Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Need For Search Neutrality

Posted by samzenpus on from the fair-and-balanced dept.

wilsone8 writes "The New York Times includes an op-ed today arguing for Search Neutrality: 'Today, search engines like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft's new Bing have become the Internet's gatekeepers, and the crucial role they play in directing users to Web sites means they are now as essential a component of its infrastructure as the physical network itself. The F.C.C. needs to look beyond network neutrality and include search neutrality: the principle that search engines should have no editorial policies other than that their results be comprehensive, impartial and based solely on relevance.'"

3 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. the media has never been neutral by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Troll

    for example, the idea that right wing media versus left wing media is a new development, and in the past the media was neutral is downright laughable. look up "yellow journalism". point being: bias in media will never go away, and you simply should learn to develop a good bullshit meter

    therefore, in the future, i fully expect search engines to develop a subtle or not so subtle bias. not that they don't have it already, just that this becomes part of their identity and common wisdom

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  2. Re:Why?? by michaelmalak · · Score: 0, Troll

    Lastly, there is NOTHING wrong with a biased search engine as long as the people using it understand the bias. Business, environmental, left wing, right wing, socialist, communist, capitalist and what-ever-ists might like to have a search engine that gives them results according to their political views.

    Exactly. And it should be the FTC that regulates it, not the FCC. FDR created the FCC to censor political speech under the guise of allocating limited spectrum. Since the Internet is not restricted by limited spectrum, the facade has been thrown off and the FCC is only about censorship in relation to the Internet.

    As I've argued before here, bias is good, as long it is disclosed. It was the Progressive Era that ushered in "neutrality", as if there could ever be such a thing, which has only allowed biased views to masquerade as unbiased views.

    What is Google's bias? For starters, they should more prominently disclose their association with the federal government. I still remember Google censoring my AdWords in 2002 for "anti-GOP views" (at a time when Bush was leading the U.S. into a an unjust war).

  3. Re:Huh... by bonch · · Score: 0, Troll

    You need to understand that:

    1.) The New York Times is full of liberals.
    2.) Liberals love the idea of government control. It's the solution to absolutely everything.

    Now, on top of regulating internet traffic, they want governments controlling what you can search as well. Somehow, politicians are supposed to be less biased and corrupt than sysadmins.