spam-accounts and not hacked accounts used by spammers?
Also, as pointed out here and there, removing spam has very much the same problem as moderation – it’s hard to do at scale.
Re: Re: Re:2 Spam Accounts
I cannot unequivocally say that taxes will increase this year in Volusia County, but I still have fairly high confidence in such a prediction.
More directly to your question, I am having a hard time distinguishing a ``spam account” from an ``account used by spammers”. This is made more difficult by the fact that, even if an account was hijacked, it i8s not onmly being used to send the spam, but also to receive responses.
A trust account scam, or a list sale scam, or a phone service scam, only works if they can receive the responmses and direct the marks in the appropriate ways to send money. So, at the least, we would need some meaningful distinction between the two types of accounts you identify in order to answer your question.
Ultimately, however, your question misses the point, which is that Google provides spam hosting and support services, and is surely worthy of derision for doing so.
Re: Re: Re:3
My point was that you essentially “outed” a bunch mail-addresses without actually knowing if they belonged to real persons that have been hacked or if they belonged to a spammer. There’s a distinction here and that’s why we don’t assume that the owner of a thing used for nefarious reasons is the culprit without evidence. It’s the stuff lynch-mobs are created from.
That can be construed as saying that Google is willingly providing material support to spammers which I find hard to believe. Just looking at the number of existing gmail-accounts, which are around 2 billion, that some are used for spamming and manage to slip through all anti-spam checks is only natural because just like moderation at scale, detecting and removing spam at scale is also impossible to do perfectly.
Re: Re: Re:4 Google GMail and MX Services Used by Spammers
Right. That is a distinction without a difference. If the account was initially created by a legitimate person and then later taken over by a scammer, the result is not distinguishable from an account initially created by a scammer. Either way, the account
and so should be viewed as an evil whose eradication is desirable.
Receiving the responses is essential to many of the scams, so we can discount the possibility that the spammer has just found a loose account for a one-time promotion. Rather, it is an account created or taken over and retained for nefarious purposes.
I should certainly hope it can be so construed. It was my intention to say precisely that. Google GMail prospers by sending spam as part of their business model. They also refuse spam reports, as observed by spamcop, which tells us something about their attitude toward spam.
Google MX services and mail services prosper by sending spam and by providing maildrop service for scammers who wish to appear somewhat legitimate. I think they may even charge for MX hosting, but if not then they surely deem the associated ad revenue sufficient.
So, yes, I am saying that Google intentionally provide spam hosting and scammer maildrop services. This is certainly providing material support to spammers.
And, yes, I intentionally “outed” the maildrop names used by the scammers. Someone trying to sell me penis pills, or drain my trust account, is someone whose name should be put up in large red letters to serve as a warning to the legitimate and a caution to the others.
Re: Re: Re:
You could just delete the contents of your spam folder without going into it if you don’t want to see such emails, but that does carry the risk of accidentally deleting an important communication that was inadvertently put in there.
Re:
so IGNORE the FACT that GMail was anit-republican
Given they’ve acquiesced to that, what are you still complaining about?
See, this is the thing with you people. Even when you get what you wanted, you’re still bitching like a PMSing teenager.
If all you’re going to do is complain no matter what, why even fucking bother?
Re: Re:
Sexist and ageist. Just saying.
Re: Re: Re:
I’m out of fucks to give.
Re: Re: Re:2
Clearly.
Oh you naive fools...
Well that’s one way to tell US republicans that if they throw a big enough tantrum you’ll bend over backwards to appease them…
If they thought this was going to solve the issue I cannot wait until they realize that by folding here they’ve just encouraged republican politicians to demand even more special treatment and put even more effort into decrying any of their emails that might hit the spam folder.
Re: It's not what you think
Read between the lines. Google isn’t folding or bending over backwards. They’ve always been savvy about appearing to go along, while actually doing exactly what they want. I’m not a big fan of Google in general, but this is actually a big win for Google, and for Google’s users, and a loss for the spammers.
Think about it: Right now, I get a lot of unwanted political campaign mail from both parties in my inbox. I don’t want it, but some people actually do, and since Google can’t guess who wants which campaign messages, a lot of it goes right into inboxes by default.
But after this change, every political campaign message will have a note from Google at the top asking me if I really want it, and proactively offering to block it for me. Personally, I can’t wait!
In short: Republican spammers don’t want Google to mark their messages as spam. So Google has “helpfully” offered to build an entirely new filtering system specifically to target their messages and make it even easier for users to block them. But it’s not called a spam filter, so it’s perfectly ok, you see! 🙂
Re: Re:
Hmm, so you’re thinking that it’s less spineless cowardice and more malicious compliance? I could see it working out like that I suppose, though I’ve no doubt that the spammers will be doing everything they can think of to abuse the system and make it hell for users as I not-so-sarcastically noted above.
Re: next up: you MUST pass political email requirements
The next thing they’re going to demand is not only that mail providers not classify them as spam, but a requirement that they MUST pass them through and bypass any spam filters or other rules that might prevent them from being delivered.
The AlRal treatment
I’d say it’s time to give politicians the AlRal treatment. Sign them up for every mailing, circular and “concerned citizen” USPS list we can find as was done with Alan Ralsky. He was getting two mail bags per day at his home.
Um, guys? I never asked for your twaddle shite; why on earth should I have to ask to stop getting it?
Re: A difficulty
It would be more satisfying to do so if they had real addresses. So many of the least desirable mailers seem to have as their addresses ``suites” in Mailboxes-R-Us and the like.
That is, if you can find them at all. A lot of them hide behind GoDaddy or similar scammer concealment services, which themselves may use Mailboxes-R-Us as their addresses.
What part of “Give us money or we’ll say you’re a Biden supporter!” Isn’t a phishing scam?
Re:
Voted funniest reply so far this year!
What I don’t understand is why Pichal, the owner/operator of a piece of private property, even thought of giving in. This makes me wonder if he’s a closet Republican…..
It used to be, I can remember that far back in time, that he who whined the loudest got smacked down the hardest. Shit-oh-dear but the times have changed, and not for the better. Sigh.
Re:
Possibly so we can see what happens, while a large number of Gmail users yell “fuck this weak shit”, and then teh Goog tracks stats on everyone suddenly training their spam filters.
Re:
Project Dragonfly was a thing until both Google’s employees AND the Senate started giving a fuck.
Well...
They did get rid of their “Don’t Be Evil” motto, so might as well.
There’s other free email services you can use that don’t give in to republican fox news fake news, Gmail block democratic spam too the problem is republicans tend to send out more spam than Democrats. So of course they get blocked more.
So millions of people will have to waste time
Looking at spam emails they won’t read
Good old days
I remember when Ajax was supposed to help scrub away vile filth.
Solve this problem with 1 crazy trick...
Change the fucking law and make the mailings Opt In.
Problem – Solution.
Oh that’s right, they love to make sure the political message can always get out, even to people who have never expressed any interest in the party who end up flagging the spam as spam.
Set a fine for those who ignore people’s wishes, you can’t show I ever opted in and you emailed me anyways… well pay me, for each and every single mailing you sent to me.
Phonelines are blowing up with political robocalls, I’ve seen other people sigh in disgust as yet another political spam text arrives.
But hey Google is properly cowed to the political whims of conspiracy thinking who are given the power to write laws that solve imaginary problems with very real penalties.
If their fan base so beloves them, why would they resist making it opt in?
Oh thats right, they deserve the very special right to force others to get messages they don’t wish to get & if anyone helps the target stop the flow of unwanted messages they need to be destroyed.
Re:
Its not just political robo calls… it is all kinds of robo calls. It has gotten to the point where most people I know do not even pick up the phone from an unknown number.
Re:
Phonelines are blowing up with political robocalls, I’ve seen other people sigh in disgust as yet another political spam text arrives.
One of those situations where I wish ‘FUCK OFF’ could be sent in place of ‘STOP’. 😉
Spam fries
At the height of the COVID-induced spate of empty grocery store shelves, I was perusing the mostly empty frozen food section trying to find something, anything, to get and came across an entire aisle on one side that had only one item left, it was spam fries, I didn’t know such existed. Even at such a time, no one wanted to buy them, big surprise. What these mfers are trying to do is essentially forcing all grocery stores to carry spam fries right along side tater tots, ice cream, or frozen pizza while maligning store owners who weren’t already doing so. Don’t know why but I had an urge to share this.
A solution
Here’s a solution:
Mark the emails as spam. Don’t unsubscribe and don’t click a link to opt out. By marking the email as spam, we’ll train the filters to keep recognizing the emails as spam.
Report the email to sites such as SpamCop, which will add their spam database. Then any email providers that subscribe to the spam database will also know the email is spam and block it.
Re: Surprise, Major Spam Hosting Service Refuses Spam Reports
Normally a good idea, and I do so. It should be noted, however, that Google does not accept spamcop reports. I get t6he impression that handling spam is part of their business model, especially as they supply scammer maildrop services and scammer MX services.
Re: Re:
“Impression” isn’t the same as “having proof”. If you know where to look, there are tons of shady people that sell hacked accounts, maildrop and MX-services for the sole purpose of spamming and phishing.
Re: Re: Re: evidence
Right you are. That is why I gave my evidence, which is that google refuse spamcop reports. You can thus evaluate whether google are responsive to reports or, alternatively, may prefer to provide spam hosting and support services.
Confused
Isn’t this a win by allowing users a direct choice in what is and is not flagged?
Re:
Not everyone thinks drinking from the firehose is a good idea…
Re: Re:
True.
But I have a problem with the idea of pre-configured spam filters.
I look at my gmail account and daily I receive nearly a dozen fake order confirmations in my IN BOX. Yet I constantly need to skim through the hundreds of daily spam notices for real messages
It’s no wonder we have so many ransomware issues when one of the largest email providers can’t even get that right.
Here I have no problem with the default for registered candidates to send email whitelisted. As long as you can easily junk them permanently.
That’s more choice than my snail mail with politics.
That one extra click equates to choice.