So Craig, founder of Craig’s list, is famous for doing his own customer support. I’ve recently learned how hard that can be. 

In a rookie mistake, when we set up our Stripe account to service the MaydayPAC account, I put in my cell phone number. Stripe then put that on the credit card charge. Because we charged people in May long after they had pledged (because our campaign was contingent, and we would only collect when we got the $1M matched), it was weeks between a pledge and someone seeing the bill on his or her credit card.

So many people call my cell phone to complain. It’s striking how similar these conversations are. Usually there is someone who is incredibly angry. They’re sure I’ve stolen their credit card number. But within 10 seconds, the usually (90% of the time) remember and are then insanely apologetic. I get a great chance to thank them for their contribution. It usually ends on a happy note. 

But during the heaviest call period, I put a special message on my phone explaining the same thing, and asking people to leave a message if they wanted me to call back. For two weeks people called, and no one left a message. 

But then I discovered (for reasons I’ll explain later) that my voice mail box had been rerouted, they had not been getting the message, and I do not have access to any messages they might have left. Two weeks of non-responsiveness — Craig would have me fired!

If you’re one of the people who called (unlikely, I know, as if you’re reading this you should know what the MaydayPAC is), I apologize. The first lesson of great customer service is DO NOT LOSE ACCESS TO YOUR VOICE MAIL BOX.

 Oh, yea, and if you want to pledge, do so here

At 12pm ET, July 2, Jack Abramoff and I will be doing an AMA on Reddit about the corruption in DC and the MaydayPAC’s effort to fix it. Come and read and ask questions. 

For the readers in the crowd, here’s a plan.
(And to clarify: This is just a prime to get us to the next level in our campaign: Our goal is still $5M). 

For the readers in the crowd, here’s a plan.

(And to clarify: This is just a prime to get us to the next level in our campaign: Our goal is still $5M). 

This is how we win: Every single group begins to recognize how corruption is their issue too. 

Here’s the link to the video

Every so often, but increasingly frequently, a character named “Brett Glass” returns to the twitter space to assert that I am a “lobbyist” for Google.  E.g. (and this is just a sample: this stuff goes back for years)

2014-06-01 04:09:47: @GeorgeRussert I never got the notice that Lessig speaks on society’s behalf. (He doesn’t. He speaks on Google’s behalf.) @alaskarobotics

2014-05-11 22:08:46: @VictorLicata1 @lessig, in particular, has served as a de facto paid corporate lobbyist for many years. He knows the game and participates.

2014-05-11 17:22:58: @antonejohnson Both @Vanschewick and @lessig lobbied for Google to get more funding for @StanfordCIS. Academic dishonesty. #NetNeutrality

2014-05-11 01:39:25: @mitchellkoch Oh, yes, @lessig is supported by tech. Specifically, by monopolist Google, for whose #NetNeutrality regs he lobbies.

2014-05-09 19:58:26: @livebeef Among other things,@lessig has exhibited academic dishonesty while serving as a de facto lobbyist for Google. @JoshuaStaples

2014-05-01 18:44:28: @EBagsLOLZ You don’t have to believe a thing I say about @lessig; you can follow the $ from Google to schools to him. #Rootstrikers #MayOne

2014-05-01 18:32:40: lessig And then you went to Harvard and are a fixture at Berkman, a think tank that lobbies for Google’s corporate agendas. @ebagslolz

2014-05-01 18:30:24: @lessig I watched as you spoke on behalf of #Google at the FCC’s en banc hearing at Stanford. @ebagslolz

2014-05-01 17:09:28: @EBagsLOLZ Could write a book on it. Not gonna do it in 140 chars. But @lessig is well known as a #Google shill. #Rootstrikers #MayDay

2014-05-01 16:45:37: @EBagsLOLZ Nonsense. @lessig is a lying corporate lobbyist trying to separate the gullible and their money. #Rootstrikers #MayDay

2014-04-03 16:21:1: @adamjwhitedc Corruption: When an academic such as @lessig claims to be expert in “ethics” while acting as a paid corporate shill.

it would be forgivable for someone reading this stuff to think that I get money from Google. That, after all, is the ordinary meaning of words like “paid corporate shill,” “de facto lobbyist for Google,” etc. And so have many inferred from Brett’s words, and at least some of them have written me angry emails about my “betrayal” and the like. 

In fact, however, I have never received any compensation for anything from Google at all. And what’s surprising, given what he says above and elsewhere, is that Brett knows this.

In 2011, I asked him why he was saying what he was saying. In an email to me, he acknowledged that by saying I was a “paid corporate shill” or “lobbyist for Google,” he didn’t actually mean I was being paid by Google, or paid to lobby for Google. What he meant instead was: 

You know as well as I do that Google has given big bucks to the institutions where you have worked, many of which have found their way into your paychecks. 

Even this, however, is wrong. I asked Brett what money the EJ Safra Center (which I direct) received from Google. None, he acknowledged. But Google “has also funded Berkman for many years.” Maybe, but I am not part of the Berkman Center, and certainly haven’t received money from the Berkman Center. Ok„ Brett says, but Google had given money to Harvard, and Harvard pays my salary, so Google is therefore paying me. But wrong again: Google hasn’t given money to Harvard (or at least so I was told by Harvard). So in absolutely no truthful sense of the term am I being “paid” by Google. 

But, Brett says,more than a decade ago, Google gave money to the Stanford Center for Internet & Society, and I was the director of the Center when they did. That’s true, and that’s precisely the kind of funding that we at the Safra Center are studying and if done improperly, criticizing

Yet again, Brett has the basic facts wrong. I came to Stanford with a contract that created a Center, and gave me no fundraising obligations for the Center. After I came, and again, without any tie to me or any relation to my work, Google gave money to the Law School, which it used to pay for the Center. That money didn’t affect my salary (that was set independently of the Center); it wasn’t my obligation to raise that money for the Center; I didn’t raise that money for the Center; the Center would have existed and functioned exactly as it did with or without that money. In a word, then, I was independent of that money. 

How research is funded, however, is an important issue to me. Again, it is the focus of the Lab I run at the Safra Center on “institutional corruption.” And it is the reason I first articulated the standard by which I do or do not accept money for my work. (See “Disclosure” here.) I’ve yet to see anyone argue that the standard I have set in that document is insufficiently independent. 

FInally, perhaps in an effort to update his campaign to facts less than a decade old, Brett has taken up the fight against the MaydayPAC. It turns out. in the strange world of Brett, this too is part of the grand Google conspiracy. As he wrote on 26 June (and many other times since we launched):  

@lessig uses #MayDayPAC to lobby for Google’s regulatory and legislative agendas.

Of course the MaydayPAC has no lobbyists. Neither is its aim in 2014 to lobby for anything. It’s aim in 2014 is to make 5 races turn on the issue of “fundamental reform in the way Congress funds its campaigns.” If we’re successful, then in 2016, we’ll do the same at a much bigger level, with the aim of electing a Congress committed to fundamental reform by 2016. If we’re successful in that, then we’ll push for that reform — and only that reform. And once that reform is passed, we will push for whatever constitutional changes might be necessary to secure the reform that we have helped to pass. 

Google may or may not like reform. I don’t know. I hope they do. I hope every right thinking sort does. But whether they do or not doesn’t make me a “lobbyist” or “shill” for Google. 

I’m not sure why — of all the causes that there are in this world — Brett has made this sort of slander his personal mission. And my ordinary practice in cases like this would be to ignore it.

But to the extent his assertions confuse people who might support our work with the MaydayPAC, I’ve got an obligation to respond to them. 

So I did. 

On my way from Colombia to SF, I land in Mexico City at 3:30am. As I had gotten on the plane, I realized the last time I was in Mexico, I receive a call from Ben Wikler, telling me Aaron was gone. (here’s the followup post) This time, when the plane landed, Aaron was back. Here’s Ben’s beautiful, wrenching, and amazing podcast, pulling together the path from Aaron to a #MaydayPAC.

The Good Fight: Episode #25

This NHRebellion sign is posted on the farm in New Hampshire where Romney announced his candidacy in 2012. The Rebellion is happening. 

This NHRebellion sign is posted on the farm in New Hampshire where Romney announced his candidacy in 2012. The Rebellion is happening. 

The guy (practically) gave us personal computing. Return the favor with a pledge

If you compare the performance of the MaydayPAC to  first quarter disclosures, we are in the top 10 for cash on hand, and top 20 in funds raised. 

And we’ve raised more than 2x what Colbert did. 

Posts I Liked on Tumblr