Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Under Fire Over Racist Blogs

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the dreamtime-racism dept.

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."

7 of 567 comments (clear)

  1. I agree with Chomsky by farker+haiku · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!
  2. Re:Subject by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How do you want to objectively define "evil" if not by the law?
    How I define it isn't important. What is important is what those who made the motto "official" (is it?) and set their other policies by it feel is and isn't evil. Now if they think following the law at all times is "doing no evil" that's fine. At least they're not hypocritical (hardly a revolutionary ideal though for a business, although yes many do manage to break the law) and are consistent within their own morals. However I'd personally find such people's morals reprehensible as it would mean that they would have no problem turning Jews into the Nazis that ran Germany in the 1940s, but hey. At least they would be acting moral by their own morals.

    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.
  3. Re:racism by CmdrGravy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  4. Re:greater or lesser evil by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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 :: faster than paper
  5. Re:racism by Rostin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "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.

  6. "don't be evil" by AviLazar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  7. Re:greater or lesser evil by indifferent+children · · Score: 3, Interesting
    She says: she was too drunk to give informed consent.

    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