8 ms·

Google adds "Black-owned" business attribute to local listings

• pragmaticpirate 6y ago
  Both woke and racist subgroup of people are very happy with this decision. While the former knows where to go shopping, and latter is more aware of what to avoid.
• zapita 6y ago
  I'm seeing many comments calling this initiative "racist", or at least going against the principles of all people being equal, etc. This is incorrect! Racism is a hierarchical caste system based on a pseudo-scientific classification of people into races. The dominant form of racism, invented in Europe and exported all over the world via colonization and slavery, is built on the concept of a biologically superior "white" race. This form of racism, also known as white supremacy, is deeply embedded in the societies and institutions of European countries and their former colonies. The United States are no different. In the United States specifically, Black people are in a special position, because their very existence as a group is the result of colonization and slavery. Their existence is a physical reminder of the racist origins of the US. And the injustice they continue to endure in the United States today - including of course police violence, but also housing discrimination, discrimination in the workplace, excessive incarceration, restricted voting rights, restricted access to healthcare and education, etc. - are a reminder of the fact that racism is still, today, deeply embedded in US institutions. One consequence of this, in the US, is that there are few Black-owned businesses relative to the population, and as a result, Black people have less access to equity. Because equity is the primary mechanism for wealth increase in the US, and is taxed very favorably compared to wages, this means that Black people are not able to benefit from economic growth at the same rate as the rest of population. This is a self-reinforcing problem because a Black entrepreneur is much less likely to receive an investment from a bank or VC than a white entrepreneur of similar experience and risk profile. This is a widely known problem, and one commonly proposed solution, if the US finance system won't invest in Black businesses, is for Black people to "invest in themselves", so to speak, by choosing to buy from Back-owned businesses whenever possible. So this is primarily about helping Black people support each other, in the absence of US institutions not supporting them appropriately.
  • bloody-crow 6y ago
    > The dominant form of racism, invented in Europe and exported all over the world via colonization and slavery, is built on the concept of a biologically superior "white" race. That sounds like bullshit honestly. I haven't seen any evidence that white people specifically have "invented" racism instead of being a position of power for the most part. There's plenty of evidence that racism existed throughout the history in all parts of the worlds and all the races are susceptible to it, it's just white ppl historically ended up being on top for the most part. To suggest that non-white people are somehow different and could not have possibly be racist or "invent" racism is to deny human nature and perpetuate the myth that the color of your skin makes you special albeit in a negative way in this case, and therefore is racist. > In the United States specifically, Black people are in a special position, because their very existence as a group is the result of colonization and slavery. Their existence is a physical reminder of the racist origins of the US. And the injustice they continue to endure in the United States today - including of course police violence, but also housing discrimination, discrimination in the workplace, excessive incarceration, restricted voting rights, restricted access to healthcare and education, etc. - are a reminder of the fact that racism is still, today, deeply embedded in US institutions. I like how readily every measurable statistically significant difference between races is readily attributed to racism without any attempt to explore multiple other possible explanations. Sure, the only possibly reason that the racial minority that that has been historically economically disadvantaged and repressed from advancing over generations has been poorer educated, engaged in more crime and less economically involved today would be racism.
    • zapita 6y ago
      > That sounds like bullshit honestly. It sounds that way to you because it goes against your beliefs. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong... > I haven't seen any evidence that white people specifically have "invented" racism instead of being a position of power for the most part. If you read History books, you will find plenty of evidence. It’s not hard to find. Nothing I wrote is particularly controversial among historians. > There's plenty of evidence that racism existed throughout the history in all parts of the worlds You’re thinking of bigotry, or prejudice. You are correct that it is present everywhere in the world. But it is not the same as racism (see my definition of racism above). > and all the races are susceptible to it Note that races are a pseudo-scientific concept. There is no such thing as “all the races” when talking about humanity as a whole. It’s as meaningless as saying “all the Hindu castes in the world”. > it's just white ppl historically ended up being on top for the most part. Yes, Europeans conquered most of the world, occupied it militarily, plundered its resources, enslaved, killed and displaced tens of millions of people, and invented the concept of “white people” as the superior race to justify it. As a result, much of the world’s wealth and power was redistributed to Europeans and their descendants, both in Europe and in their colonies. If that’s what you mean by “being on top” then we are in agreement. > To suggest that non-white people are somehow different and could not have possibly be racist or "invent" racism is to deny human nature and perpetuate the myth that the color of your skin makes you special albeit in a negative way in this case, and therefore is racist. Again, you are confusing prejudice and racism. Sure, I guess anyone could have invented racism and spread it to half the planet. Any human group is biologically capable of doing that. Who cares? That statement applies equally to every historical fact. Any humans could have conquered the Mediterranean - but the Romans did. Any humans could have caused WW2 - but the Germans did. Any humans could have invented and spread racism - but the Europeans did. > I like how readily every measurable statistically significant difference between races is readily attributed to racism without any attempt to explore multiple other possible explanations. Oh, plenty of people have looked for other explanations. It’s just that they have failed to make a convincing case for them. By contrast, what I explained to you is supported by mountains of evidence and pretty much the entire scientific community. You might as well be looking for alternate explanations to global warming. But feel free to try! Sure, the only possibly reason that the racial minority that that has been historically economically disadvantaged and repressed from advancing over generations has been poorer educated, engaged in more crime and less economically involved today would be racism. I didn’t say it’s the only possible reason. It’s just the only reason supported by evidence and research.
• kyriakos 6y ago
  This is actually the definition of racism packaged as anti racism. I don't get it, pointing out a business is black owned means you differentiate based on skin colour aiding discrimination.
  • X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
    Would reperations be racist?
    • bearclaw89 6y ago
      Reparations for what?
      • stef25 6y ago
        Reparations refers to giving cash payments to the black community as an apology for what happened during slavery.
        • bearclaw89 6y ago
          I guess in this context that's what it means. Giving money out simple based off someone's skin tone doesn't make much sense to me. Don't think America invented slavery.
          • X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
            That's an absurd standard. People successfully sue for fraud all the time, not just against the person that first invented fraud. If you'd like to learn more about the case for reparations for chattel slavery in the US I can pull up some resources.
            • ralfd 6y ago
              African-Americans have way higher living standards and income than Africans though. I know very few who would have rather be born in Kongo or Zimbabwe.
• AnonC 6y ago
  I’m fully in support of surfacing attributes about groups who are systemically discriminated against (African American, women, LGBTQ, etc.). I also appreciate knowing that some business is local, supporting the poor and those not privileged to have a decent education, the disabled, etc. But considering how most of the world has turned strongly and violently right wing in the last few years, I’m also concerned about targeted attacks against such places in the light of this information. Yeah, if you won’t visit a place dominated by businesses owned or run by African Americans because of this fact alone, that’s problematic in itself. But if you’re against these groups and want to cause harm, now Google has made it easier for you to find them or inform people who think similarly in other places where they should target. I don’t know if this move is beneficial or harmful overall at this point in time. I wish this had been done more than a decade ago though.
  • nitro_luke 6y ago
    > most of the world has turned strongly and violently right wing in the last few years Really? Do you have evidence that right wing violence exceeds that of any other political affiliation? Anecdotally, looking at current events, the opposite seems to be true. I'm not looking for a fight, I'm genuinely curious if there are sources for this claim.
  • raxxorrax 6y ago
    The right wing tendency is a reactionary response to this kind of activism. A few percent of people believe themselves to be superior due to race. Some people will always be like that but it was certainly a less and less prominent political orientation. But the conquest for more state control, against freedom of expression, against open dialogue put more and more people against activists. I don't think there is anything more to it and overall pretty simple. There are people making millions with esoteric bias training which are basically just bullshit jobs that certainly don't improve understanding. This industry needs a constant supply of racism.
• eloff 6y ago
  Is this a good thing? Why should I care about the skin color of the owner of a restaurant or business I'm thinking of going to?
  • baddox 6y ago
    I don't think you need to look for a "should." The article says: > Google said it has seen “a surge in online searches for Black-owned businesses” in recent months So it seems like a feature Google decided is useful for its visitors in the same way that a business' address, operating hours, and reviews are useful for its visitors.
    • albacur 6y ago
      By that logic, if they saw a surge of interest in white-owned businesses, it would be justified adding a “white-owned business” label. I think we can say “segregating people based on skin color is wrong in principle,” or “segregating people is acceptable if it benefits those who are disadvantaged,” but I don’t see segregating races based on search interest as a reasonable policy.
      • baddox 6y ago
        “Segregation” means “forced separation,” but you seem to be using it to mean “recognizition of any distinction.”
        • Ancapistani 6y ago
          No, not necessarily. Neither the dictionary on my desk nor Wikipedia define the term as requiring force.
          • baddox 6y ago
            I think the context is pretty clear here.
    • Natsu 6y ago
• senectus1 6y ago
  now there is an interesting philosophical stance. hmmm. I wonder if businesses are allowed to de-list "attributes".
  • wutwutwutwut 6y ago
    Why wouldn't they be able to remove an attribute they have added themselves?
  • GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
    How is it interesting?
• dirtyid 6y ago
  It's less intrusive than spamming my Google assistant quick actions with an undismissable "black lives matter" button for the last couple weeks. When tapped, it affirms BLM solidarity vow. My phone region wasn't even North America. More ontopic, wonder if this will be extended to other minorities. Easy way to filter out actually Mexican owned taco shops. Or Japanese owned sushi. What let's go full political, what if I want to avoid Christian owned franchises like Chick-Fil-A. Maybe some of that Blue Vs Yellow division from HK.
  • dgellow 6y ago
    > My phone region wasn't even North America. The spread of US internal issues to the rest of the world is quite frightening to be honest. A social unrest in North America has way, way more influence in Europeans countries than our own local issues (I'm in the EU), and both our news and politicians react quickly to it, even though US problems are mostly irrelevant here. Even without living close to America, or try to be only consuming local content, it is impossible to avoid whatever is happening there. This country has really too much impact over the rest of the world, which wouldn’t be necessarily an issue if not for the fact that it is widely dysfunctional.
    • dirtyid 6y ago
      Basically. The world can't even get competent contact tracing apps running because it must comform to US / Silicon Valley privacy standards. Google/Apple rebuffing sovereign governments to implement more granular models, because it'll open domestic privacy pandora's box. They're too big for America, let alone the rest of the world.
    • sildur 6y ago
      It’s cultural colonialism, the way they force their problems over the rest of the world.
      • stef25 6y ago
        There's nothing being forced on us here in the EU in the context of BLM. It's more the case that people here lap it up, copying all the same narratives, terminology and practices. This goes for both ends of the political spectrum. It's pretty worrying.
• bjt2n3904 6y ago
  "Anti-racist" strategies bewilder me. Am I now supposed to consider the skin color of the business owner before shopping there? Because I thought making business decisions based on skin color was racist.
  • summitsummit 6y ago
    the whole point is for us to fight amongst ourselves and to sow division.
    • pcbro141 6y ago
      I don't see how Google adding a black-owned business label might encourage a previously non-racist person to now want to 'fight' black people or feel ill will towards black people.
      • radegast 6y ago
        You know, I am getting tired of all this. I am a white dude and just reading the media it seems like I should either die or give away everything just because of my race and gender. These same people, who are whining about someone saying "all lives matter", don't mind calling themselves "comrades". We've had communism in my country for circa 40 years. I might as well start complaining that they are using "comrade", because my parents suffered under the regime. Mind you the regime was toppled some 30 years ago, and unlike slavery in the US, there are millions of people who lived through it and are still alive. So to sum it up; I was somewhat moderate. And now since the whole circus started, I feel attacked from all sides for something I cannot change. That makes me want to support the whole cause less, and in fact start doing something against it, because if now I am supposed to write "Black people" with capital B, but "white people" with lower-case W, I keep wondering where this will all end.
      • dforrestwilson 6y ago
        You really don’t see how elevating a single race over others might be an issue?
• zzo38computer 6y ago
  It doesn't matter to me if they are black-owned or women-led or whatever (and, in order to avoid (possibly unintentional) bias, perhaps it should not be listed by default, unless you specifically look for that information). I should think what matters is the quality of the products/services. Business hours, telephone number, price, etc, are much more important than whether or not those people are black.
  • X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
    Then I suppose this isn't a very useful feature for you. Taking feedback or offering a customizable experience isn't really Google's way so I guess you'll just have a small icon to ignore until they decide to silently kill the feature
  • userbinator 6y ago
    The fact that you're getting voted like a rollercoaster shows just how controversial things like this are. There are people who want to force their entirely absurd notions of "equality" upon the world, and those who realise that this is a very dangerous and destructive line of thought.
• aphroz 6y ago
  Isn't this the exact definition of racism ? Imagine if they started putting jewish owned business. It can be both used to promote and discriminate, but in both cases to differenciate people based on skin color. This is absurd.
• runawaybottle 6y ago
  If the business owners choose to broadcast that label then it’s fine. The only thing I don’t like about this social pattern is that it can over time lead to people becoming more prejudiced. Filter by white-owned, Chinese owned, etc. The worst version of it was when Germany labeled Jewish owned businesses. The best way to deal with a bug is to not design a system where the bug could appear.
  • eganist 6y ago
    > The best way to deal with a bug is to not design a system where the bug could appear. Correct. The problem right now is that prosperity around small businesses tends to be stumbled-upon by people with the necessary networks and safety nets. Said people largely tend to be White, and as a result, there's a bias in the number of White-owned businesses which succeed. Affirmative Action and other policies (including this move by Google) recognize this and realize that the only way to level the playing field is to artificially boost the signal on Black-owned businesses, Black attendance in higher-ed, etc., because with policies that completely remove all handicaps, momentum is sustained, and momentum right now is in favor of sustained systemic racism (even after the protests). That's also why policies like this generally aren't considered racist: because they act to level the playing field when a certain group has an outsized advantage. > The only thing I don’t like about this social pattern is that it can over time lead to people becoming more prejudiced. Filter by white-owned, Chinese owned, etc. The worst version of it was when Germany labeled Jewish owned businesses. To this point, it's also a difficult balance to strike. How can we get to as close to level as possible without instilling the wrong search practices long term? I don't think anyone knows the answer yet.
• grizzles 6y ago
  Bad idea. Just like it is/was stupid for them to surface the neo nazi content I've been shown in the last few years, eg. in Google News. I usually expect more from this company. Has Google gone hopelessly corporate?
• kepler1 6y ago
  This is getting really frustrating. How many tech company equity-based judgement calls are we going to be subjected to, that will not be extended to other groups that aren't the popular favorites of the moment? How about tags for restaurants owned by poor immigrants? Or how about veterans? Or people who are their family's first people to go to college? When are we done with this moment, or when does the equity get extended to other equity-worthy groups?
  • brandmeyer 6y ago
    Apparently, veteran-led and women-led are already available as tags.
• dathinab 6y ago
  So Google went accidentally racist again? Because the moment you treat someone different because of things like skin color it's racist, you know. Doesn't matter if it's a preferred or discriminatory treatment because any preferable treatment for one group of people based on race is a discrimination against all other.
  • zapita 6y ago
    Your definition of racism is incorrect. Racism is a hierarchical caste system based on a pseudo-scientific classification of people into races. The dominant form of racism, invented in Europe and exported all over the world via colonization and slavery, is built on the concept of a biologically superior "white" race. This form of racism, also known as white supremacy, is deeply embedded in the societies and institutions of European countries and their former colonies. The United States are no different. In the United States specifically, Black people are in a special position, because their very existence as a group is the result of colonization and slavery. Their existence is a physical reminder of the racist origins of the US. And the injustice they continue to endure in the United States today - including of course police violence, but also housing discrimination, discrimination in the workplace, excessive incarceration, restricted voting rights, restricted access to healthcare and education, etc. - are a reminder of the fact that racism is still, today, deeply embedded in US institutions. One consequence of this, in the US, is that there are few Black-owned businesses relative to the population, and as a result, Black people have less access to equity. Because equity is the primary mechanism for wealth increase in the US, and is taxed very favorably compared to wages, this means that Black people are not able to benefit from economic growth at the same rate as the rest of population. This is a self-reinforcing problem because a Black entrepreneur is much less likely to receive an investment from a bank or VC than a white entrepreneur of similar experience and risk profile. This is a widely known problem, and one commonly proposed solution, if the US finance system won't invest in Black businesses, is for Black people to "invest in themselves", so to speak, by choosing to buy from Back-owned businesses whenever possible. So this is primarily about helping Black people support each other, in the absence of US institutions not supporting them appropriately.
    • 6y ago
• sleepinseattle 6y ago
  I’d suggest most of you read this as a longer form examination of policies like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Be_an_Antiracist https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Be_an_Antiracist Rather than trying to make tired points in 140 characters.
  • monoideism 6y ago
    Most of us understand the "anti-racist" philosophy. We just don't agree with it. BTW, it's the height of passive aggressiveness to use this rhetorical trick of naming things (antifa, anti-racist) in such a way that you use the very name to shame people. I mean, meet my new group: the anti-evil collective. What's that? You're don't agree with us? Well, you're against evil, aren't you? Are you some kind of a demon, or a devil?
    • baryphonic 6y ago
      I have recently begun calling self-described "anti-<X>s" co-<X>s. Co-racists are almost exactly the same as racists, just with slightly different vocabulary that depends on the existence of classic racists. Co-facists are essentially the same thing (any outgroup must be oppressed and overcome at all costs, is simultaneously weak and super-powerful, etc). Marxist regimes are almost always co-capitalist and co-imperialist (such as the largest explicitly Marxist regime today). The idea is that the relationship between <X> and "co-<X>" is sort of like "domain/codomain," "sine/cosine," "product/co-product," "vector/co-vector," etc. in math, or "dependency/co-dependency" in psychology. "Co-<X>" cannot exist without <X>, but behaves almost exactly the same.
    • GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
      So, you claim to understand "anti-racism", but don't agree with it. And yet you're complaining about the name? I'm sure if you understood the philosophy then you would be able to articulate your issues with it, rather than just complaining about something superficial. I'm guessing you're also against (but understand, ha) feminism too? but just don't like that it sounds like it's just for women.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• reactchain 6y ago
  The next logical step of course is to start bumping up "disadvantaged" listings in search rankings.
  • reportgunner 6y ago
    Then we start wondering why everybody has stopped using the app all of a sudden.
• craigmbooth 6y ago
  In contrast to most of the comments here, I like this. Earlier this year, I watched the first episode of Trigger Warning with Killer Mike (Netflix). In this episode he tried to spend a few days putting money only into black-owned businesses... It was a hard experience for him, and since then I have tried to be conscious of where my money goes, and if I have the option of selecting a black owned business intend to do so, and I am happy that there is an easy way for me to do that.
  • bloody-crow 6y ago
    So, you're saying you're intentionally prioritizing businesses based on the owner's race. By doing so, you're making a statement, that the race of the owners is an important variable since it leads to a different economic outcome. You're denying ecomomic opportunities to other businesses based on their owner's race. Congratulations, you're perpetuating racism.
  • X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
    I honestly wanted to make this, but as a white person I opted to not as there is potential for harm. Glad to see it, reading though the comments here really makes new feel like many commenters don't know the history of why black Americans are so economically deprived (in general, obviously there are exceptions). Black wall Street is a piece of history to look up or reading seriously about the case for reperations (freakonomics had an interesting, multifaceted episode on it recently)
  • reportgunner 6y ago
    Friendly reminder: Not everything on TV(Netflix) is true.
  • stef25 6y ago
    Why don't you keep shopping where you usually do, wherever you think you get the best value for money and donate to a charity instead?
• stef25 6y ago
  As a European I'm very far removed from all this and don't really care either way. But I can't help but wonder - are there any Native American voices in this whole story? Black people got a raw deal but surely it's incomparable with Native American history and they situation the few remaining find themselves in now. Or am I totally wrong?
  • fortytwo79 6y ago
    There are people of all demographics who've had a raw deal. In modern America, there are black people born into lives of "privilege," and there are white people born into adversity. So does flagging a business as minority-owned tell the full story of the owner's life circumstances? Certainly not. On the other hand, veteran ownership is a common thing to see advertised. I guess I have no problem with businesses self-advertising their own values. I take more issue if Google has a short list of business attributes, and only causes they deem worthy make the list. I don't know if that's the case though.
• Markoff 6y ago
  all racists now thank Google for information how to avoid black businesses they provide even Yellow stars for you to rate them
• hokkos 6y ago
  Well, they already have the yellow star icon next to black owned, women-led icons, for the next step in their journey.
• nico42 6y ago
  the road to hell is paved with good intentions. * Any tool that allows to discriminate "for" allows to discriminate "against" * What is the rational to be able to add "black-owned", but not "mexican-owned" or anything else, are mexicans not victims of discriminations ? * What is the end game ? Black people go to black-owned businesses, white people go to white-owned businesses ? this kind of anti-racism looks a little bit like segregation to me. I'm not against any positive actions, but this one seems dangerous and could have unwanted indirect impacts
• BossHogg 6y ago
  These comments perfectly demonstrate the hypocrisy of [a certain demographic]. They will take every opportunity to beat Black people over the head with: "Well Jews and Asians were discriminated against. Look how great they're doing!" Leaving aside whether the histories are comparable, both of those groups practiced extensive cooperative economics. But if Black people just attempt to do the same? If Black people go left they will criticize. If they go right they will criticize. [A certain demographic's] sole interest is in attacking Black people and its been that way for five centuries. I know a couple of Black business owners who don't want that fact known precisely because they know it'll make them a target from [a certain demographic's members].
• gremlinsinc 6y ago
  I support BLM, the protesters, and reparations even, but this is damaging. There's way too many racists for businesses to put up a flag saying 'Black and Proud' or 'Gay and Proud', a lot of bigots probably eat at a McDonald's, they might stop if they learned the franchise owner is black, gay, or <insert other minority>. Anonymity can bring in more cash, which I think they could probably use, esp in this economy. I'm sure, there's a lot like myself who'd go out of our way to use these businesses, but I'm not sure if we outnumber the bad segments of society.
• Grue3 6y ago
  What's next, marking Jewish-owned businesses and LGBT-owned businesses? We don't learn from history at all, do we?