Google accused of ‘monetising' website linked to Southport misinformation
MPs on the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee said they had seen an unpublished report which said the tech giant's advertising network had helped monetise a site where misinformation about the attack appeared.
In the days following the murder of three girls in Southport last summer, violence erupted across England, in part fuelled by false information circulating online about the attacker's identity and background, including false claims that he was an asylum seeker who had arrived in the UK the previous year.
Committee chair Chi Onwurah MP, during an evidence session on misinformation, said MPs had seen a report from digital advertising watchdog Check My Ads, which said it had evidence that a website claimed 'to be monetised' by two firms, including Google, 'at the time that it published that misinformation'.
In response, Google's managing director for trust and safety in Europe, Amanda Storey, said that if true, such an incident would violate the tech giant's rules and it would investigate 'what had gone wrong'.
'I would completely agree that monetising any form of low quality information, particularly associated with an atrocious real world attack, is absolutely not acceptable,' she said.
'I haven't seen that report yet – very happy to take a look at the report once it comes out, and to respond in writing – but very much agree that would violate our policies.
'It's something that we would look into and understand what had gone wrong.
'These fast-moving, real-world situations are very challenging – there is viral spread of misinformation on social media, and we have to deal with the echo of that across sites that we operate with.'
Elsewhere in the session, Ms Storey said she believed that had the Online Safety Act been in effect last summer when the riots took place, it would have 'made a difference' to how easily misinformation was able to spread.
New codes of practice that will require platforms to remove illegal content and protect children from harmful material are due to take effect this year, with fines running into billions of pounds for the largest firms who breach the new rules.
Ms Storey added that she believed Google's position as a search engine, rather than a social media platform, meant it was in a different position with regards to social media platforms when it came to misinformation.
'I think the illegal harm codes would have probably made a difference to overall ecosystem safety,' she said.
'I think that our policies and our approaches meant that we were not particularly implicated in what happened in the Southport situation, but obviously it's an atrocious attack, and our thoughts and sympathies are with the families.'
But in response, committee member Emily Darlington MP said she was 'concerned' that Google appeared to be trying to distance itself from links to misinformation around the Southport attack.
'You've been presented evidence here where you helped to monetise the creation of misinformation – a key piece of misinformation – that was used to incentivise the riots,' she said.
Asked by Ms Darlington if Google had done any 'reflection' since the riots on how its 'advertising and monetisation of content may have contributed', Ms Storey said: 'Absolutely. Any time an incident plays out in the real world, any real world harm situation, we have our strategic command teams do a root cause and corrective action assessment.
'We post-mortem. If anything did go wrong, what can we learn from that? And we roll those learnings into our policies and our enforcement processes on a real-time basis.'
She added that she would report back and look to share more details of that process with the committee.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
6 hours ago
- New York Post
Massachusetts cops close off popular public beach over ‘dead body' that ended up being a crumpled blanket
It's no 'Weekend at Bernie's.' Massachusetts police spent Wednesday morning roping off parts of a popular public beach after receiving reports of an 'unattended death' that turned out to be a crumpled-up blanket, authorities said. Massachusetts State Police arrived at Revere Beach, a summer hotspot just 6 miles northwest of Boston, around 10:30 a.m. Wednesday to probe the grim report. Massachusetts State Police reported finding a dead body on a beach outside of Boston, but it was just a blanket. Google Video captured by a passerby showed five officials standing on the beach cordoning off a large section of the three-mile shore with yellow caution tape while a sixth person waded into the sea. A police boat was also further out off the shore, according to the footage. Police originally described the situation as an 'unattended death.' They said they found what they believed to be a dead body on the beach wrapped in a sheet, according to Boston 25. But when officers opened the bulky, corpse-shaped blanket — expecting to make a grisly discovery, it was empty, cops later corrected. 'It's been confirmed that the item in question is a large blanket rolled up. There has been no body of any type recovered,' Sergeant Gregory Jones confirmed in a statement to the local outlet. It's unclear how the corpse-shaped blanket wound up on the beach. Wangkun Jia – It's unclear how the blanket turned up on the shore in the first place, or if it was left by a spacey beachgoer the night before. The hasty authorities turned all further questions over to the Massachusetts district attorney's office. In a similarly odd case in Idaho earlier this month, cops there spent three hours searching for a reported corpse in a river, only to find a life-sized sex doll floating downstream. The team spared no expense and even rolled out a full drone search while looking for what was nothing more than an inflatable plaything. Still, authorities had no regrets, noting how disastrous the situation could've been if a real person had fallen into the water and they'd opted not to go 'all out.'
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Google Finds Workaround for Lobbying Rules That Omits Big Bosses
(Bloomberg) — It was the end of 2018, and Google's leaders were tired of being Number One. For the second year in a row, federal records showed the search giant had spent more than any other individual company on lobbying in Washington. Executives in Mountain View were sick of seeing that mentioned in the press. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion The US-Canadian Road Safety Gap Is Getting Wider To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets Then Google apparently found a workaround. A new analysis of federal lobbying data by the nonprofit Tech Transparency Project shows that Google and its parent company, Alphabet Inc. used an internal reorganization to exclude the value of lobbying by its senior executives from disclosures. The move helped keep Google off the top of the lobbying charts even as it maintained a robust network of advocates pushing its interests in the capital, during federal challenges to its dominance in search and advertising and the beginnings of artificial intelligence regulation. The findings, which were confirmed by a Bloomberg analysis of lobbying records, show that the effect of the accounting change was to lower the amount that Google reported spending to influence the federal government, likely by millions of dollars. The reorganization 'has allowed the company to shield a significant portion of its lobbying expenditures from public view,' the Tech Transparency Project said in its report. A Google spokesperson, José Castañeda, disputed the report and said the company has followed all relevant disclosure laws. 'These are inaccurate claims about a technical change that simply brought us in line with how many other companies report their lobbying activities,' he said. 'Our lobbying expenditures began decreasing in 2018, after we restructured our government affairs team and cut spending on consultants.' Internal Reshuffle Starting in 2019, Google began cutting ties with some of its external lobbying firms, a move it acknowledged publicly as part of an overhaul of its Washington operations. But the shuffling of external lobbying firms doesn't explain the whole of the decline in Google's reported lobbying expenses, which fell from more than $22 million in 2018 to $8.9 million in the Covid-disrupted year of 2020, and have subsequently remained well below pre-pandemic levels. There's been another, quieter change: in early 2020, Google moved its in-house lobbyists into a new subsidiary, called Google Client Services LLC. It's that unit which now files spending disclosures for Google's lobbying activities. The reorganization meant that the parent companies Google and Alphabet no longer directly employed any lobbyists – defined under federal disclosure law as people spending at least 20% of their time on influencing Congress or the executive branch. Companies that file lobbying disclosure reports are supposed to also account for the time that other senior executives — those who don't meet the 20% threshold – devote to lobbying, according to legal experts and the compliance guide for the Lobbying Disclosure Act published by Congressional leaders. That generally involves prorating their annual compensation to account for the days they spend influencing the government. But since Google moved lobbyists into the Google Client Services subsidiary, the parent company no longer meets the threshold for filing disclosures under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, according to the TTP analysis. That means Google no longer reports the lobbying expenses of high-ranking managers who aren't part of the Client Services unit — like Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai and chief legal officer Kent Walker — to the public, as it once did. As a result, in 2020 Google dropped out of the top 20 in corporate lobbying expenses for the first time in nearly a decade, the TTP analysis found. While Google's reported annual spending has since edged back up again, it hasn't come close to the No.1 slot in the company lobbying rankings that it used to occupy. For the past five years, that position has alternated between two other tech giants: Meta Platforms Inc. and Inc. Antitrust Challenge There's been plenty going in in Washington over the period that was crucial for Google's business. For one thing, the company — like many peers — is betting heavily on AI, a field where decisions in the US capital will shape the commercial landscape. Google has also been under assault from antitrust authorities over its dominance in search and digital advertising. The company has maintained in those lawsuits that its success is down to consumer choice and superior innovation, rather than a result of its power to shape laws and regulations. Publicity around its lobbying spending has the potential to undercut such arguments and alienate regulators. When executives are as highly paid as many in Silicon Valley, the prorated amounts can add up to millions — even for just a few days' worth of lobbying. Google reported total compensation for Pichai of more than $225 million in 2022, thanks to grants of stock. His total compensation was $10.7 million in 2024. Walker's total compensation was more than $30 million last year, the company reported. Some say the new structure Google is employing flouts the spirit of the federal disclosure law – if not the letter itself. 'This is just too cute by half,' said William Luneburg, a professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and the co-editor of the manual for lobbying compliance published by the American Bar Association. 'On the face of it, it's wrong,' he said. 'They have to report all of their expenses, which would include the time of officers and directors and other employees that spend their time engaging in lobbying activity.' 'We always comply with disclosure laws and any suggestion of improper reporting is false,' said Castañeda, the Google spokesperson. TTP said it examined lobbying disclosures of several other companies that filed reports via a similar subsidiary model, but didn't find any that had used the structure to remove executive lobbying from their disclosures. —With assistance from Davey Alba and Sarah Frier. Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist A $340 Million New York Office Makeover Is Converting Boardrooms to Bedrooms ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Bloomberg
7 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Google Finds Workaround for Lobbying Rules That Omits Big Bosses
It was the end of 2018, and Google's leaders were tired of being Number One. For the second year in a row, federal records showed the search giant had spent more than any other individual company on lobbying in Washington. Executives in Mountain View were sick of seeing that mentioned in the press.