A recent report reveals that Google has been instructing its employees to destroy certain messages and avoid using specific language to prevent antitrust lawsuits. The practice has reportedly been in place since 2008, following intense scrutiny over an advertising deal with Yahoo.
Despite Google’s role as a repository for much of the world’s information, the company has worked to suppress internal communication to sidestep potential legal consequences. This strategy, which involved deleting messages and limiting certain topics of discussion, is detailed in a New York Times report.
The Memo That Started It All
In 2008, Google faced antitrust concerns following its advertising agreement with Yahoo. To protect the company from potential legal fallout, a confidential memo was sent to employees, advising them to avoid speculation, sarcasm, and certain “hot topics” in their communications. Employees were instructed to wait for “all the facts” before commenting on contentious issues.
Tech Tweaks to Suppress Communication
Google even altered its technology to ensure messages didn’t stay around too long. Instant messaging settings were changed to “off the record,” meaning any unguarded comments would automatically be deleted within 24 hours. The company also recommended that employees mark documents as “attorney-client privileged,” even when no legal questions were involved. Adding a lawyer to the email chain, even if they didn’t reply, was another precaution taken to shield the company from potential lawsuits.
Skirting Document Retention Laws
While U.S. law mandates that companies facing litigation preserve evidence, Google took steps to ensure instant messages were exempt from automatic legal holds. Workers were required to manually activate the history-saving function, though few did so, according to evidence from multiple antitrust trials.
Judicial Backlash: Suppressing Evidence
In recent years, Google’s communication practices have drawn sharp criticism in three high-profile antitrust trials. Judges have chastised the company for its culture of hiding relevant information.
Judge James Donato, overseeing the 2020 Epic Games case, described Google’s conduct as “a frontal assault on the fair administration of justice.” Similarly, a Virginia judge in a case involving Google’s advertising technology warned that the company’s document retention system was likely responsible for the destruction of key evidence.
Google’s Document Retention Problems
Despite producing far more emails than the average company, Google’s document retention practices were frequently flagged as problematic. Kent Walker, Google’s top lawyer, testified that the company’s struggle to manage the sheer volume of documents contributed to its decision to limit or erase certain records. However, he denied any intention to conceal evidence.
Shifting Policies in 2023
After facing significant legal challenges, Google revised its internal policies. Now, the default setting is to retain all communications, including chats. Employees who are subject to litigation holds can no longer disable chat history, marking a shift in the company’s approach to legal compliance.
