Skip to main content

Google navigation addition is not Google +1

socialIf you noticed an addition to your Google account pages recently, you weren’t the only one. Last week, Google introduced a new feature of its page that displays a users’ account name and lets them access their settings, various folders, and easily log out. It’s a pretty minimal update, but seeing as we’ve all become so hungry for the massively delayed Google social project, this seemed like a sign.

Turns out we were all reaching. After widespread speculation this was indeed the first implementation in a Google social layer to be incrementally introduced, the Cupertino company is setting the record straight. Google explains that the addition is nothing more than a way for users to make sure what account they are logged in under when using various Google applications. For instance, if you’re wanting to share a document under your company’s account, it makes it immediately obvious how you are logged in and if you need to switch.

Recommended Videos

It’s also meant to help users who want to keep some information from being associated with their name. According to a blog post from director of privacy Alma Whitten, “sometimes you want the web without having your online activity tied to your identity…perhaps when you’re researching a medical condition.”

On the plus side, it’s another step toward user privacy for Google. Clearly, there’s been contention when it comes to this in the past and the company isn’t taking any chances. Unfortunately, it means there’s still little to no progress on Google +1 (if that’s even your real name, Google social project!). It’s starting to feel like maybe Google’s trying to kill its alleged social feature, and is just waiting until all the media hype dies down and we forget about it.

Topics
Molly McHugh
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Before coming to Digital Trends, Molly worked as a freelance writer, occasional photographer, and general technical lackey…
What is Section 230? Inside the legislation protecting social media
social media on phone

A little known piece of legislation called Section 230 is making headlines after President Donald Trump's latest effort to repeal the legislation, demanding that Congress fold that repeal in with another round of stimulus checks, defense spending, and the massive bill that keeps the lights on in Washington D.C. It seems politicians are alwasy struggling to wrap their heads around social media and "Big Tech," a silly term for the technology giants that have defined the modern era.

It's not the first time Section 230 made waves, of course. Trump signed an executive order in May that targeted social media platforms and the content on their sites, aiming to remove the protections of Section 230 in the Communications Decency Act. By repealing Section 230, social networks would be legally responsible for what people post on their platforms. The law that protects speech over the internet has been around for more than 20 years, but has been targeted by politicians of both major parties, including Democratic president-elect Joe Biden.

Read more
2020 forced Big Social to address its flaws, but it’s too late for an easy fix
Trump Twitter

The phrase "out of the frying pan, into the fire" is an incredibly apt description of the plight of the internet's social media giants in 2020. Already grappling to settle into their increasingly large roles in democracy and culture, social networks like Facebook and Twitter suddenly gained an even bigger role in our daily lives as the coronavirus pandemic took hold. In the face of this extra pressure, they had no choice but to adapt.

While these forced adaptations were no doubt difficult for the companies involved, the resulting changes have arguably been good ones -- not only for individual users, but for the world at large.
Too many fires to put out
When the COVID-19 pandemic took hold, social media was a natural fallback. People turned to their online networks for community updates, virtual hangouts, news, entertainment, and more. Giants such as Facebook and Twitter faced a fresh coronavirus-related “infodemic,” while at the same time, an urgent responsibility hung on their shoulders to police an influx of controversial political content from President Donald Trump and many others who were quickly racking up huge follower counts.

Read more
Tech advocates say Trump’s executive order could ruin the internet
donald trump facebook libra cryptocurrency banking charter president holds news conference in rose garden on census and citze

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that seeks to remove the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, making social networks and internet services responsible for what people post on their platforms.

Even with an executive order, a fundamental change to Section 230 is far away. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or Federal Communications Commission (FCC) would need to approve new interpretations of the clause and take new enforcement actions to give it teeth, and it would require congressional approval. But, the tech industry is still wary of what a world would look like without Section 230's protections.
'Chilling' free speech
Daniel Castro, the vice president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a nonprofit that focuses on public policy and technological innovation,  said internet giants losing their Section 230 protections would have troubling effects.

Read more