Slashdot Mirror


The Googlewashing Of Our Language

KIondike writes "The Register talks about how a term ("Second Superpower") coined by the anti-war culture suddenly got radically neutered and altered by a weblog that a lot of people link to. Searching for the term on Google now brings up his blog and other people talking about his blog for the first several entries. Can Google's power to give information to the people be misused and perverted? This only took 42 days." First the widespread usage of "googling" to mean web searching, and now this.

8 of 512 comments (clear)

  1. So is there freedom of speech or not??!! by univgeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    Okay, let me get this straight. One guy calls world public opinion a second superpower. Another guy calls informed netizens a second superpower a few days (weeks?) later. Now the Reg is upset that the first guy is not showing up on Google? What the f*** ??

    Does he have a right to come first on a google search? Maybe if more people linked to him, he would be first. How is this a conspiracy? Is there any evidence that Google actively did this? If they are so pissed about it, may be they should start a link campaign, or propagate their version of the "second superpower" more...

    --
    All bow to his Noodliness!! His Noodle Appendage has touched me!
  2. How DARE they use Free Speech against liberals??? by Nova+Express · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That seems to be what the entire article amounts to: "Gosh, we were trying to create this "meme" that large global gatherings of communists, students, and people without jobs were some mysterious force known as a 'Second Superpower,' and then someone went off and used those words in an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WAY without asking our permition! It's not fair not fair not fair! How DARE they used free speech differently than we do?"

    This is news? (I know, it's a slashdot story, so it has no requirement to even resemble news.) Whatever happened to "the cure for speech you disagree with is more speech"? It's not like anyone has a copyright on a silly phrase like "Second Superpower." Get a grip already...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  3. Re:I love the google* words. by Com2Kid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • I already have to include -this and -that all the time to get rid of the common junk that I *don't* need to search for.


    You think that is bad? You must not remember the web around 96 or so. . . .

    IIIIICK!!!

    HUUUGE ass searches. Search Engines has basic introductory lessons to Boolean Logic, almost necessary just so users could find something

    It

    was not

    pretty.

    And when the first web based forums started showing up (in all their slow loading CGI glory), search results got completely destroyed almost over night.

    (thankfully more and more people began to take notice of robots.txt . . . . )
  4. Re:I love the google* words. by bughunter · · Score: 5, Funny
    Googlewhacking, Googlewashing, Googling, what else are there?

    How about these?

    Googlingering - wasting time, usu. at work, performing Google searches on random or unimportant subjects unrelated to one's occupation.

    Googlewanking - One-handed Googling, usu. when performing Google searches for pr0n or special interest advocacy.

    Googlevision - a type of retinopathy caused by excessive Googlewanking.

    Googlehacking - manipulating the process by which Pagerank(TM) is assigned in order to move your listing to the top of Google search results.

    Googooling - using the influence of your weblog circle to increase the Pagerank(TM) of infantile web pages and opinions.

    Googlesmacking - similar to Googlehacking but done with the intent of overwhelming the target server to the point of incapacitation. See also "slashdotting."

    Googolplexing - successfully receiving a Google search link as the top result of a Google search.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
  5. PageRank != Democratic, is the point! by flaneur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree with some posters claiming that the Register article isn't the best example...like many, I think the two meanings of "Second Superpower" don't seem that different, and both seem productive.

    But to focus on that alone is to completely miss the point of the article! What's much more interesting are the claims it makes about PageRank. It makes the case that bloggers only make up 4% of the web-surfing population, which might be a BIT low but sounds right to me. THEN they point out that because of how PageRank works with its distributed scores, all it takes is for 10-20 "A-List Bloggers" (ie. a very small fraction of an already small 4%) to link to something to catapult it to the very top of a Google search. We all use Google, so we know how important this is.

    The point, then? PageRank claims to be democratic, yet the article demonstrates that 20 or so people can effectively dictate the order of search results for certain terms. It's not a conspiracy...yet. Certainly worth noting, however!

  6. Re:Google works.. by PickaBooga · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Imagine if you typed "freedom of expression" in Google, and instead of articles about protecting speech that governments want to suppress, the first 50 hits were articles about AT&T's wireless service, back when they were using the slogan 'Freedom of Expression'.

    The point is an important idea got replaced with a completely banal phrase. And it only took a few bloggers to decide that they liked the banal phrase better than the important idea.

    The danger is that the phrase loses all meaning. So you might march under the banner 'Freedom of Expression', and all the passersby will think you are complaining about your cell phone reception.

  7. Fourty-two... by AnyoneEB · · Score: 5, Funny
    42 Days
    Orwell would be amused, indeed.
    Orwell would be amused? What about Douglas Adams? ;)
    --
    Centralization breaks the internet.
  8. Re:Am I the only one... by John+Ineson · · Score: 5, Informative
    First definition: large crowds of booted skinheads and homeless "alternative lifestyle" (eg alcholic and heavy drug abusing) ex-punks with spiderweb tattoos, on the rampage, smashing in storefront windows, defacing public monuments and lobbing half-bricks at the riot police."

    Catchy rhetoric, but ignorant of the facts. Britain has a population of around 60 million. On the 15th of February around a million of us were not only against the war, but felt so strongly that we spent our free time and money making our way to London to protest.

    There was no violence, no vandalism, just a monumental expression of public opinion. Young and old; families and people in suits outnumbering the dreadlocked and tie-died. It was the biggest political protest in this country, to date, and similar events happened in cities across the globe. Very few saw violence instigated by the protesters, because -- like myself -- the majority were totally unlike the provocative stereotypes you invoke.

    The very thing that makes these people a superpower is that they are not just extremists, rather a vast number of responsible, everyday people who will not support military agression without international consensus, especially where it promises numerous economic and political rewards to the participants.