Unless you’ve been out of commission for the past couple of days you’ve probably heard about a report issued by Privacy International (PI) that asserts Google is the worst of the worst when it comes to consumer privacy [PI write-up on the report | Report Findings in PDF format].

The exact words used to describe Google go something like this:

We are aware that the decision to place Google at the bottom of the ranking is likely to be controversial, but throughout our research we have found numerous deficiencies and hostilities in Google’s approach to privacy that go well beyond those of other organizations. While a number of companies share some of these negative elements, none comes close to achieving status as an endemic threat to privacy. This is in part due to the diversity and specificity of Google’s product range and the ability of the company to share extracted data between these tools, and in part it is due to Google’s market dominance and the sheer size of its user base. Google’s status in the ranking is also due to its aggressive use of invasive or potentially invasive technologies and techniques.

It would be enough for just such a report to come out. But not surprisingly, the media also picked up the report and the Associated Press has published an article that combines information from the Privacy International report with other privacy concerns facing Google (including EU investigations and FTC investigations). The AP article paints a blistering portrait of a company that lives up to PI’s image of disregard and “hostility” toward privacy concerns.

Matt Cutts of Google has published his take on the report:

Personally, I think Privacy International should feel remorse about walking right past several other companies to single out Google for their lowest rating. But I think that there’s a larger danger here too. I believe this report could corrode earnest efforts to improve privacy at companies around the internet. Why? Because the bottom-line takeaway message that I got from the report is that a company can work hard on privacy issues and still get dragged into the mud. Consider: in the last year or so, other companies gave users’ queries to the government, leaked millions of raw user queries, or even sold user queries and still came off better than Google did.

His response to criticism of his employer is not surprising. Although I don’t believe he’s simply reacting in the capacity of a Google employee, I still have to take his response with a grain of salt. Combined with the fact that Cutts spends more time knocking other companies than actually responding to Privacy International’s claims, I decided I need another perspective.

Luckily… Techmeme has quite the coverage of the ensuing debate.

Danny Sullivan at Search Engine Land steps up to the plate with a point-by-point rebuttal of PI’s report (something Cutts should have done himself):

It’s a bad privacy day for Google, with Privacy International first accusing the company of having the worst privacy performance of any internet service company in a study it has just released and then accusing Google of conducting a smear campaign against it. But if you actually read the report, Privacy International itself comes off bad for putting out a haphazard condemnation of Google.

Never one to shy away from a fight, Donna Bogatin supplies the counter with “Google is WRONG On Consumer Privacy“:

Out of the Cutts gate, a standard Google PR line [quote from Matt Cutts]. OK, but Google takes its multi-billion dollar massive server farm build out world wide designed to support the archiving of every piece of data belonging to every one of the world’s inhabitants very, very seriously, and so should citizens of the world.

Bogatin fine-tooths Matt Cutts’ response to the privacy report and gives it the same treatment that Danny Sullivan gave the Privacy International report.

So what’s the conclusion? Who’s right?

I’m not sure. Both sides of this debate offer compelling arguments. But as John Battellle points out, more people are likely to see the AP article than Matt Cutts, Danny Sullivan, or Donna Bogatin. So the overall consumer reaction is likely to be negative.

None of this is surprising to me, though. Whether or not Google is a privacy concern isn’t a new topic. The fact of the matter is that Google will always be construed as a danger to personal information simply because of the nature of its business.

As I’ve said before, I know there are companies out there treating my personal information much more haphazardly than Google. There are also companies out there treating it better. But none of them have the reach, power, and position that Google has. As long as Google remains synonymous with “the Internet” in the eyes of the masses, they will find themselves with the privacy crosshairs squarely trained on their foreheads.

Google could offer consumers a one-click way to purge all of their records permanently from their system and it wouldn’t be enough for some. But Google needs to put its massive bankroll to work nipping this little issue now - before it gets out of control.

Personally… I’ve often said that I don’t like the idea of Google having as much information about me as it does. I’d love the ability to permanently purge my information from their system. But that’s just not how it works online… for any company. And if I had to pick a company that I wanted to have my information… I could do a lot worse than Google. In fact, I’d rather hand my personal information over to Google than just about any other company listed on Privacy International’s report.

Is their handling of private consumer data perfect? No, it’s not. Is it the worst of the worst? No, it’s not. Could it be better? Yes. Do I trust Google with my personal data? No… and yes. No, I don’t fully trust any company with my personal data. And in the not too distant future, I would have said that I didn’t trust Google at all. But I’ve done some research of my own as of late and I’ve changed that opinion. As far as corporations go (and the limited amount of trust I give them)… Google has earned mine.