Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.) | Content governance report at Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.)

Status
0.63% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
14
Resolution details
Company ticker
GOOGL
Lead filer
National Legal and Policy Center
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Digital rights
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED:



Shareholders request that Alphabet Inc. (“Company”) issue a report at reasonable cost – omitting proprietary or legally privileged information – reviewing the vulnerabilities of its enforcement of Google’s and YouTube’s Terms of Service related to content policies, and assessing the risks posed by content management controversies related to issues such as election interference, freedom of expression, and inequitable application of policies, and how they affect the Company’s finances, operations, and reputation.
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT:



Evidence has accumulated over many years that show Alphabet Inc.’s platforms discriminate against disfavored speech, interfered in elections, and is undeniably prejudiced. Major examples include:



● In leaked Company emails, employees discussed using “ephemeral experiences” to change users’ views. Back in 2016, the Company’s chief financial officer said, “we will use the great strength and resources and reach we have” to advance Google’s values. Consequentially, senior research psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein found that – based on 1.5 million search experiences his team aggregated in 2020 – that the Company’s manipulations could have shifted up to six million votes to Joe Biden.1
● A study of voter outreach by 2020 political candidates, conducted by North Carolina State University’s Department of Computer Science, found that Google’s Gmail “marked 59.3% more emails from [conservative] candidates as spam compared to the [progressive] candidates.”2
● The Republican National Committee claimed that Gmail sent more than 22 million of its emails to spam during a critical fundraising period in the 2022 election cycle. The Company has incurred a lawsuit and a complaint to the Federal Elections Commission due to the alleged suppression.3
● A Media Research Center analysis of the most tightly contested 2022 U.S. Senate races found that ten of 12 Republican candidates’ campaign websites (83%) appeared far lower (or did not appear at all) on page one of Google’s organic search results, compared to their Senate Democratic Party opponents’ campaign websites.4


In addition to the above examples, the Company is the target of a credible, major lawsuit by the states of Missouri and Louisiana, based on extensive evidence that the Company violated users’ First Amendment rights.



Shareholders need to know whether the Company is engaged in unconstitutional censorship, and whether the Company exercises its content moderation in violation of its Terms of Service, opening the Company to liability claims by victims. Shareholders also need to know whether the Company is failing to disclose these potential liabilities as material risks in its public filings. There is currently no single source providing shareholders the information sought by this resolution.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Kutxabank Gestion SGIIC SAU. Against
Anima Sgr Against The company has provided numerous disclosures and reports addressing rights of users, and how its services work, specifically speaking to mis-information and political material.
The company already has governance frameworks in place to address the topics and risk brought forth by the proponent.
EFG Asset Management Against
Rothschild & co Asset Management Against

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.