At Microsoft, Promoting Back Doors, Proprietary Lock-in and Mass Surveillance Under the Guise of Diversity ("Microsoft Philanthropy Team")

posted by Roy Schestowitz on Feb 03, 2025

Also, Microsoft staff enters NGOs to lobby for Microsoft and sell for Microsoft

THE TOPIC of GAFAM as 'charity' deserves many articles (imperialism and espionage disguised as 'goodwill', 'generosity'; that's what they use the media to tell us all). We already wrote many articles about the fake charity of Bill Gates. It's a pressure group that is, in effect, attacking society.

Today we'll try to focus more on Public Knowledge, with Microsoft inside its Board. We've been talking about this problem for years, but usually in IRC alone.

Public Knowledge now insists that digital weapons should continue to target children, based on flawed logic. It promotes all sorts of other positions, including against Google (which it does while completely failing to disclose that Microsoft is inside its Board). So let's look a little closer at this one particular example (there are more, but the modus operandi is the same).

There is this one person in the Board who does not even hide the real agenda. The purpose of this person is to promote Microsoft's interests from within Public Knowledge. The money comes from Microsoft, so therein lie the obligations.

We need to call out those Microsoft apologists, an associate has argued. "All the more important to identify the culprit." The associate says it is "definitely a mole, albeit a visible one."

Public Knowledge should know better, but apparently Public Knowledge believes that even Microsoft inside the Board would be beneficial or benign. Big mistake. "Apparently [this person] has been damaging the FCC from the inside as well," the associate notes, "quite a trail of destruction."

Though it can be framed as bigotry, the only thing that matters to us is the affiliation and actions, nothing else.

And "it will be taken as racebait or sexism" according to the associate, seeing some online angles [1, 2]. Judging by words and actions [1, 2] what quickly emerges is a pattern of lobbying or Microsoft propaganda even in universities. "Good people do not go to work at Microsoft," explains the associate.

Here's lobbying inside the US government. Our associate says "there is a pattern of people working for Microsoft for years prior to moving to Redmond and being on the payroll officially."

Moreover, the associate recalls that we "have a long list of such people and there is no need to give anyone actually at Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. Prior to joining the payroll, there could be questions, but those questions have been cleared up by throwing in with Microsoft and working against the government."

For 2 decades we've named some culprits and showed how they promoted Microsoft, sometimes from inside the media or as "analysts". We gave many examples like OOXML boosters. Microsoft hires them laters. Any time we need evidence we just show their actions and words prior to joining Microsoft. Dozens of examples were given back in the OOMXL days (severe corruption). "Have any come in from the cold?" the associate has asked. "Even Lunduke tried and failed to do so."

In the case of the person above, the evidence is all over the Web (in the public domain). "After her joining Microsoft," the associate says, "it seems clear. The big question is how early did she start?"

Taking stock of [1, 2]: "...At Microsoft, Ms. Robinson continues her commitment to Universal Access by fostering relationships with internal and external partners, with the goal of closing the global digital divide and driving digital transformation enabled through applications and services powered by Microsoft's Cloud."

"As General Manager for the Airband Initiative at Microsoft, Ms. Robinson draws upon her broad and deep command of Universal Broadband Access to deliver consistent results for the company in our ambitions..."

What is this Airband Initiative at Microsoft? Well, it is vendor lock-in via grift: "So, we also partner with technology solution providers and hardware providers, because we believe that if we can empower our partners to use whatever technology solution works best in the given geography, that's how we can effectuate change. In addition to that, working with the Microsoft Philanthropy Team, we also provide community specific digital skills training."

How sad that Public Knowledge is associating with this. Has Public Knowledge turned to Microsoft marketing?

"They will keep playing the race and gender cards," the associate believes, as "they have a lot of spin trying to frame vendor lock-in as philanthropy."

The net effect is corporate takeover.

They are also buying one's critics... a very Microsoft-like move. Look what happened to Public Knowledge's policies as of late. Microsoft staff now controls - at least partly - an NGO that claims to speak for the poor or for the public interest (revolving doors between private and public sector as explained by the above-mentioned university).

Basically, it's like Microsoft is politics now. It competes politically instead of technically and it infiltrates the political system/process. 1.5 years ago this article explained how Microsoft did this in the Biden days. That's not to say this issue was limited to any one presidency; it is a perpetual problem.

Since it is analysis, not news, what matters here is the pattern. There are many other 'Robinsons' out there, but usually they're harder to identify. This page about Microsoft lobbyists shows many examples and this article from last summer ("Defense Department Submits to Microsoft’s Profit-Taking") says:

But Microsoft’s power is still very real, and its image as the nicer tech giant is shifting because of its rapid expansion into artificial intelligence, through a partnership with OpenAI. Meanwhile, recent mishaps with Microsoft’s core software business, like a series of major cybersecurity attacks, remind us of all the many tentacles Microsoft has wrapped around technology markets, and even our national-security state.

One of those episodes came at the end of last month when the Department of Defense, the largest and most powerful body in the government, bowed down to its tech master from Redmond, the largest federal contractor for information technology (IT), according to several estimates.

The American Prospect highlights the role of Microsoft lobbying in one particular area: security. It's an area that we covered two days ago and a reader has an update on it.

"More news on US government computer systems," says the reader. "People who appear to be DOGE employees come and make changes, with no regard of established security protocols. Those who object are told to leave. The newly arrived band of hackers may lock all others out of the server room. But God knows what they may be doing in secret."

See this report:

--Attempts were made to "plug in hard drives" at three separate agencies:

OPM, which oversees hiring and firing procedures, and holds eletronic personnel records, including for employees involved with classified and sensitive programs

GSA, which controls facilities, as well as oversees leases, rentals, purchasing and contracts

The Treasury Department, which controls overall cash flow of the government, bond issues, grants to states and other entities, and much more; if the report is exact, it suggests Musk's representatives were specifically interested in Social Security and Medicare, which comprises some $6 trillion in cash flow annually.

--They plugged, or tried to, external hard drives into sensitive, complicated government systems.

"Most government departments do not allow plugging in external memory drives to their systems," the reader reminds us. "They may be tainted with malware. There are stiff penalties for those who break the rules."

That's the Windows mindset.

At Microsoft, Promoting Back Doors, Proprietary Lock-in and Mass Surveillance Under the Guise of Diversity ("Microsoft Philanthropy Team")

Other Recent Techrights' Posts