HHS is Paying Google with Taxpayer Money to Alter 'Obamacare' Search Results

[Geee]

Weekly Standard:

The brazenness of the Obama administration never ceases to amaze. Try typing "Obamacare" into Google, and you'll find that the first entry is now the Obama administration's www.healthcare.gov. If you don't particularly like that result, you'll probably hate the fact that you're paying for it.


You'll get the same paid-for result if you type in "Obamacare facts," "Obamacare summary," "Obamacare info," "Obamacare overview," "Obamacare questions," "Obamacare explanation," "Obamacare basics," "Obamacare pros and cons," "Obamacare and elderly," and even "Obamacare and abortion." For each of these search terms, and many others, the Obama administration's site comes up first, as a paid entry. But it doesn’t come up if you type in "ObamaCare repeal."

Politico's Ben Smith, in a post entitled "HHS Buys 'ObamaCare,'" quotes an official from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), who confirms that this clear attempt to influence what Americans read about Obamacare does, indeed, represent your tax dollars at work: "'We are using a bunch of search term to help point people to HealthCare.gov. [it's] [p]art of our online efforts to help get accurate information to people about the new law (i.e. [we] also use Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webcasts),' an HHS official confirmed by e-mail."

[righteousmomma]

I am surprised Google is being paid by HHS . I would think they were doing it for free on behalf of Obama and the Dems.

AAAAHHH maybe the Unions are also running Google now. "Robbing Peter to pay Paul Principle" hard at work once again.

[Evad]

Try typing "Obamacare" into Google, and you'll find that the first entry is now the Obama administration's www.healthcare.gov

 

I did

It wasn't

[righteousmomma]

I just found:

1.

ObamaCare

Insurers now more accountable for policyholder value.

Protections for Young Adults - Coverage Under Age 26 - Individuals

www.healthcare.gov/

 

2

Health Care Reform Facts

Learn About the 12 Most Important Changes in the New Health Care Law.

www.StandUpForHealthCare.org/Facts

 

3

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Wikipedia, the free ...

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and Obama's plans for health care reform in general, is often nicknamed "Obamacare". The term was usually ...

Legislative history - Provisions - Impact - Legal challenges

en.wikipedia.org/.../Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act - Cached - Similar

[Argyle58]

I got:

 

1. The Wikipedia article

 

2. Obamacaretruth.org.....an AntiObamacare site

 

3. Obamacare411.worldpress.com......a site dedicated to obamacare

political news stories from both sides of the aisle.

[clearvision]

The HHS stuff appears at top (on my screen in pink with a small "ad" next to it) to show that it is a "paid" ad versus a "native" google search.

[pollyannaish]

Sigh.

 

This is much ado about nothing imo. The Obama administration is paying for ads to appear with certain key words. It shows up as PAID advertising. This is no different than the government spending money to promote Obamacare via Andy Griffith on TV or any of those Medicare ads you see sponsored by the government. And what they are doing in buying the words "obamacare" etc. is standard best practice for any marketing team who is trying to maintain the "brand" of something. It's nothing sinister...it's good business.

 

Now. That said, our country DOES need to have a discussion about whether or not the government should be advertising in favor of policy is a good idea is a legitimate discussion. I personally don't believe that is a good use of taxpayer money. Similarly, I am uncomfortable with drug companies advertising prescription drugs on TV. In the good old days, respectable doctors and lawyers didn't advertise either. I sometimes miss the good old days.

 

But to make this out to be somehow conspiratorial or sneaky (which I felt the tone of the article was...even if that was not the intent of the author) is to shoot the messenger, rather than deal with the basic issue...which is "should the government advertise partisan policy on the taxpayer dime.'