[fname]

I fail to see how the two are even remotely the same. Google continuously scans email content to sell ads; while Microsoft does it once and admits it so they can catch someone stealing trade secrets.

While I agree that the Scroogled campaign does tread slightly into the hyperbole, I can't agree that this the double-standard that most are making it out to be.

[chaostheory]

It doesn't matter if they're the same. The point of the Scroogled campaign is to say "the other companies read your emails, while we don't". Like every other MS marketing campaign, it doesn't take long to unravel.

[basch]

Do they read your email? Your parent specifically debunked the point your trying to make. Microsoft selectively reading one persons mail who was leaking their activation technology, is not the same as reading their customers emails.

Hyperbole doesnt make your case stronger. In light of every other privacy issue happening in the world, this is a non story. I think it would be useful to prioritize outrage, and direct it to a spy agency or some other countries military.

[chaostheory]

I'm not entirely sure my previous posts were clear enough.

I'm not saying that Outlook / Hotmail is better or worse than competitors in terms of privacy. I'm saying that an MS Marketing campaign has helped create an unrealistic perception of MS email services for the public, which after this PR debacle has created yet another unrealistic perception of MS email services.

[Johnie]

With Google, no real human is sitting around sifting through your email. It's all done programmatically.

I don't care if some algorithm scans my email for keywords, but I don't want Bob to read my emails.