Slashdot Mirror
Google Under Fire Over Racist Blogs
AcidAUS writes "Google is being accused of refusing to remove racist blogs targeting minority groups in Australia. Google, whose corporate motto is "don't be evil", says it will take the blogs in question offline only if ordered to do so by a court."
Are U crazy? The evil of censorship can be easily countered: There is NO evil in censorship according to our esteemed Attorney General. The COPA is meant to save the children and if it results in censorship so be it.
I read in the book Presidential Anectodes an incident about a US president and a European Prince visiting the prez: The papers, especially one specific editor was vitriolic about his anger and spewed venom in his paper against the Prez (venom that today would land him straight in Gitmo). The European prince was surprised and asked the Prez: "How do you tolerate such lies? Why don't you imprison him to shut him off?"
To which the Prez replied: "That my prince is his birthright: given under our constitution which i have sworn to uphold. As long as no blood is shed, he can write all he wants, and i won't lift a finger to harm him."
Fast forward today, we find editors sued and threatened with PATRIOT and other acts for pointing out illegal acts by prez (acts that surely would have resulted in impeachment in 1970s).
Atleast Google is standing up....
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
It's about as ridiculous as hating someone for the OS they choose to run ...
Public hate speech has no more protection under freedom of speech laws (or their analogue) than shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater. That is, if what you are saying is designed to forcibly infringe upon the rights of others, it should not be guarded. However, these weblogs are not similar to the aforementioned example in that nobody is being unwillfully subjected to their messages. Is that definitive enough to determine that these weblogs should not be removed?
Why bother.
"And still humanity doesn't grow up ... racism is so ridiculous."
Racism takes many, many forms. Seeing a black man and thinking "He's black" even momentarily is racism to some because comparatively most don't see a male WASP and think "He's white." A white government worker going door to door in a predominately white suburban neighborhood who blurts out "Oh, you speak English very well!" when she comes across an old Asian woman who speaks with an accent is rascist to some. Both situations, though, are without malice although one or the other can still be insulting.
In any case, censorship of any speech, even hate speech, is worse. Censorship is akin to sanctioned ignorance as it blocks access to information. I'd rather not be ignorant of the hate that remains in the world, as that indicates to me that there is still work to be done. If you believe a non-rascist world is the end goal (I don't, I simply believe in a fair system for all), how do you intend to achieve it by sticking your head in the sand? I would even argue censorship allows those groups to hide more effectively, as groups being silent for an extended period of time is often quite hard.
Further, hate information is rather critical to survival in some situations. I'm from PA. I like to know that there are hate groups local to the area and who come down from the NYC area to hang out.
I also use the Internet a heck of a lot; knowing that hate groups like to use the Internet means to me not that the Internet needs to be censored or that the Internet is causing racism, but that the underlying factors of racism were there before. Without the Internet and the prosperity of hate forums and groups, I was ignorant that it was as widespread as it is in this modern day. If you had censored that information, I wouldn't know. Plus, a simple statement--I like to know what my enemies are thinking, not be ignorant of the hate that remains in the world.
As a counterpoint, not in either of the places I've lived it's not. Melbourne and a small country town. I've found neither of these places to be racist at all, and in fact when people
:P
start with the racist crap, others tend to jump on them. (re: Gary Anderson)
Ah, but then again, neither Melbourne or Kerang are anywhere near Sydney
Just like in the Faurisson affair, where Chomsky wrote the following:
Faurisson's conclusions are diametrically opposed to views I hold and have frequently expressed in print (for example, in my book Peace in the Middle East, where I describe the Holocaust as "the most fantastic outburst of collective insanity in human history"). But it is elementary that freedom of expression (including academic freedom) is not to be restricted to views of which one approves, and that it is precisely in the case of views that are almost universally despised and condemned that this right must be most vigorously defended. It is easy enough to defend those who need no defense or to join in unanimous (and often justified) condemnation of a violation of civil rights by some official enemy.
Google is right, submitter is wrong for attempting to start a flame war. 'Nuff said.
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
IMO if "do no evil" is to be more then a clevert piece of marketting it does need to mean more then "do nothing illegal" and does need the owners of Google to enforce it regardless of the law.
While I'm not a supporter of Neo Nazi goose-steeping fanatic "lets kill all the Jews" type garbage I'm sick to goddamn death with all the whining about "rascism" that goes on these days, usually from some mooching group that wants a free ride and no criticism.
Fact: The Cronulla Riots had nothing to do with a rascist undercurrent in OZ, they had everything to do with Muslim minority groups who seem to think they can act here like animals and no-one can do anything to stop them.
Fact: Most people aren't "rascist" per se, they just object to uncivilised, uncouth, barbaric behaviour exhibited by certain minority groups...you know the ones, don't you guys? If you're in the US, or Norway, or the UK or Sweden or France....you know who I'm talking about......don't you ?
Fact: I'm sick to death of the Lefty Thought Police who jump up and down every time something gets into the public domain that doesn't fit in with their Utopian dreamworld.....
Fact: One in five South Africans males are rapists.
Fact: One in three Swazilanders are HIV positive.
Fact: Imams and Mullahs preach hatred towards Westerners and women every day without censure, they even lock their women up, when they're not genitally mutilating them
Fact: These people are coming from shitholes of their own creation...stop with the Colonial Legacy whining...that was years ago, get over it. Mugabe is the absolute poster child of that one!
Fact: If you just act like a decent human being and fit into the society you're living in then most people will treat you fine...start acting like a sub human raping animal and see what happens to you...
Fact: What the HELL is going on with US when we tolerate whole areas of OUR cities and countries becoming no-go zones for US ?!?!?!?!!?! We all know what I'm talking about...the areas full of brown people..the slums...the shitholes....whole areas of major cities being over-run. Don't give me the crap about diversity and wonderful new spices....if you're coming over to live then at least don't screw it up for everyone already here...
Tell me...truly...how does it feel to know that parts of LA or Paris or Amsterdam are now no-go..they're not yours anymore?
Do the burning cars keep you warm at night?
Mod me troll, I don't care...I'm just saying what most people believe deep down, every thinks it but no-one will admit to it.
Thank god some people are starting to wake up..look at the Netherlands starting to clamp down for example....how long until Britain is Sharia ?????
Oh, I'm in OZ btw and you probably live next to me, I'm just an ordinary guy who works hard, pays his taxes, is nice and friendly and stays out of trouble.....not some cliche neo-nazi white supremacist (as I can just see the "Don't listen to him, we're not like that here really" type posts that are bound to folow....NEWSFLASH---> es we are!!).
Interesting to see this story just after the "where would you live in the world" story. Ever wondered why it's easier to go work/live in the EU if you're from the US or Canada or Australia???....because we're white and not trouble!
Indeed, this is an important distinction which many people today could do with learning. A worrying example of people not making this distinction is the British Government and it's religious hatred laws which seem to equate a dislike of religion, which is a choice made by individuals, and racism which is not something you have any choice in. E.g. you can choose to be a muslim, christian, whatever but you can't choose to be born either black or white. Many muslims pressure groups also seem to not understand this distinction when they equate hatred of their religious choices as being racism.
If the article is correct and the blogs themselves are breaking the terms, then shouldn't google close them down?
Does it matter whether somebody is a serial telltale with an agenda or not if the end result is the same?
liqbase
"Real education"? Education is never free from bias. There will always be disagreement about what "real education" should include. It can't be defined in terms of results, either, because there's also no universal agreement about what humanity would be like if it were to grow.
We had a few websites at my hosting company with anti-semetic and other material on them (before blogging was around). The customers were all in Germany or Austria.
Strange how one of America's most prized exports seems to be freedom of speech.
You know, I am getting tired of people throwing the "don't be evil" phrase in their face all the time. It is old, tiring, and played out so many times in the wrong way.
I don't like racism, but in our country -and google is based in our country- our laws let people spew whatever trash they want to trash as long as it doesn't cause harm....and while racism may infuriate me, and hurt people's feelings - it does not cause actual harm (yes someone will argue it teaches young people to do stupid things, but the harm came from the young kids).
All in all, Google is correct for letting people have their free speech.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
>> Let's have the courts sort it out
The entire "west" is being turned into some godawful mixture of nanny state and police state precisely because of the influence of courts, judges, and lawyers.
The last thing we need is courts adding even more mountains of red tape and restrictions on communication.
Leave the courts to deal with actual physical events only, not with the ramblings of morons who are easily countered by reasoned argument.
This is a no brainer in my book, but apparently not in everyones. Making it difficult or illegal to discuss racisim certainly doesn't remove it.
The best strategy is to create an environment where being a racist is 'uncool' (for lack of a better word). This is one arena where the rest of world can, I think, learn quite a bit from the United States. Although the U.S. still has a huge racial problem, it has improved vastly since 1950. Maybe it's getting worse again under the new administration, I don't know. Anyone still in the U.S. have a comment about that?
In the U.S. you can spout whatever racial crap you want to. Free speech isn't attacked. Rather, the laws address concrete areas where racism directly affects minorities. If you are at home with your buddies, or writing a blog, you can call blacks niggers and the law won't do anything about it. Do it in the workplace, where it could bother a co-worker though, and bam, down comes the stick. Not a bad strategy.
Even that is subject to abuse though. For example a teacher suffered http://www.jacobsen.no/anders/blog/archives/2002/0 9/03/american_political_correctness_the_word_nigga rdly.html for teaching her children the word 'niggardly'.
Say somone writes a blog where they critisize the administration for censoring racist blogs. It wouldn't be outside of the realm of possiblity for this to be taken down for being pro-racist as well.
I think the best example of censorship failing is modern Germany, where right wing, pseudo neo-nazism http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spie gel/0,1518,357628,00.html (it isn't as bad as it sounds, but it's creepy enough) is getting trendier in Germany. It's become cool because it's anti establishment. As soon as you start censoring something, a large population is going to get curious about it. If racism is really an inferior point of view (and I believe it is), then it will lose out in the marketplace of ideas.
It's like Noam Chomsky says, freedom of speech means freedom to say things we don't like to hear. Even Stalin gave people the freedom to say things he liked to hear. It's our tolerance for unpleasant ideas that measures the degree to which we have freedom of speech.
Since you were both drunk, if she was on top, is she the one guilty of rape?
If your BAC was 0.20 and hers was 0.18, then you were more incapacitated than she was. Is she guilty of rape?
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
Noam Chomsky correctly put it (paraphrasing): You are either for free speech or you are against it. There is no meaningful middle ground. Everyone is for free speech that they agree with. Even Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels agreed with that. The meaningful test is whether you are for speech that you disagree with. Blogger Brian Stokes wants to remove racist blogs. Therefore he is against free speech that he disagrees with; he is against free speech.
... giving the bloggers enough rope to hang themselves. If their opinions are so poisonous, they should be publicly aired so that everyone can see for themselves how pathetic and disgusting they truly are.
Should Google honor his wishes? Clearly they have a right and a reason not to. If you claim to be for free speech you must support their freedom to keep the blogs.
There is a simple rationale why the basic right of free speech has a public benefit in this case