2 ms·
I get that google has the power to censor, but the examples the author gives... I kind of side with google for most of it. They need to censor autocomplete, ot
by jbob2000 10y ago
I get that google has the power to censor, but the examples the author gives... I kind of side with google for most of it.
They need to censor autocomplete, otherwise all sorts of depraved crap will turn up. Like another commenter here said, just start typing "jews/muslims/gays/blacks/whites are..." on DuckDuckGo to see why it's needed.
I get the google maps blacklist too. 99.99999% of people will not need to see the areas that are blacked out. Those that want to see them, probably shouldn't! It's a consumer-level mapping tool, it's for showing your kids some geography and getting directions to your friend's cottage.
I understand why Google obeys foreign governments too. They're a private business, if Pakistan wants to censor youtube, let them. From a Western perspective, we think this is bad, but we don't live in Pakistan to fully understand why they need that control. It's not Google's job to be prescribing to foreign countries how they should operate.
And I get why they blacklist websites and entire domains. Sorry, but co.cc was being abused, it needed to go. Whatever google is doing to fight spam is working, my inbox is clean as a whistle, I literally can't remember the last time I got spam.
Ultimately, my point is that, yes google "censors" things. But I haven't seen them do anything that's terribly "evil", it's generally been under the scope of providing a better user experience.
- greglindahl 10y agoIt's also worth pointing out that "freedom of the press" in the US means freedom for businesses that own printing presses. Removing stuff from autocomplete is an editorial decision. Removing and reordering stuff in search results can be an editorial decision. As someone who tried (and failed) to compete with Google's search engine, I don't think the US government should regulate editorial decisions of search engines.