4 ms·

I hate to be that guy but is it Google's responsibility to police legally operating insurance companies? It's not their problem that USA has a trash insurance m

I hate to be that guy but is it Google's responsibility to police legally operating insurance companies? It's not their problem that USA has a trash insurance market and a backwards healthcare system.

ggm 11mo ago
I believe traditional publishers had pretty specific liability for the stuff they carry. There's no magic exclusion for ads that I know of.
- gruez 11mo ago
  Source? Specifically, examples where publishers were sued for fraudulent products they advertised?
  - ggm 11mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beardstown_Ladies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beardstown_Ladies is the exemplar
    - toast0 11mo ago
      That's a book publisher being liable for the book it published. We're looking for a newspaper publisher being liable for the ad it published. Not a story it published.
tourmalinetaco 11mo ago
Legally? No. However, due to their alteration of search results anything that becomes the top is effectively an endorsement regardless of whether it was chosen by the black box or their employees. They already remove legally operating websites they disagree with. Since they’re selective editors with multiple lost antitrust suits, the only thing we as consumers can do is criticize. Especially as most of these companies top the charts due to SEO spam and not genuine traffic.
venturecruelty 11mo ago
Poor, powerless Google. The scrappy, ragtag outfit down in Mountain View, barely hanging on, unable to downrank predatory insurance companies. I'll say an extra prayer for them during Compline tonight.
- morkalork 11mo ago
  Didn't say they were powerless but you do you
- notfed 11mo ago
  Imagine how hard moderating a forum is. Now imagine moderating the whole Internet. Everyone always thinks it's trivial. Everyone couldn't be more wrong.
  - venturecruelty 11mo ago
    How convenient that Google gets to reap all of the benefits of that situation without bearing any of the responsibility. Oh, but it's fine, because they have a trillion dollars and "it's hard, you guuyyysss!"
    - morkalork 11mo ago
      "lets make private corporations responsible for policing the behavior of other corporations instead of the government and legislation" <- this is what I'm hearing
  - davkan 11mo ago
    Yes, we should not have built internet scale services and forums if it was not possible to moderate them effectively.
chasing0entropy 11mo ago
Imagine a magazine that only had garbage ads for scam insurance, adware, and cheap Chinese $2 trinkets, would you keep your subscription? You can't cancel google. They make sure of it

ggm 11mo ago

I believe traditional publishers had pretty specific liability for the stuff they carry. There's no magic exclusion for ads that I know of.

gruez 11mo ago
Source? Specifically, examples where publishers were sued for fraudulent products they advertised?
- ggm 11mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beardstown_Ladies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beardstown_Ladies is the exemplar
  - toast0 11mo ago
    That's a book publisher being liable for the book it published. We're looking for a newspaper publisher being liable for the ad it published. Not a story it published.

tourmalinetaco 11mo ago

Legally? No. However, due to their alteration of search results anything that becomes the top is effectively an endorsement regardless of whether it was chosen by the black box or their employees. They already remove legally operating websites they disagree with. Since they’re selective editors with multiple lost antitrust suits, the only thing we as consumers can do is criticize. Especially as most of these companies top the charts due to SEO spam and not genuine traffic.

venturecruelty 11mo ago

Poor, powerless Google. The scrappy, ragtag outfit down in Mountain View, barely hanging on, unable to downrank predatory insurance companies. I'll say an extra prayer for them during Compline tonight.

morkalork 11mo ago
Didn't say they were powerless but you do you
notfed 11mo ago
Imagine how hard moderating a forum is. Now imagine moderating the whole Internet. Everyone always thinks it's trivial. Everyone couldn't be more wrong.
- venturecruelty 11mo ago
  How convenient that Google gets to reap all of the benefits of that situation without bearing any of the responsibility. Oh, but it's fine, because they have a trillion dollars and "it's hard, you guuyyysss!"
  - morkalork 11mo ago
    "lets make private corporations responsible for policing the behavior of other corporations instead of the government and legislation" <- this is what I'm hearing
- davkan 11mo ago
  Yes, we should not have built internet scale services and forums if it was not possible to moderate them effectively.

chasing0entropy 11mo ago

Imagine a magazine that only had garbage ads for scam insurance, adware, and cheap Chinese $2 trinkets, would you keep your subscription? You can't cancel google. They make sure of it