Unclick Google

We can force Google to stop their privacy violations while ridding the internet of advertising ... by clicking ads.

240 comments Micah White, 12 March 2009

On March 11, Google revealed its latest plan to violate your privacy: they will now record the types of websites you visit in order to gather a behavioral profile of your interests purportedly so that they can send you targeted advertising. This policy is in addition to their current policy of keeping a record of every single web search you have ever made along with as much other personally identifying information as they can gather. Of course, these behavioral profiles and detailed search histories will also be made available to law enforcement personnel upon request. The disregard for user privacy is a long standing tradition at Google and one that should be challenged. Just as Facebook was recently forced to cave after protests, Google too can be made to backtrack from their creeping violations of our privacy. Every company has their weak point, for Facebook it is the fear that users will stop using the site, and for Google it is the necessity of increasing their advertising revenue. I propose that we collectively embark on a civil disobedience campaign of intentional, automated "click fraud" in order to undermine Google's advertising program with the goal of forcing Google to adopt a pro-privacy corporate policy.

As every internet user knows, the web is inundated with advertising. Many of these ads are generated automatically by Google. Unlike advertisements in newspapers or on billboards which are priced per impression (the more people that see an ad the more expensive it is), Google's ads are priced per click. Therefore, every time you click on a Google AdSense advertisement, some advertiser must pay Google. If the ad you clicked on was displayed on a website other than Google's then Google must also pay that website. As you can see, if ads are being clicked on automatically then the whole house of cards upon which the AdSense system is built on crumbles. Advertisers will refuse to pay Google and Google will refuse to pay websites.

Because Google ads are targeted, certain advertisers are willing to pay top dollar for clicks. Some keywords such as insurance, refinance and "IRS problem" are rumored to be worth more than $10 per click. Click fraud can very quickly do major damage to Google and its advertisers but the fact is there is nothing Google can do to stop it, if we work together.

The system I propose is quite simple and is accomplished in three steps: 1) Install Firefox and restart Firefox 2) Install GreaseMonkey (a useful plug-in for Firefox) 3) Install the Blackspot Google GreaseMonkey script or if you are on a slow network install the Blackspot Google Randomly script which will only click on one ad randomly.

Now, whenever you use Google your computer will automatically click on all the AdSense advertisements sending a message to Google to stop their privacy violations.

Note: If you are a techie and want to get involved with this campaign, we need a version of this script that will both remove the ads from our sight and click them automatically. The best would be integration of this script into Adblock Plus. Unfortunately, this script does not work with Adblock Plus so if you want to use Adblock Plus (you should!) then you must disable it on google.com in order to automatically click their ads. If you are a programmer, post your upgraded version of this script below. (Update: One person has already posted an updated version, but I haven't tested it yet.)

Special thanks to Alf at Hublog for designing the prototype of this script four years ago which I upgraded to work today.

The debate is raging! Read the March 13 follow-up to this post for further discussion of Unclick Google

Micah White is a Contributing Editor at Adbusters Magazine and an independent activist. He can be reached at www.micahmwhite.com or micah[at]adbusters.org

240 comments on the article “Unclick Google”

Displaying 231 - 240 of 240

Woe of the Internet

19 March 2009 at 02:12 am

The whole direction of the Internet economy since the late 90's has been pretty sickening to watch. I have seen the most stupendously bad ideas get funding and blow huge amounts of money. I have seen other things which were excellent at one point get completely wrecked through catastrophically inept mismanagement. The only overriding factor behind all of the development in terms of Internet as business is greed, greed, greed. In the old days, before the hordes of greedy idiots came, people had ideas about the Internet being a free or nearly-free medium for communication and exchange of data. To that end, they either created or had international bodies set up agreed upon standards for differnt protocols, mediums of communication, formats for data exchange, etc. Any client which operated with these protocols could be used. People forget so often the part about what makes something "killer", as in an application, device, or any other thing. For example, to me at least, what is "killer" about my mobile phone is that it is of suficiently low cost that, if I take it to the beach and get sand in it, or take it to a club and it gets lost, it will not matter much. The low cost of the device actually is a significant part of its "value" to me. Now, with the Internet, what one of the prime, fundamental values of it is is that it is free - it does not cost money, once you have access and applications that speak the protocols - you can participate on it as much as you want, communicate over it as much as you want, exchange data over it as much as you want, for free. The whole problem I see is that an entire generation of people wanting to make money off it have not realized that everything they are doing is counter to one of the prime values of the Internet. And that value, being so prime, manifests in often brutal paths that don't care about marketing niches, cool widgets, web 2.0, etc. It is a core, almost reptilian primal driving force that underlies "consumer" (read "Internet users") behavior and always will unless they are sadistically forced to do otherwise. In fact, the real control wars going on now over the Internet are exactly about this - turning into some type of controlled, hyper-television-like medium. This is why the whole battle over file sharing is so important. It is a fundamental right we must preserve.

Woe of the Internet

19 March 2009 at 02:12 am

Roberto

20 March 2009 at 11:21 am

DOES A DYNAMIC IP ADDRESS PROTECT PRIVACY? I have a "dynamic" (changing) IP address as opposed to the more common "static" (fixed) kind. If you are not a gamer, nor a user of VOIP, it's a great money-saver -- usually 50% less costly. But does it increase my privacy in any way? I would appreciate a definitive answer from any techie reading this. If it turns out dynamic IP addresses undermine data-collection efforts, wouldn't that be a good way to solve the privacy problem with Google?

Roberto

20 March 2009 at 11:21 am

Anonymous

20 March 2009 at 07:34 pm

When I decided to join facebook it was a choice to embrace openness. Corporations and governments as claim to be creating an open transparent society. Let them have it all - they already have it all or near all via SAP. If we fear that they have the power to control and remain silent then "they" already won. I would rather be true than live a lie. I already opted out of mainstream society on many fronts and this will only be one more step embracing openness and what is most real. These advertisers are fools. This is but one life time among many and how I respond to this manifested reality determines a future incarnation.

Anonymous

20 March 2009 at 07:34 pm

Anonymous

27 March 2009 at 07:48 am

'Rumored to cost as much as $10' ? You can find out exactly how much a click costs simply by visiting google's keyword external tool (search keyword external, im not linking to it) also, your guy's comments boards are getting abused by little scrots advertising, (people using anchored texted links back to dog cages and god knows what). You should have spoken to someone who knows/works in online marketing before writing this...it's well intentioned but factually incredibly shaky.

Anonymous

27 March 2009 at 07:48 am

Albert

04 April 2009 at 04:21 pm

Although I see the point as to where you are getting at, some may agree with how you feel, however, your solution that you are proposing is wrong, and will only hurt the publishers and advertisers. If you strongly feel so passionate about Google, and it's advertising system, why not find a better approach that is ethical to both sides of the argument. No one wants to be monitored or do they want to be convicted of this bad approach as well.