HNewsWire:

It's already challenging enough to run a search engine in today's increasingly social environment. When antitrust authorities accuse you of favoring your own products over those of rivals, it's a bad sign. Now Google's upper management, who are proud of the company's unofficial motto,

Others, such as "Don't Be Evil," have been falsely accused of being evil. Is there any other way to explain the persistent claims that the internet giant knowingly committed "the single greatest breach in the history of privacy" and "one of the biggest violations of data protection laws that we had ever seen?"

Already, Google's longtime web dominance and illustrious brand are being threatened by the company's history of anti-social social networks and anti-trust trust relations that dishonestly breach online consumer privacy and trust. Google may have reached a breaking point with its defensive and dishonest responses to allegations that its Street View cars secretly gathered private internet communications like emails, photos, passwords, chat messages, and posts on websites and social media.

Now that the privacy, trust, and anti-trust practices of the incredibly successful and profitable internet giant have come under renewed scrutiny from consumers, competitors, regulators, and elected officials alike, the question must be asked: Is Google facing an existential threat? With government regulators on both sides of the Atlantic nipping at its heels, Facebook taking the lead in the race for attention and prestige, and "social" beginning to replace "search" as the focus of online activity, the company that revolutionized our means of finding information just a decade ago is increasingly under siege and in danger of fading from prominence, becoming, in essence, the "next Microsoft."

Already, Google's longtime web dominance and illustrious brand are being threatened by the company's history of anti-social social networks and anti-trust trust relations that dishonestly breach online consumer privacy and trust. Google may have reached a breaking point with its defensive and dishonest responses to allegations that its Street View cars secretly gathered private internet communications like emails, photos, passwords, chat messages, and posts on websites and social media.

Now that the privacy, trust, and anti-trust practices of the incredibly successful and profitable internet giant have come under renewed scrutiny from consumers, competitors, regulators, and elected officials alike, the question must be asked: Is Google facing an existential threat? With government regulators on both sides of the Atlantic nipping at its heels, Facebook taking the lead in the race for attention and prestige, and "social" beginning to replace "search" as the focus of online activity, the company that revolutionized our means of finding information just a decade ago is increasingly under siege and in danger of fading from prominence, becoming, in essence, the "next Microsoft."

Who gave these new media companies the right to secretly collect personal information without our knowledge or consent, and then hoard it until they can figure out how to make a profit off of it? This is especially true after European regulators finally issued an ultimatum to the company, telling them they must stop lying about their anticompetitive search, online advertising, and smartphone software practices or face serious consequences. U.S. authorities are expected to follow suit.

Meanwhile, questions about the stealthy Street View data collection have been raised in at least a dozen different nations. But Google still won't admit its wrongdoing or provide a satisfactory explanation for why and by whom the data was collected. The information Google collected on American citizens has not been seen by any domestic regulators as of yet. Instead, Google denied any wrongdoing, explained that the error was the result of experimental software, insisted that the stolen information would not be used in any Google products, and blamed a "rogue" employee for the whole mess. Instead, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) found that Google "intended to collect, store, and review" the data "for possible use in other Google products," and fined the company for obstructing the investigation.

The response Google gave to the FCC was typical. The company has consistently stalled, denied, and obstructed inquiries into its data-gathering practices. It has repeatedly delayed providing requested information to European and American regulators for months, during which time they were left wondering why the data was even being collected in the first place. Executives even had the nerve to suggest to regulators that revealing the data they had gathered might be illegal due to privacy and wiretapping concerns. While Google's stated goal is to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," Microsoft's general counsel, Bradford L. Smith, told The New York Times that "Google's practice is to prevent others from doing the same thing."

Password-killing technology is being rolled out to all Google accounts.

How can we trust Google or other Internet giants like Facebook, which now faces its own privacy and anti-trust concerns, given their track record and lack of accountability? Who gave these new media companies the right to secretly collect personal information without our knowledge or consent, and then hoard it until they can figure out how to make a profit off of it?

Who could have seen the eventual showdowns with regulators that could befall Google and Facebook coming? No one, and they are the biggest to hit Silicon Valley since the US government went after Microsoft more than a decade ago. Their persistent privacy scandals have also caught the attention of politicians. Minnesota Senator Al Franken, who heads up a privacy-focused committee, recently said that websites like Google and Facebook collect user data because "it's their whole business model." And you're not even a customer; you're a commodity to them.

Larry Page, co-founder of Google, has reportedly been feeling "paranoid" as a result of recent AP reports. Why? I predict more bad news for Google as the "contextual web" replaces the "data-driven web" of the early 21st century, despite the fact that the company still sold $36.5 billion in advertising last year, as I explain in my new book Friends, Followers, and the Future: How Social Media are Changing Politics, Threatening Big Brands, and Killing Traditional Media.

It's understandable that Google's executives would be on edge given the company's history of paranoia regarding Facebook and the obvious failure of its latest social network, Google Plus, as well as its issues with privacy, trust, and anti-trust. After all, they will likely have to fight a defensive battle on multiple fronts (social, privacy, and trust) at once. Google is the 21st-century equivalent of the still-powerful but increasingly irrelevant Microsoft, and despite its enormous reach, power, and profits, it may be doomed to lose this war, along with the trust its users have long extended to one of the world's most powerful brands.

When the Parkland massacre happened, Christians everywhere offered their thoughts and prayers for the victims of that atrocity, and it was met with immense backlash.

And now one major corporation in America seems to be sharing the anti-Christian sentiment.

Google is one of the biggest companies in the world.

When an American holiday happens, Google will do something special with its worldwide search engine logo.

They’re called “Google Doodles,” which show a temporary gratitude of the logo and homepages to celebrate people, holidays, achievements and events.

For instance, their first one was in honor of a Burning Man festival in 1998, but then they also did Bastille Day.

That’s a major spectrum of celebration. One is a hippy concert and the other is a French national holiday.

Google will also celebrate other religious holidays,but on Easter this year, the ultimate Christian holiday celebrating Jesus’ death and resurrection, was the 18^th year in a row where they completely ignored it.

Breitbart reports:

“Veteran actor James Woods ripped into Google for their failure to publish an Easter themed “Google Doodle,” while regularly using Doodle art to honor socialists, Islamic causes, and other historical events and figures.

Taking to Twitter on Easter Sunday, Woods noted that despite Google publishing a number of “Google Doodles” for almost every other holiday, religious celebration, and anniversary, the Silicon Valley tech firm failed to publish a Doodle for Easter.

Screenshots of Google’s homepage featuring their generic logo where a Doodle would be bounced around on social media, with one user noting: “So Google has a doodle for every obscure “woke” person/event imaginable, but nothing for Easter?