Slashdot Mirror
Google Apologizes For "Michelle Obama" Results
theodp writes "CNN reports that for most of the past week, when someone did a Google image search for 'Michelle Obama,' one of the first images that came up was a picture of the First Lady altered to resemble a monkey. After being hit with a firestorm of criticism over the episode, Google first banned the site that posted the photo, saying it could spread malware. Then, when the image appeared on another site, Google displayed the photo in its search results, but displayed an apologetic Google ad above it. On Wednesday morning, the racially offensive image appeared to have been removed from any Google Image searches for 'Michelle Obama.' Google officials could not immediately be reached for comment."
Update — 15:38 GMT by SS: A reader pointed out that this article from the Guardian says the image was de-listed simply because it was removed from the blog where it was hosted rather than by any "deliberate" action from Google.
At the moment it suggests searching for "Michelle Obama monkey" when you search for "Michelle Obama"
Personally, I think that's an astonishingly good suggestion. Well done Google!
In the past, numerous artists have drawn caricatures of numerous politicians, and no one apologized for the caricatures.
In much the same way, the media has ignored the racist voting pattern by African-Americans in favor of Barack Hussein Obama. Allow me to explain.
During the election, about 95% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin. See the exit-polling data by CNN.
Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc. These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against Whites (and other non-Black folks). Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is Hispanic or Asian. So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern. Only about 65% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama. In other words, a maximum of 65% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable. (A maximum of 65% for McCain is okay. So, European-American support at 55% for McCain is well below this threshold and, hence, is not racist.)
If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65% of them would have supported Obama. At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.
At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals. That claim is an outright lie. Look at the exit-polling data for the Democratic primaries. Consider the case of North Carolina. Again, about 95% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton. Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical. Yet, 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton. Why? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.
Here is the bottom line. Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America. He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.
African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100% acceptable. Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior. Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color. Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American. You need not defend your actions in any way. Voting on the basis of skin color is quite acceptable by today's moral standard.
Did they remove the images - I do a GIS and there are a ton of pictures of Obama's wife where she looks like a monkey.
Yep this yer typical "nigger" logic. OMG once I was oppressed therefor now I can do and say what the oppressers once did to me.
anti-hate-speech laws are immoral.
Sorry, no. There are laws against violence, and this is a good thing, don't you think? Hate-speech is verbal violence and thus there must be laws against it.
Laws of course need to be well-balanced, restrict only the minimum that needs to be restricted to get the wanted result.
Google have used their power to take an active part in censorship, both in this case and in plenty of cases before.
Refusing to listen to someone who is talking is not censorship. Google just stopped broadcasting a soapbox-speech to the world. The soapbox still is there and the person on it still can express hirs opinion freely. That is not censorship.
You know, the president of the United States of America - the single most powerful human being on the planet - is a nigger. So, either the cotton-picker in question has godlike talents, or racism is no longer a significant factor in how high the blackulas can rise. But even if this particular liquorice-face is the single exception to the rule, and all other third-degree burn victims are cruelly oppressed by the Man, the fact sill remains that the monkey-girl is his wife, and is thus unlike to be among those victims.
Political leaders are legitimate targets for ridicule, and crying "Help, I'm being oppressed!" when you are The (Wo)Man is just plain ridiculous. And racism itself is pretty much as dead as it'll ever be, so stop this politically correct crap already, or be prepared for the counterreaction.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
No matter what your opinion of obama or the picture it falls under the freedom of speech clause of the Constitution. I may have to read and listen to liberal global warming BS, but i do not complain about their right to open their out and spew it, just about the junk science. I read tons of post about censorship in China well where are those same voices now?
Now, how many times has /.done the same without us even knowing?? Back when /. first started I thought it was completely above board in the past several year you do see a distinct left sided view being promoted.
Shut the fuck up, hippie. You wouldn't know what real racism is if it punched you in the face.
Now scram.
Oh, just stop it. Obama was by far the best candidate, and should have gotten 70% of the total vote if the election was based on merit. The fact that so many white people preferred to vote for a decrepit corrupt old fool, part of a mafia that had already ruined the country and broken the middle class... out of fear for a "black" president? that is racism.
Obama, to remind the fools here, is mixed blood, like everyone else on the planet. Race is a theory based on a lie. Skin color is a cosmetic.
Maybe the idea that African Americans just voted more sensibly is so shocking that you have to turn this into "racism"?
Go. Away.