Search Engine Censorship

[kmortis]

I don't see the problem... it's not like Google doesn't practice censorship locally, too. And I'm all for their censorship here.

Try it sometime - think of the most disgusting, disturbing, awful taboo search terms you can think of, and see if there isn't a note at the bottom indicating that Google has removed some results at such-and-such request. I mean, who knew penguin lust was such a taboo subject?

... or was that nun-beating? I always get those two confused...

You might want to get those terms straightened out in your mind before your next trip to the zoo with the Zaayrlings.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I don't see the problem... it's not like Google doesn't practice censorship locally, too. And I'm all for their censorship here.

Try it sometime - think of the most disgusting, disturbing, awful taboo search terms you can think of, and see if there isn't a note at the bottom indicating that Google has removed some results at such-and-such request. I mean, who knew penguin lust was such a taboo subject?

... or was that nun-beating? I always get those two confused...

I have not seen such a note and can not seem to make google create one

 

[Cosmo]

I have not seen such a note and can not seem to make google create one

Can't say I've ever seen that note either.

On another note, as others have pointed out, it's almost certainly true that some searches (child pornography, bomb making, etc) are also censored to some extent in the US and elsewhere.

 

[Just thinking]

Putting forth child porn, nun-beating, bomb making and other such topics of like as examples show what some here must come up with in some absurd attempt to parallel censorship in a free society with that of communist China.

 

[Just thinking]

And then their Chinese employees go to prison.

Even more a reason to not distribute a great propaganda tool to such a regime.

BTW ... you can document the above in this case, right? I mean, that specific threat has been clearly stated by some official of the Chinese government ... yes?

 

[Just thinking]

Sorry ... double post.

 

[Cosmo]

Putting forth child porn and other such topics of like as examples show what some here must come up with in some absurd attempt to parallel censorship in a free society with that of communist China.

Fair enough. There's not much of a parallel.

 

[Ducky]

Stupid question:

Does the chinese government also somehow filter what is attained by using proxies like tor? If not, then what is stopping the chinese public from getting the full google search?

 

[wollery]

Absolutely nothing.

 

[This Guy]

Some related/interesting reading (IMHO)

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/china/

The URL describes the topic

 

[Z]

I have not seen such a note and can not seem to make google create one

Then you're a good, upstanding moral person. Or uncreative. Whatever.

I saw them twice - the first, quite by accident. Seems researching entertainers in Japan can get you into hot water, if you're not careful. The second was deliberate - I wanted to know just what my kids might see typing in certain search terms. I'm thankful that those are censored out.

The point I was making - or failing to make - is that censorship happens right here at home, for good reasons. The question, then, should be are the reasons in China sufficient to the level of censorship? Or, to put it another way, does the complex social and political situation of China warrant government censorship, and how should internet search engines approach these concepts?

--Personally I'm against all censorship of any form, aside from parental/personal. But that's just me.

 

[Z]

Putting forth child porn, nun-beating, bomb making and other such topics of like as examples show what some here must come up with in some absurd attempt to parallel censorship in a free society with that of communist China.

It's no parallel, that's for sure. But it does illustrate part of the problem: we have a largely free, liberal society, so we suffer little censorship. China is more strict, more conservative, more controlled; they suffer more censorship. Here's what I wonder: would a lack of censorship benefit, or harm, the people over there?

I would personally say benefit; but I'm not intimately familiar with the compexities of Chinese society. I might very well be wrong.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Then you're a good, upstanding moral person. Or uncreative. Whatever.

References to coprophilia/coprophagia, bestiality, and the westboro baptist Church failed to generate such a note. What are the real criteria that create such results?

 

[Zygar]

References to coprophilia/coprophagia, bestiality, and the westboro baptist Church failed to generate such a note. What are the real criteria that create such results?

I haven't seen them censor a site due to content. One time I did receive a message saying something about the site being IIRC a phishing site. Which caught me a little off guard. I honestly didn't know that Google did anything to prevent sites from being accessed from the US at all.

 

[Z]

References to coprophilia/coprophagia, bestiality, and the westboro baptist Church failed to generate such a note. What are the real criteria that create such results?

Simple one: preteen.

In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org.

And I'm glad it's there. Wish it happened more often, in fact. After all - it was one page out of six million plus...

It's sickening that the first page is almost nothing but porn links.

Of course, I didn't think of this - did you turn off Google filtering first? I rarely turn it on, as it used to filter out a lot of Wiccan/Pagan search results.

 

[Glen.Nogami]

My understanding of the search engine situation was that google was allowed at all because they agreed to censor it. If they were to refuse to censor their product, my understanding was that china would simply block the entirety of google. So, the choice is some information, or much much less information. I can't really fault google for picking the first, particularly since the first is the way that they make money.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Simple one: preteen.



And I'm glad it's there. Wish it happened more often, in fact. After all - it was one page out of six million plus...

It's sickening that the first page is almost nothing but porn links.

Of course, I didn't think of this - did you turn off Google filtering first? I rarely turn it on, as it used to filter out a lot of Wiccan/Pagan search results.

I have never messed with turning it on or off, and the preteen search worked.

And the first page did not seem to have much if anything in the way or porn except for one about russian models. Nothing obviously sexual.

I changed around with filtering and did not get any noticeable change.

 

[ponderingturtle]

My understanding of the search engine situation was that google was allowed at all because they agreed to censor it. If they were to refuse to censor their product, my understanding was that china would simply block the entirety of google. So, the choice is some information, or much much less information. I can't really fault google for picking the first, particularly since the first is the way that they make money.

Also they do not censor the english version to the same extent as the chinese version as well.

 

[Z]

I have never messed with turning it on or off, and the preteen search worked.

And the first page did not seem to have much if anything in the way or porn except for one about russian models. Nothing obviously sexual.

I changed around with filtering and did not get any noticeable change.

That is weird... I get eight pages which link to pornographic material. None of it has anything to do with the keyword, but they've planted the keyword to attract hits, I guess.. or something...

The first one is clean, then two porn, then Wikipedia, then another five porn, then some clean preteen fun sites, Preteen alliance, two more porn, and a Preteen modelling site (which could be a porn site, if the Federal case in Florida works out)...

Wonder why we're getting different results?

And this notice at the bottom:

In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org.

 

[ponderingturtle]

That is weird... I get eight pages which link to pornographic material. None of it has anything to do with the keyword, but they've planted the keyword to attract hits, I guess.. or something...

The first one is clean, then two porn, then Wikipedia, then another five porn, then some clean preteen fun sites, Preteen alliance, two more porn, and a Preteen modelling site (which could be a porn site, if the Federal case in Florida works out)...

Odd, I got 1 modeling cite and the rest seemed to be mostly on the up and up targeted at preteens.

Wonder why we're getting different results?

No idea

And this notice at the bottom:

In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org.

That I did get also.

I just find it weird that I was being concidered and upstanding moral person, because I was not looking for bomb making instructions of kiddy porn. As I pointed out you can get into areas concidered obsenity on film and illegal in many areas and not get any blocked sites on google.