[quote]and used for god-knows-what[/quote]
Research and targeted advertising/content, once someone can figure out how to synthesize the data. Corporations don't have political agendas; they just want your money.
Corporations don't have political agendas? No offense, sir, but have you lost your mind or do you live under a rock?
Also, what do you say when the government starts subpoenaing Glass footage from Google to aid in solving crimes? To aid in squashing terrorism? What about to aid in PREVENTING crimes and terrorism? What about to search for dissenters and troublemakers? What about to just "keep track of people"?
That's why I said "used for god-knows-what." If you think that the big data that big tech companies collect is used and will only ever be used for advertisements, I envy your naivete.
[quote]Corporations don't have political agendas? No offense, sir, but have you lost your mind or do you live under a rock?[/quote]
Why do corporations lobby? I mean, as your link shows, these companies spent [i]record[/i] amounts... for what? Google's lobbyist certainly isn't fixing bugs in Chrome, refining algorithms to synthesize data, or working on some top-secret project for Google X-- and he's getting paid an awful lot, that jerk. So clearly there's some shady, political motive.
Well, maybe not.
Lobbying is done by a corporation for the same purpose as anything else it does: to make money. It would be nice to believe that Google cared about a free and open internet because it's just that nice of a company, but that's not the reason at all; an internet where content is under attack by a draconian anti-piracy law threatens Google's ability to target users most effectively, and [i]that[/i] hurts cash flow. I think we all know that "don't be evil" is, like all corporate mottos, complete bullshit. There is no room for morality in business, and Google's sole obligation is to its shareholders.
And, obviously, this is prevalent everywhere-- companies lobby to protect their business interests all the time. They group together to face one threat, and then go right back to fighting amongst each other the next day. Political flip-flopping? No: business. But let's say a company were to try and balance protecting business interests and lobbying for some political gain, what's to stop them? Competition. The race to provide lower prices and higher profits is packed with participants, and it's quite brutal. Nobody has a monopoly; if one store raises its prices, consumers simply go to another store 2 minutes away. If one company doesn't meet expectations, selling stock and moving the money to a competitor can be done in a moment. Companies are [i]forced[/i] to compete, and they are [i]forced[/i] to expand into government to gain an advantage over their competitors simply because consumers and investors are the only things that matter.
So Target doesn't lobby because some board members are cackling and rubbing their hands in glee, as they plot some political takeover. Corporations are set up exclusively to make money; they have no other objective, and engaging in anything else is counterproductive. Everything they do is to improve their products or service or whatever, or at least give that impression, so they can lure more consumers. Lobbying is simply another form of the competition that has always existed, but intensified to an unprecedented degree over the past decades.
And that's a good enough transition into answering the rest of your post. This competition has intensified because of some things that are very good - like technology that breaks down barriers to entry - but also something that is very bad: the complete overwhelming of the citizen by the consumer. We care so much about low prices and high returns on investment that we're quite happy to let companies expand into Washington (as well as squeeze their supply chains dry, cut employee wages and benefits, and pay as little attention to quality control as possible). Corporations are big bad meanie-heads, but it's not actually their fault that they're plonking down industrial complexes in the middle of our national parks, or whatever it is that environmentalists complain about. Citizens are the ones who are supposed to care for their country and their government-- and we've kind of screwed up with that part. The economy is down, but capitalism has fared a [i]lot[/i] better than democracy.
Compared to the government, corporations are an open book. What does Google want with me today? Money. What does it want with me tomorrow? More money. How does it get my money? By creating more engaging services and products. If they go full Digg (you never go full Digg), then I'll simply switch to another search engine or web browser or... you get the idea. To Google, I'm a humanoid wallet-- but my actual humanity is not of concern.
So what do I say when the government starts subpoenaing Glass footage? What the shit was everyone doing [i]before[/i] it started? Complaining around the watercooler? Waving their fists in the air and coming up with creative names to call politicians? People - citizens - actually have power, but whether it's because being a good citizen is just plain hard or something else, it's nobody's fault but our own if we don't exercise it. Whether it's those jackasses on TV complaining about "partisan bickering" or those jackasses stocking up on guns to defend against a government takeover, it seems like people will do whatever it takes to avoid such basic responsibilities.
tl;dr lobbying is not a result of political motives; it's an extension of competition, and it's driven by the fact that we are better consumers than we are citizens.
I think you're confusing "politics" with "social/environmental agendas." I doubt Google as a corporation gives a rat's ass about the politics of abortion or marijuana legalization. But it's purely naive to limit "politics" to that definition. At its core, politics is about power. And at its core, incorporation is about money. And having power is in the interest of any corporation that wants to make serious money.
Board members of big corporations may not be planning to overthrow the government, but you can be damn sure that they're taking an interest in making sure that the politicians and political parties that they want to be in office are representing their interests. Whether their interests lie in lower taxes, laxer privacy laws, or otherwise, the exercise of power is precisely what corporations seek in order to get more money. This is the reason that corporate PACs and corporate donations and -- especially -- lobbying all exist.
So for you to say that lobbying is not a result of political motives is just about the most backwards thing you could possibly say, and is utterly wrong.
You seem to have a pretty big misconception about competition, which is that you can always "just switch." That's easy to say when the products you're dealing with are free, like a web browser. But what about ecosystems? Take the easy example of email: how easy would it be for you to switch email addresses in today's day and age? Sure, most services are free. But it would take you hours, if not days or weeks, to remember all of the various sites and services that you need to log into and switch your email address around. For most people, it's just not worth the time. And what about your device ecosystem? Try telling a person who owns an Apple computer, iPad, iPhone, and iPod that he or she should change phones or music players -- they'll probably have a heart attack at the thought, not to mention saying that they can't afford another $500 device right now.
I'm glad you're so idealistic about the political process. Good thing that corporate interests haven't had massive influence on policymaking for the last 30 years. Oh wait, that was a dream I had, not reality.
One other point to address is your statement that you are nothing but a humanoid wallet to Google. That's laughably wrong. You are the product that Google sells. That is literally their business model, and it's no secret. Give away products that people use frequently for free in exchange for collecting data about them. Sell that data to advertisers and rake in the profits. Sure, some Google devices cost money -- Motorola smartphones and Google Glass are certainly not free. But products that Google sells to end consumers constitute a whopping FOUR percent of their revenues. You are most certainly not the revenue source here -- you're the product that Google sells. Sorry.