Google reportedly ends forced arbitration for employees

Google is finally ending forced arbitration for its employees, Axios reports. These changes will go into effect for both current and future Google employees on March 21.

For the contractors Google works with directly, it will remove mandatory arbitration from their contracts. The caveat, however, is that it won’t require outside firms that employe contractors to do the same.

This is a direct response to a group of outspoken Google employees protesting the company’s arbitration practices. Last month, a group of Google employees took to Twitter and Instagram tomorrow in an attempt to educate the public about forced arbitration. That came about one month after this same group of 35 employees banded together to demand Google end forced arbitration as it relates to any case of discrimination. The group also called on other tech workers to join them.

Forced arbitration ensures workplace disputes are settled behind closed doors and without any right to an appeal. These types of agreements effectively prevent employees from suing companies.

Following the massive, 20,000-person walkout at Google in November, Google got rid of forced arbitration for sexual harassment and sexual assault claims, offering more transparency around those investigations and more. Airbnb, eBay and Facebook quickly followed suit. Despite some progress across the industry, the end of forced arbitration across all workplace disputes is not widespread.

I’ve reached out to Google and will update this story if I hear back.

Even the IAB warned adtech risks EU privacy rules

A privacy complaint targeting the behavioral advertising industry has a new piece of evidence that shows the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) shedding doubt on whether it’s possible to obtain informed consent from web users for the programmatic ad industry’s real-time bidding (RTB) system to broadcast their personal data.

The adtech industry functions by harvesting web users’ data, packaging individual identifiers and browsing data in bid requests that are systematically shared with third parties in order to solicit and scale advertiser bids for the user’s attention.

However a series of RTB complaints — filed last fall by Jim Killock, director of the Open Rights Group; Dr Johnny Ryan of private browser Brave; and Michael Veale, a data and policy researcher at University College London — allege this causes “wide-scale and systemic breaches” of European Union data protection rules.

So far complaints have been filed with data protection agencies in Ireland, the UK and Poland, though the intent is for the action to expand across the EU given that behavioral advertising isn’t region specific.

Google and the IAB set the RTB specifications used by the online ad industry and are thus the main targets here, with complainants advocating for amendments to the specification to bring the system into compliance with the bloc’s data protection regime.

We’ve covered the complaint before, including an earlier submission showing the highly sensitive inferences that can be included in bid requests. But documents obtained by the complainants via freedom of information request and newly published this week show the IAB itself warned in 2017 that the RTB system risks falling foul of the bloc’s privacy rules, and specifically the rules around consent under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force last May.

The complainants have published the latest evidence on a new campaign website.

At the very least the admission looks awkward for online ad industry body.

“incompatible with consent under GDPR “

In an email sent to senior personnel at the European Commission in June 2017 by Townsend Feehan, the CEO of IAB Europe — and now being used as evidence in the complaints — she writes that she wants to expand on concerns voiced at a roundtable session about the Commission’s ePrivacy proposals that she claims could “mean the end of the online advertising business model”.

Feehan attached an 18-page document to the email in which the IAB can be seen lobbying against the Commission’s ePrivacy proposal — claiming it will have “serious negative impacts on the digital advertising industry, on European media, and ultimately on European citizens’ access to information and other online content and services”.

The IAB goes on to push for specific amendments to the proposed text of the regulation. (As we’ve written before a major lobbying effort has blow up since GDPR was agreed to try to block updating the ePrivacy rules which operate alongside, covering marketing and electronic communications and cookies and other online tracking technologies.)

As it lobbies to water down ePrivacy rules, the IAB suggests it’s “technically impossible” for informed consent to function in a real-time bidding scenario — writing the following, in a segment entitled ‘Prior information requirement will “break” programmatic trading’:

As it is technically impossible for the user to have prior information about every data controller involved in a real-time bidding (RTB) scenario, programmatic trading, the area of fastest growth in digital advertising spend, would seem, at least prima facie, to be incompatible with consent under GDPR – and, as noted above, if a future ePrivacy Regulation makes virtually all interactions with the Internet subject solely to the consent legal basis, and consent is unavailable, then there will be no legal be no basis for such processing to take place or for media to monetise their content in this way.

The notion that it’s impossible to obtain informed consent from web users for processing their personal data prior to doing so is important because the behavioral ad industry, as it currently functions, includes personal data in bid requests that it systematically broadcasts to what can be thousands of third party companies.

Indeed, the crux of the RTB complaints are that personal data should be stripped out of these requests — and only contextual information broadcast for targeting ads, exactly because the current system is systematically breaching the rights of European web users by failing to obtain their consent for personal data to be sucked out and handed over to scores of unknown entities.

In its lobbying efforts to knock the teeth out of the ePrivacy Regulation the IAB can here be seen making a similar point — when it writes that programmatic trading “would seem, at least prima facie, to be incompatible with consent under GDPR”. (Albeit, injecting some of its own qualifiers into the sentence.)

The IAB is certainly seeking to deploy pro-privacy arguments to try to dilute Europeans’ privacy rights.

Despite it’s own claimed reservations about there being no technical fix to get consent for programmatic trading under GDPR the IAB nonetheless went on to launch a technical mechanism for managing — and, it claimed — complying with GDPR consent requirements in April 2018, when it urged the industry to use its GDPR “Consent & Transparency Framework”.

But in another piece of evidence obtained by the group of individuals behind the RTB complaints — an IAB document, dated May 2018, intended for publishers making use of this framework — the IAB also acknowledges that: “Publishers recognize there is no technical way to limit the way data is used after the data is received by a vendor for decisioning/bidding on/after delivery of an ad”.

In a section on liability, the IAB document lays out other publisher concerns that each bid request assumes “indiscriminate rights for vendors” — and that “surfacing thousands of vendors with broad rights to use data without tailoring those rights may be too many vendors/permissions”.

So again, er, awkward.

Another piece of evidence now attached to the RTB complaints shows a set of sample bid requests from the IAB and Google’s documentation for users of their systems — with annotations by the complainants showing exactly how much personal data gets packaged up and systematically shared.

This can include a person’s latitude and longitude GPS coordinates; IP address; device specific identifiers; various ID codes; inferred interests (which could include highly sensitive personal data); and the current webpage they’re looking at;

“The fourteen sample bid requests further prove that very personal data are contained in bid requests,” the complainants argue.

They have also included an estimated breakdown of seven major ad exchanges’ daily bid requests — Index Exchange, OpenX, Rubicon Project, Oath/AOL*, AppNexus, Smaato, Google DoubleClick — showing they collectively broadcast “hundreds of billions of bid requests per day”, to illustrate the scale of data being systematically broadcast by the ad industry.

“This suggests that the New Economics Foundation’s estimate in December that bid requests broadcast data about the average UK internet user 164 times a day was a conservative estimate,” they add.

The IAB has responded to the new evidence by couching the complainants’ claims as “false” and “intentionally damaging to the digital advertising industry and to European digital media”.

Regarding its 2017 document, in which it wrote that it was “technically impossible” for an Internet user to have prior information about every data controller involved in a RTB “scenario”, the IAB responds that “that was true at the time, but has changed since” — pointing to its Transparency & Consent framework (TCF) as the claimed fix for that, and further claiming it “demonstrates that real-time bidding is certainly not ‘incompatible with consent under GDPR'”.

Here are the relevant paras of IAB rebuttal on that:

The TCF provides a way to provide transparency to users about how, and by whom, their personal data is processed. It also enables users to express choices. Moreover, the TCF enables vendors engaged in programmatic advertising to know ahead of time whether their own and/or their partners’ transparency and consent status allows them to lawfully process personal data for online advertising and related purposes. IAB Europe’s submission to the European Commission in April 2017 showed that the industry needed to adapt to meet higher standards for transparency and consent under the GDPR. The TCF demonstrates how complex challenges can be overcome when industry players come together. But most importantly, the TCF demonstrates that real-time bidding is certainly not “incompatible with consent under GDPR”.

The OpenRTB protocol is a tool that can be used to determine which advertisement should be served on a given web page at a given time. Data can inform that determination. Like all technology, OpenRTB must be used in a way that complies with the law. Doing so is entirely possible and greatly facilitated by the IAB Europe Transparency & Consent Framework, whose whole raison d’être is to help ensure that the collection and processing of user data is done in full compliance with EU privacy and data protection rules.

The IAB goes on to couch the complaints as stemming from a “hypothetical possibility for personal data to be processed unlawfully in the course of programmatic advertising processes”.

“This hypothetical possibility arises because neither OpenRTB nor the TCF are capable of physically preventing companies using the protocol to unlawfully process personal data. But the law does not require them to,” the IAB claims.

However the crux of the RTB complaint is that programmatic advertising’s processing of personal data is not adequately secure — and they have GDPR Article 5, paragraph 1, point f to point to; which requires that personal data be “processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data, including protection against unauthorised or unlawful processing and against accidental loss”.

So it will be down to data protection authorities to determine what “appropriate security of personal data” means in this context. And whether behavioral advertising is inherently hostile to data protection law (not forgetting that other forms of non-personal-data-based advertising remain available, e.g. contextual advertising).

Discussing the complaint with TechCrunch late last year, Brave’s Ryan likened the programmatic ad system to dumping truck-loads of briefcases in the middle of a busy railway station in “the full knowledge that… business partners will all scramble around and try and grab them” — arguing that such a dysfunctional and systematic breaching of people’s data is lurking at the core of the online ad industry.

The solution Ryan and the other complainants are advocating for is not pulling the plug on the online ad industry entirely — but rather an update to the RTB spec to strip out personal data so that it respects Internet users’ rights. Ads can still be targeted contextually and successfully without Internet users having to be surveilled 24/7 online, is the claim.

They also argue that this would lead to a much better situation for quality online publishers because it would make it harder for their high value audiences to be arbitraged and commodified by privacy-hostile tracking technologies which — as it stands — trail Internet users everywhere they go. Albeit they freely concede that purveyors of low quality clickbait might fair less well.

*Disclosure: TechCrunch is owned by Verizon Media Group, aka Oath/AOL . We also don’t consider ourselves to be purveyors of low quality clickbait  

Companies including Nestle, Epic and reportedly Disney suspend YouTube ads over child exploitation concerns

Days after a YouTube creator accused the platform of enabling a “soft-core pedophilia ring,” several companies have suspended advertising on the platform, including Nestle, Epic, and reportedly Disney and McDonald’s.

Nestle told CNBC that all of its companies in the U.S. have paused advertising on YouTube, while a spokesperson for Epic, maker of the massively popular game Fortnite, said it has suspended all pre-roll advertising. Other companies that confirmed publicly they are pausing YouTube advertising include Purina, GNC, Fairlife, Canada Goose, and Vitacost. Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal report that Walt Disney Co. and McDonald’s, respectively, have pulled advertising, too.

Other advertisers, including Peloton and Grammarly, said they are calling on YouTube to resolve the issue.

The latest scandal over YouTube’s content moderation problems took off on Sunday when YouTube creator Matt Watson posted a video and in-depth Reddit post describing how pedophiles are able to manipulate the platform’s recommendation algorithm to redirect a search for “bikini haul” videos, featuring adult women, to exploitative clips of children. Some otherwise innocuous videos also had inappropriate comments, including some with timestamps that captured children in compromising positions.

A YouTube spokesperson sent a statement to TechCrunch that said “Any content – including comments – that endangers minors is abhorrent and we have clear policies prohibiting this on YouTube. We took immediate action by deleting accounts and channels, reporting illegal activity to authorities and disabling comments on tens of millions of videos that include minors. There’s more to be done, and we continue to work to improve and catch abuse more quickly.”

The platform has also reported comments to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and is taking further steps against child exploitation, including hiring more experts.

Watson’s report, however, highlights that YouTube continues to struggle with content that violates its own policies, even after a series of reports two years ago led to what creators dubbed the “adpocalpyse.” In an effort to appease advertisers, YouTube gave them more control over what videos their ads would appear before and also enacted more stringent policies for creators. Many YouTubers, however, have complained that the policies are unevenly enforced with little transparency, dramatically lowering their revenue but giving them little recourse to fix issues or appeal the platform’s decisions, even as objectionable content remains on the platform.

Google’s managed hybrid cloud platform is now in beta

Last July, at its Cloud Next conference, Google announced the Cloud Services Platform, its first real foray into bringing its own cloud services into the enterprise data center as a managed service. Today, the Cloud Services Platform (CSP) is launching into beta.

It’s important to note that the CSP isn’t — at least for the time being — Google’s way of bringing all of its cloud-based developer services to the on-premises data center. In other words, this is a very different project from something like Microsoft’s Azure Stack. Instead, the focus is on the Google Kubernetes Engine, which allows enterprises to then run their applications in both their own data centers and on virtually any cloud platform that supports containers.As Google Cloud engineering director Chen Goldberg told me, the idea here it to help enterprises innovate and modernize. “Clearly, everybody is very excited about cloud computing, on-demand compute and managed services, but customers have recognized that the move is not that easy,” she said and noted that the vast majority of enterprises are adopting a hybrid approach. And while containers are obviously still a very new technology, she feels good about this bet on the technology because most enterprises are already adopting containers and Kubernetes — and they are doing so at exactly the same time as they are adopting cloud and especially hybrid clouds.

It’s important to note that CSP is a managed platform. Google handles all of the heavy lifting like upgrades and security patches. And for enterprises that need an easy way to install some of the most popular applications, the platform also supports Kubernetes applications from the GCP Marketplace.

As for the tech itself, Goldberg stressed that this isn’t just about Kubernetes. The service also uses Istio, for example, the increasingly popular service mesh that makes it easier for enterprises to secure and control the flow of traffic and API calls between its applications.

With today’s release, Google is also launching its new CSP Config Management tool to help users create multi-cluster policies and set up and enforce access controls, resource quotas and more. CSP also integrates with Google’s Stackdriver Monitoring service and continuous delivery platforms.

“On-prem is not easy,” Goldberg said, and given that this is the first time the company is really supporting software in a data center that is not its own, that’s probably an understatement. But Google also decided that it didn’t want to force users into a specific set of hardware specifications like Azure Stack does, for example. Instead, CSP sits on top of VMware’s vSphere server virtualization platform, which most enterprises already use in their data centers anyway. That surely simplifies things, given that this is a very well-understood platform.

You can now register .dev domains

Google today announced that you can now register .dev domain names. Google acquired the .dev top-level domain when ICANN opened up the web to new generic top-level domains (gTLD) a few years ago. At the time, Google acquired gTLD’s like .app, .page and .dev (for some reason, Google also owns .soy).

Right now, the .dev domains are still in an early access program, though. That means you’ll have to pay an additional fee that decreases every day until February 28 — and that early access fee is pretty steep.

Registering a new domain on GoDaddy, which is one of the many resellers that offer the new domain names, will set you back over $12,500 in extra fees today. Tomorrow, that price drops to just over $3,100. Come February 28, you can register any available domain and it’ll just cost you about $20 per year. The idea here, of course, is to manage demand (and to extract a few extra dollars from the companies that really need to have a given domain name).

Some of the companies and organizations that are already using the new gTLD are Google itself, as well as the likes of GitHub. Women Who Code, Jetbrains, Codecademy and Salesforce. And because this is 2019, there’s also Kubernetes.dev.

Like its .app domains, .dev domain will require HTTPS connections to protect users from ad malware, tracking injections and WiFi snooping.

“We hope .dev will be a new home for you to build your communities, learn the latest tech and showcase your projects—all with a perfect domain name,” Google explains in today’s announcement.

I never got the sense that there was all that much demand for non-.com or country-level domain names (does the world really need .ninja domains?), but if you always wanted a .dev domain, now would be a good time to get our your credit card.

What business leaders can learn from Jeff Bezos’ leaked texts

The ‘below the belt selfie’ media circus surrounding Jeff Bezos has made encrypted communications top of mind among nervous executive handlers. Their assumption is that a product with serious cryptography like Wickr – where I work – or Signal could have helped help Mr. Bezos and Amazon avoid this drama.

It’s a good assumption, but a troubling conclusion.

I worry that moments like these will drag serious cryptography down to the level of the National Enquirer. I’m concerned that this media cycle may lead people to view privacy and cryptography as a safety net for billionaires rather than a transformative solution for data minimization and privacy.

We live in the chapter of computing when data is mostly unprotected because of corporate indifference. The leaders of our new economy – like the vast majority of society – value convenience and short-term gratification over the security and privacy of consumer, employee and corporate data.  

We cannot let this media cycle pass without recognizing that when corporate executives take a laissez-faire approach to digital privacy, their employees and organizations will follow suit.

Two recent examples illustrate the privacy indifference of our leaders…

  • The most powerful executive in the world is either indifferent to, or unaware that, unencrypted online flirtations would be accessed by nation states and competitors.
  • 2016 presidential campaigns were either indifferent to, or unaware that, unencrypted online communications detailing “off-the-record” correspondence with media and payments to adult actor(s) would be accessed by nation states and competitors.

If our leaders do not respect and understand online security and privacy, then their organizations will not make data protection a priority. It’s no surprise that we see a constant stream of large corporations and federal agencies breached by nation states and competitors.  Who then can we look to for leadership?

GDPR is an early attempt by regulators to lead. The European Union enacted GDPR to ensure individuals own their data and enforce penalties on companies who do not protect personal data.  It applies to all data processors, but the EU is clearly focused on sending a message to the large US based data processors – Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc. In January, France’s National Data Protection Commission sent a message by fining Google $57 million for breaching GDPR rules. It was an unprecedented fine that garnered international attention. However, we must remember that in 2018 Google’s revenues were greater than $300 million … per day!  GPDR is, at best, an annoying speed-bump in the monetization strategy of large data processors.

It is through this lens that Senator Ron Wyden’s (Oregon) idealistic call for billions of dollars in corporate fines and jail time for executives who enable privacy breaches can be seen as reasonable.  When record financial penalties are inconsequential it is logical to pursue other avenues to protect our data.

Real change will come when our leaders understand that data privacy and security can increase profitability and reliability.  For example, the Compliance, Governance and Oversight Council reports that an enterprise will spend as much as $50 million to protect 10 petabytes of data, and that $34.5 million of this is spent on protecting data that should be deleted. Serious efficiencies are waiting to be realized and serious cryptography can help.  

So, thank you Mr. Bezos for igniting corporate interest in secure communications. Let’s hope this news cycle convinces our corporate leaders and elected officials to embrace data privacy, protection and minimization because it responsible, profitable and efficient. We need leaders and elected officials to set an example and respect their own data and privacy if we have any hope of their organizations to protect ours.

As GE and Amazon move on, Google expands presence in Boston and NYC

NYC and Boston were handed huge setbacks this week when Amazon and GE decided to bail on their commitments to build headquarters in the respective cities on the same day. But it’s worth pointing out that while these large tech organizations were pulling out, Google was expanding in both locations.

Yesterday upon hearing about Amazon’s decision to scrap its HQ2 plans in Long Island City, New York City Mayor De Blasio had this to say: “Instead of working with the community, Amazon threw away that opportunity. We have the best talent in the world and every day we are growing a stronger and fairer economy for everyone. If Amazon can’t recognize what that’s worth, its competitors will.” One of them already has. Google had already announced a billion dollar expansion in Hudson Square at the end of last year.

In fact, the company is pouring billions into NYC real estate with plans to double its 7000 person workforce over the next 10 years. As TechCrunch’s Jon Russell reported, “Our investment in New York is a huge part of our commitment to grow and invest in U.S. facilities, offices and jobs. In fact, we’re growing faster outside the Bay Area than within it, and this year opened new offices and data centers in locations like Detroit, Boulder, Los Angeles, Tennessee and Alabama,” wrote Google CFO Ruth Porat.”

Just this week, as GE was making its announcement, Google was announcing a major expansion in Cambridge, the city across the river from Boston that is home to Harvard and MIT. Kendall Square is also is home to offices from Facebook, Microsoft, IBM, Akamai, Digital Ocean and a plethora of startups.

Google will be moving into a brand new building that currently is home to the MIT Coop bookstore. It plans to grab 365,000 square feet of the new building when it’s completed, and as in NYC will be adding hundreds of new jobs to the 1500 already in place. Brian Cusack, Google Cambridge Site lead points out the company began operations in Cambridge back in 2003 and has been working on Search, Android, Cloud, YouTube, Google Play, Research, Ads and more.

“This new space will provide room for future growth and further cements our commitment to the Cambridge community. We’re proud to call this city home and will continue to support its vibrant nonprofit and growing business community,” he said in a statement.

As we learned this week, big company commitments can vanish just as quickly as they are announced, but for now at least, it appears that Google is serious about its commitment to New York and Boston and will be expanding office space and employment to the tune of thousands of jobs over the next decade.

Google says it’ll invest $13B in U.S. data centers and offices this year

Google today announced that it will invest $13 billion in data centers and offices across the U.S. in 2019. That’s up from $9 billion in investments last year. Many of these investments will go to states like Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Virginia, where Google plans new or expanded data centers. Though like most years, it’ll also continue to expand many of its existing offices in Seattle, Chicago and New York, as well as in its home state of California.

Given Google’s push for more cloud customers, it’s also interesting to see that the company continues to expand its data center presence across the country. Google will soon open its first data centers in Nevada, Nebraska, Ohio and Texas, for example, and it will expand its Oklahoma, South Carolina and Virginia data centers. Google clearly isn’t slowing down in its race to compete with AWS and Azure.

“These new investments will give us the capacity to hire tens of thousands of employees, and enable the creation of more than 10,000 new construction jobs in Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Virginia,” Google CEO Sundar Pichai writes today. “With this new investment, Google will now have a home in 24 total states, including data centers in 13 communities. 2019 marks the second year in a row we’ll be growing faster outside of the Bay Area than in it.”

Given the current backlash against many tech companies and automation in general, it’s probably no surprise that Google wants to emphasize the number of jobs it is creating (and especially jobs in Middle America). The construction jobs are obviously temporary, though, and data centers don’t need a lot of employees to run once they are up and running. Still, Google promises that this will give it the “capacity to hire tens of thousands of employees.”

Manipulating an Indian politician’s tweets is worryingly easy to do

Here’s a concerning story from India, where the upcoming election is putting the use of social media in the spotlight.

While the Indian government is putting Facebook, Google and other companies under pressure to prevent their digital platforms from being used for election manipulation, a journalist has demonstrated just how easy it is to control the social media messages that published by government ministers.

Pon Radhakrishnan, India’s minister of state for finance and shipping, published a series of puzzling tweets today after Pratik Sinha, a co-founder of fact-checking website Alt News, accessed a Google document of prepared statements and tinkered with the content.

Among the statements tweeted out, Radhakrishnan said Prime Minister Modi’s government had failed the middle classes and not made development on improving the country’s general welfare. Sinha’s edits also led to the official BJP Assam Pradesh account proclaiming that the Prime Minister had destroyed all villages and made women slaves to cooking.

These are the opposite of the partisan messages that the accounts intended to send.

The messages were held in an unlocked Google document that contained a range of tweets compiled for the Twitter accounts. Sinha managed to access the document and doctor the messages into improbable statements — which he has done before — in order to show the shocking lack of security and processes behind the social media content.

Sinha said he made the edits “to demonstrate how dangerous this is from the security standpoint for this country.”

“I had fun but it could have disastrous consequences,” he told TechCrunch in a phone interview. “This is a massive security issue from the point of view of a democracy.”

Sinha said he was able to access the document — which was not restricted or locked to prevent changes — through a WhatsApp group that is run by members of the party. Declining to give specifics, he said he had managed to infiltrate the group and thus gain access to a flow of party and government information and, even more surprisingly, get right into the documents and edit them.

What’s equally as stunning is that, even with the message twisted 180 degrees, their content didn’t raise an alarm. The tweets were still loaded and published without any realization. It was only after Sinha went public with the results that Radhakrishnan and BJP Assam Pradesh account begin to delete them.

The Indian government is rightly grilling Facebook and Google to prevent its platform being abused around the election, as evidence suggested happened in the U.S. Presidential election and the U.K’s Brexit vote, but members of the government themselves should reflect on the security of their own systems, too. It would be too easy for these poor systems to be exploited.

Google expands partnership with Founder Gym to support underrepresented founders

Google for Startups has expanded a partnership with startup training program Founder Gym to better serve underrepresented founders through a new scholarship program.

The program typically charges $396 to participate but thanks to this partnership with Google for Startups, Google will cover the costs for select scholarship recipients to participate in the six-week program. This partnership an extension of a pilot program that started last March.

“Google for Startups took an early bet on Founder Gym when we were less than six months old, and as any founder knows, you never forget the first people to say ‘yes’ to your dream,” Schumacher-Hodge Dixon said in a statement.
“Our team at Founder Gym has used that early vote of confidence to help fuel our efforts to train a groundbreaking number of founders around the world in our inaugural year.”

Founder Gym, co-founded by Mandela Schumacher-Hodge Dixon and Gabriela Zamudio (pictured above), unveiled its online platform to support and train underrepresented founders building tech startups in November 2017.

“We are deeply committed to supporting the growth and success of underrepresented founders,” Google for Startups VP Lisa Gevelber said in a statement. “At Google we know that innovation can come from anywhere, but the resources needed to succeed are not evenly distributed. Founder Gym is truly moving the needle in this space – their unique program delivers the tangible resources necessary to level the playing field for founders and help them grow their businesses.”

Instead of describing it as a school, bootcamp or incubator, Founder Gym describes itself as a topical, six-week training program that covers topics like fundraising, pitching, user growth and problem validation. In Founder Gym’s first 12 months of operations, its cohort has collectively raised $35 million in funding.

“As we enter year two of this journey, we couldn’t be more excited to expand our partnership with Google for Startups, an organization that has a long history of supporting the entrepreneur’s journey,” Schumacher-Hodge Dixon said. “There is no doubt in my mind, this partnership will help us achieve our mission of developing the next generation of great innovators and leaders.”