Slashdot Mirror


How Google Searches Are Promoting Genocide Denial

merbs writes: If you use Google Turkey to search for "Ermeni Krm", which means "Armenian genocide" in Turkish, the first thing you'll see is a sponsored link to a website whose purpose is to deny there was any genocide at all. If you Google "Armenia genocide" in the U.S., you'll see the same thing. FactCheckArmenia.com may reflect Turkey's longstanding position that the Ottoman Empire's systematic effort to "relocate" and exterminate its Armenian population does not qualify as a genocide, but it certainly does not reflect the facts. The sponsored link to a credible-looking website risks confusing searchers about the true nature of the event. Worse, it threatens to poison a nascent willingness among Turkish citizens to recognize and discuss the horrors of its past.

216 comments

  1. It is an ad. by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I see ads, I ALWAYS assume they are false. Also: ads are influenced about your browsing history. I did not see it and I tried google on several countries. No ad.

    Next on /. I googled iPhone and saw an ad for Samsung. OMG,: google is evil.

    I am not a fan of Google, as they have way too much power, but I think this is just stoopid.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:It is an ad. by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever watch political ads sway an election or referendum? People are really stupid.

    2. Re:It is an ad. by itzly · · Score: 2

      Sure, but it's silly to blame Google for putting it there.

    3. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is exactly why compulsory voting is a farce.

    4. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The ads aren't just false, they're often dangerous. Search for a piece of software, such as VLC and the top results are poorly differentiated ads pointing to somewhere other than the official download site. From that alternate site will be a repackaged version that, at best will have an installer bundled with crapware. Quite probably loaded down with some sort of virus or backdoor for viruses. Next theing you know supermegawindowsantivirussepreme2015 is explaining to you that 32,485 threats have been detected and that the full version for $49.99 will be able to clean them. When you get the full version, it will explain how you can get all your now-encrypted files back for the low, low price of $2,000.

    5. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think YOU are stupid. powerful rhetoric can lead anyone into hellish rabbit holes.

      goebbels, lenin, robespierre, bush YOU NAME IT.

    6. Re:It is an ad. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Look: power doesn't care what you do to acquire and wield it.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    7. Re:It is an ad. by nbauman · · Score: 5, Informative

      So Turkish nationalists are buying Google adwords. What's the problem with that? It's an exercise of free speech (for a position that I disagree with).

      I have Armenian (and Greek) friends, so I know the basics. Armenians tell me about losing grandparents, aunts and uncles in 1915. This is of course the 100th anniversary. The personal tragedies are overwhelming, and if that wasn't enough, there is the further tragedy of destroying the Armenian and Greek communities and culture in Turkey, and the end of Ottoman tolerance.

      I realize there's a debate over the word "genocide." The official Turkish position is, "Let the historians decide." I'm not sure what good that does them. The New York Times leans towards "genocide." http://www.nytimes.com/ref/tim... There is some symbolism here that I can't follow too well.

      There is also a small, slowly growing movement among Turks to acknowledge the Armenian position. I don't know how long it will take. I'm not as optimistic as I used to be about world peace and reconciliation.

      But Google isn't doing anything wrong.

    8. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Google isn't doing anything wrong.

      Well, Google does plenty of things wrong, but maybe we don't skewer them for this one, eh? On the other hand... "That translates to a lot of users primed to happen across..." -- oh, don't do that to the English language....

    9. Re:It is an ad. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      but maybe we don't skewer them for [exercise of free speech]

      Good call.

    10. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      the funny thing about all this is that the term "genocide" was coined precisely to describe what the ottomans did to the Armenians. no kidding, look it up. the author of the term is known.

    11. Re:It is an ad. by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So Turkish nationalists are buying Google adwords. What's the problem with that? It's an exercise of free speech (for a position that I disagree with).

      I have Armenian (and Greek) friends, so I know the basics. Armenians tell me about losing grandparents, aunts and uncles in 1915. This is of course the 100th anniversary. The personal tragedies are overwhelming, and if that wasn't enough, there is the further tragedy of destroying the Armenian and Greek communities and culture in Turkey, and the end of Ottoman tolerance.

      I realize there's a debate over the word "genocide." The official Turkish position is, "Let the historians decide." I'm not sure what good that does them. The New York Times leans towards "genocide." http://www.nytimes.com/ref/tim... There is some symbolism here that I can't follow too well.

      There is also a small, slowly growing movement among Turks to acknowledge the Armenian position. I don't know how long it will take. I'm not as optimistic as I used to be about world peace and reconciliation.

      But Google isn't doing anything wrong.

      Two takes from this:

      Free speech, first and foremost, especially to the folks who disagree with me.

      Eyes wide open, a very close second, get your important information from as many sources as possible.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    12. Re:It is an ad. by oobayly · · Score: 1

      I've no problem with compulsory voting, providing you are allowed to spoil your ballot

    13. Re:It is an ad. by oobayly · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I had a script that used to I used to run whenever I found somebody trying to sell a rebadged package like Open/LibreOffice, GIMP, etc. It would simulate clicks on the offending advert via a list of proxies until that advert disappeared - generally they have a fairly low daily click allowance so that they don't get hit by large fees from google.

    14. Re:It is an ad. by stephanruby · · Score: 5, Informative

      The official Turkish position is, "Let the historians decide." I'm not sure what good that does them.

      Is that a new position? Or does Turkey like the Armenians better than the Kurds somehow?

      When Noam Chomsky wrote about the treatment of Kurdish people in Turkey, the position of the Turkish government was to prosecute Noam Chomsky's Turkish publisher.

    15. Re:It is an ad. by ranton · · Score: 1

      What ad?

      Google must have already fixed this issue because all I get is a Wikipedia page and then a few news articles talking about how various people are disappointed about how this topic is being treated by various officials.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    16. Re:It is an ad. by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but it originally referred to the extermination of the Jews about 25 years after Armenia.

    17. Re:It is an ad. by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is what is wrong with advertising on the internet. It's become too automated. All that's required to get your ad up on the internet is for you to put down the money. Nobody reviews the ad to see if it's for a legitimate product. Nobody checks that false claims aren't being made. And the websites wonder why people resort to using things like Adblock Plus. If they held ads to a higher standard, then they could demand more money for ads, and they would have a much smaller likelihood of people blocking them. With the current state of ads on the internet, I avoid them as much as possible. If they were high quality, less intrusive ads, I might start paying attention more.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    18. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fairness to the original poster, there were many (albeit a minority) who did not swallow the rhetoric in Nazi Germany. People, in the main, really are stupid.

    19. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, that was a funny - Bush?

    20. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody reviews the ad to see if it's for a legitimate product. Nobody checks that false claims aren't being made.

      Someone absolutely does review the ad, but they review it based on written policies which can be implemented fairly that the advertiser gets to see beforehand. They do not review it based on twitter politics, "outrage," scorched-earth agenda-pushing, or whether the ad serves the betterment of society according to social justice experts.

      I'm sorry your ancestors were brutally murdered. Would you like to buy an ad to advocate your view? Or you think you have enough outlets for it already, you just want to wield Google like a club to control the propaganda flowing toward Turks (but for good! not evil! so we should let you do it!)?

      This attitude is a well-understood and therefore tiresome danger. seems to get people "engaged" in news sites, though. The real ad here is TFA.

    21. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So false advertising is legal when it is on the Google platform

    22. Re:It is an ad. by matfud · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Lemkin was also a close relative of genocide victims, losing 49 relatives in the Holocaust. However, his work on defining genocide as a crime dates to 1933, and it was prompted by the Simele massacre in Iraq.[5]"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

    23. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what is wrong with advertising on the internet. It's become too automated. All that's required to get your ad up on the internet is for you to put down the money. Nobody reviews the ad to see if it's for a legitimate product. Nobody checks that false claims aren't being made. And the websites wonder why people resort to using things like Adblock Plus. If they held ads to a higher standard, then they could demand more money for ads, and they would have a much smaller likelihood of people blocking them. With the current state of ads on the internet, I avoid them as much as possible. If they were high quality, less intrusive ads, I might start paying attention more.

      Good news, the market has taken notice :) Programmatic ad marketplaces are taking big steps (and forgoing large profits) to ensure ad quality.

    24. Re:It is an ad. by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      You have no problem with compulsory voting, as long as you're not compelled to actually vote?

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    25. Re:It is an ad. by wired_parrot · · Score: 1

      So Turkish nationalists are buying Google adwords. What's the problem with that? It's an exercise of free speech (for a position that I disagree with)

      Free speech applies to your interactions with the government - it does not apply to a private company. If Google did not wish to publish an ad that may damage their brand and business, that would be their own decision to make. Print publications already have policies on what is acceptable advertising, and will readily reject any ads seen as offensive and racist. Ad space is always limited - there is no reason they have to publish this ad over another less offensive ad.

    26. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does apply with corporations being considered individuals. That said id still like to see one hang in texas.

    27. Re:It is an ad. by Solandri · · Score: 1

      All that's required to get your ad up on the internet is for you to put down the money. Nobody reviews the ad to see if it's for a legitimate product. Nobody checks that false claims aren't being made.

      I don't see the problem. It's an ad. It's obvious it's an ad. When I see an ad claiming something, my first thought is, "someone had to pay money to show this to me." If it's for a product, I can understand why you'd want to do that. If it's making a claim with no way for them to financially recoup the money they spent on the ad, that immediately destroys any credibility they have.

      And just because you're on Google (or the Internet) doesn't free you from having to think. YOU are supposed to review ads to see if they're a legitimate product before buying, check claims before believing they're true.

    28. Re:It is an ad. by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Free speech applies to your interactions with the government - it does not apply to a private company.

      Who says that?

      Free speech applies to private universities. Private universities usually have free speech, because college teachers demanded it and organized to get it.

      Free speech applies to private organizations. If I join a union, I should have free speech to criticize that union.

      Free speech is a right and principle. It applies everywhere. We should have free speech everywhere. We don't always have it. You only get free speech if you fight for it.

    29. Re:It is an ad. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You left something out.

      Nobody reviews the ad to see if it actively delivers malware. Except, I suppose, the people who put the malware in.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    30. Re:It is an ad. by sdoca · · Score: 1

      I am. If push comes to shove, most people will pick a candidate if it was mandatory to vote. It might make people give even a little thought to who they want making decisions that affect their lives. If they're really ambivalent, confused, frustrated, they have the option of spoiling their ballots. But, I suspect that will be a small minority. Instead, I think we'd actually see a better representation of what the people want.

    31. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was it Cheney ? Who hypnotized the foreign secretary in order to rant about "WMD" ?

      Whoever it was, "Bush" was Commander In Chief. He should have been disabled by CIA, FBI and NSA. For evident lying. They did nothing and were fucking cowards. Now they claim they knew and weren't heard.

    32. Re:It is an ad. by suutar · · Score: 1

      Rephrased a bit, he's fine with being forced to express an opinion as long as "I don't care" is an allowable opinion.

    33. Re:It is an ad. by suutar · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. I wonder if there's an app or a mod (seems like greasemonkey could probably do it if I knew how) to remove the sponsored stuff from google searches :)

    34. Re:It is an ad. by morphotomy · · Score: 1

      Forced relocations do not count as genocide just because somebody didn't build houses and bring food to them at their destination.

      So if I relocate you to the bottom of the ocean, its not murder just because I forgot to bring you oxygen. The ocean killed you, not me!

    35. Re: It is an ad. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      http://politics.slashdot.org/c...

      If Bush "lied" about WMD, than what did all these Democrats, including Bill Clinton do when they talked about WMD?

      The WMD were found, there were plenty of chemical weapons found and destroyed in Iraq, but people like you continue to spout off about it.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    36. Re: It is an ad. by MenThal · · Score: 1

      There needs to be two such options ; Any of the above (I don't care), and None of the above (they all suck).

      If the first gets a majority, the winner should be selected at random, with people being able to play a lottery betting on candidates.

      If the latter gets a majority, all the candidates are [CENSORED] on live television as new candidates are presented. This should help get both voting and ratings up. Or lead to anarchy. It's a toss up.

    37. Re:It is an ad. by flink · · Score: 1

      Free speech applies to your interactions with the government - it does not apply to a private company.

      Who says that?

      The first amendment says that. It prohibits the government from restraining speech or establishing a state religion ("..the government shall make no law..."). To the extent that other non-state actors are forced to respect the 1st amendment, it's usually because they are acting as agents of the government because a law delegates regulatory authority to them or because they are accepting public money to perform a service.

      Free speech applies to private universities. Private universities usually have free speech, because college teachers demanded it and organized to get it.

      Many if not most universities accept government subsidies, to a certain extent they are government actors and may have part of their funding tied to respecting civil rights.

      Free speech applies to private organizations. If I join a union, I should have free speech to criticize that union.

      Free speech is a right and principle. It applies everywhere. We should have free speech everywhere. We don't always have it. You only get free speech if you fight for it.

      And all of these organizations have the right to respond in any legal manner they want to in response to your speech. The union might kick you out (or not, there are a lot of other laws and regulations covering union behavior). Your employer might fire you if they don't like what you have to say. Google is free to decline to do business with you if they don't like the message of your ad.

      You might have free speech, but no one is obligated to facilitate the distribution of your speech unless they are operating as a common carrier (e.g. the phone company).

    38. Re: It is an ad. by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

      i think YOU are stupid. powerful rhetoric can lead anyone into hellish rabbit holes.

      goebbels, lenin, robespierre, bush YOU NAME IT.

      You are accusing George W Bush of powerful rhetoric ?

    39. Re: It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and what about all that yellowcake and the first warning being a mushroom cloud...crickets... yeah, shove your propaganda.

    40. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do some people not understand that "free speech" is not necessarily referring to the bill of rights and is instead referring to the bloody concept of free speech?

    41. Re:It is an ad. by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      How is this different from any other kind of ad? Do you think newspapers or billboard owners investigate all their clients to determine if their products are "legitimate"? How do you determine legitimacy? Should they probe all their clients' accounting and business practices to make sure they aren't doing anything shady? I imagine they'd be out of clients pretty fast. Moreover, why is this the responsibility of the advertising agency in the first place? There are already laws regarding false advertising that rightly put the blame on the organization that actually created the ad. Anyone running a false ad is opening themselves up to a lawsuit.

    42. Re:It is an ad. by rs79 · · Score: 1

      I watched the video.

      I have to say it does make a good case for the Turkish point of view.

      If it's non-factual it should be debunked.

      But you might want to have a look at it.

      I was, I admit, kinda surprised at it, it did not meed my assumptions at all and pointed out how little I knew.

      Go watch it and see what you think. Tne we can talk about it on an informed basis.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    43. Re:It is an ad. by rs79 · · Score: 1

      Did you look this up?

      The word was created in the 1940s decades after the Armenian thing. Please verify this for yourself.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    44. Re: It is an ad. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      WMD are not equivalent to just nuclear weapons, they include many weapon classifications. Yellow cake is pretty much useless for making nuclear weapons, it needs a considerable amount of processing, the type of processing we see happening in Iran interestingly enough.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    45. Re:It is an ad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA:

      The sponsored ad may be in violation of Google’s ad policy, which states that “we don't allow the promotion of products or services that are designed to enable dishonest behavior.” Denying a genocide seems to me to count as “dishonest behavior.” According to Google, “products or services that help users to mislead others” are forbidden. Google declined multiple requests for comment on this story.

    46. Re:It is an ad. by Paul+server+guy · · Score: 1

      The difference between billboard or magazine ads and software ads? Billboards and magazines can't directly write to your brain!

      Yet...

      (I loved Snow Crash!)

      --
      Your Moon, Your Mission, Get involved! http://www.openluna.org
  2. The alternative is... What, exactly? by Etcetera · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ban people with an opposing point of view? Google deciding intentionally what's "true" and "not true"? Only people with approved viewpoints get a chance to place ideas out there?

    Perhaps he author might want to take some time to Google "epistemically closure," followed a little later for some basic overviews of the history of mankind.

    1. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If we can have a right to be forgotten, we can have a right to be denied!

    2. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 1

      Ban historical revisionists from Google ads. Simple.

    3. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously:

      1) Educate people that adverts are misleading and pointless and should be blocked and ignored all the time. In short, until Google's business model fails entirely, the problem is still there;

      2) Educate people that the Google search results algorithm is automated and easily gamed, and that for anything of import, you shouldn't be starting with a generic search engine.

      But yes, always allow opposing speech, no matter how stupid, ignorant and bigoted. Censorship doesn't stop incorrect conclusions, and nothing will stop them entirely because people's agendas are always emotional - but education at least stops incorrect conclusions made on the basis of ignorance.

    4. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ban people with an opposing point of view? Google deciding intentionally what's "true" and "not true"? Only people with approved viewpoints get a chance to place ideas out there?

      "I hate Jews" is a point of view. "There was no Holocaust" is a flat-out lie. You are entitled to your own opinions and interpretations, but not your own facts. The latter makes you wilfully insane.

      And frankly, Turkey is being a moron here. They could simply ignore all this, it happened 100 years ago after all. Or they could issue an official apology. They could even frame the Armenians as nasty people who had it coming, evil as such approach might be. But instead they pick the one strategy that has no chance of success whatsoever: pretending nothing ever happened. It's enough to make one question whether someone in Turkey wishes to ride a national persecution complex to power.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    5. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's enough to make one question whether someone in Turkey wishes to ride a national persecution complex to power.

      Why not it's working fuckin great for Hamas...

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    6. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Cytotoxic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm pretty shocked how quickly people jump to censoring ideas they don't agree with in this society. The irony of so many people on a public forum like Slashdot advocating for complete censorship of speech they find distasteful or wrong is thick. I would say there is a new mood to suppress opposing ideas, but I think history shows that there is nothing really new about it. Still, The Onion covered this sentiment pretty thoroughly the other day.

      Trescott University president Kevin Abrams confirmed Monday that the school encourages a lively exchange of one idea. “As an institution of higher learning, we recognize that it’s inevitable that certain contentious topics will come up from time to time, and when they do, we want to create an atmosphere where both students and faculty feel comfortable voicing a single homogeneous opinion,”

    7. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by houghi · · Score: 1

      What about "There is no God" or "There is a God".

      Where do you draw the line?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    8. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      Mostly "Turks" are of Armenian and Greek ancestry, their ancestors being Armenians and Greeks converted to Turkish culture, either voluntarily using economic incentives or enslaved in young age and grown as Turks. So any Armenians and Greeks that don't want to be Turks are considered existential threat by Turkish nationalists..

    9. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by TheRhinoplast · · Score: 3, Funny

      Where the subject matter is not of a measurable or falsifiable nature, Google would have a third category, which flags pages with "Who gives a shit?".

    10. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      any proof of these claims ?

      iam seriously interested and i recognize they dont look much mongolian on average.

    11. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with posting a page of lies?

    12. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ban people with an opposing point of view? Google deciding intentionally what's "true" and "not true"? Only people with approved viewpoints get a chance to place ideas out there?

      Yes. That would be social justice. We just need to make sure that whomever decide truth from lies are angry minorities, otherwise it would be oppression.

    13. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by loonycyborg · · Score: 1
    14. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by itzly · · Score: 1

      Now all you have to do is provide a method to determine which ad constitutes historical revisionism.

    15. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      I think a great deal of the folks on slashdot could actually benefit from a class on that, is someone willing to do a seminar?

      I swear, the number of times we see censoring (but only of the actually bad stuff!) being advocated here...

    16. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Obviously its such fantasies as "Armenian Genocide" and "Tianenmen Square", duh. I have it on good authority from the countries involved, they would know.

    17. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by dargaud · · Score: 1

      Well, one of those two is obviously wrong since they are mutually exclusive. So, what of it ?

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    18. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The alternative is... What, exactly? ...Google deciding intentionally what's "true" and "not true"?

      Well, actually, that's already in the works:

      http://science.slashdot.org/story/15/03/01/213245/google-wants-to-rank-websites-based-on-facts-not-links

    19. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      '"I hate Jews" is a point of view. "There was no Holocaust" is a flat-out lie. You are entitled to your own opinions and interpretations, but not your own facts. The latter makes you wilfully insane.'

      It's easy to draw a line, point at two examples on far sides, and say "see, it's really very simple", but there are absolutely situations where it's going to fall close enough to that line that it's at best a question for strong debate, at worst something with no mutally agreeable answer. To suggest Google should *always* arbitrate these issues and decide which side of the line they fall on, because it's *always* clearcut, is completely unrealistic... And this is just because of the ethical issues it would raise, quite aside from the logistics involved in vetting every ad that crosses their servers.

    20. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thanks. that makes sense when looking at turkish faces.

      also fascinating how the mongols essentially imposed language and ideology.

    21. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      What does it have to do with Mongols? You mean that original invaders were of mongoloid phenotype? Nobody ever cared about that at that time. Islam vs Christianity mattered a lot more. And whole concept of nationality didn't even exist. Just some powerful warlord conquered Anatolia from Byzantine and made it his property. Was he mongoloid of Turkish origin? Nobody cared.

    22. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fact: there were 22 million Russians who died in World War 2 for the 6 million jews that died.

    23. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the funny thing here in germany are the lefties who complain about nazism while praising mao.

      the government even tolerates lefty stormtroopers now.

      what a fucked world.

    24. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "And frankly, Turkey is being a moron here. They could simply ignore all this, it happened 100 years ago after all. Or they could issue an official apology."

      Trouble is, they'll have to pay reparations at some point in the future. So they're not being moronic, they're being practical...

    25. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They learned from the best - Israel.

    26. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That is complete nonsense.

      Armenians as the name implies are Arameic, that means they are Semites like Jews or other semitic tribes around the Levante.

      The greek are as the name implies: greeks. Perhaps you should look on a map and see where that "country" is, funnily it never really changed its place the last 3000 years.

      Now the Turkish are a conglomerate of Hunnes and other Mongolic tribes.

      If you look at those Nations and their languages you easily see: there is not even the remotest connection.

      The only thing where you have a point, if that is a point you want to make is: the area where now Turkey is, was settled by greeks and arameics/armenians as well as by invading "turk tribes" and hence was a multi culture "nation".

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    27. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      No they are not. They are Hittites and Arameans who converted to Hellenic culture.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    28. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      "Fact" can be something of a slippery concept, especially when it happened a hundred years ago on the other side of the world. Your opinion as to which claims are reliable may not be the same as another's.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    29. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It all comes down to a question of terms, and since Google uses language to do its thing terms are all-important. Depending on how one defines God, either answer is true, and given the convoluted way in which holocaust deniers interpret the holocaust it is no surprise how they reach their idiotic conclusions (the rhetoric is quite twisted on both sides TBH).

      Unfortunately the meaning of terms doesn't get arbitrated with any real finality until the US Supreme Court tells you, at least in this country.

    30. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are entitled to your own opinions and interpretations, but not your own facts.

      Do you trust Google to decide what's really a fact? How about the government? How about the Turkish government?

    31. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which Holocaust do you speak of?

    32. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assume that language inheritance is genetic. It's not. In fact, genetic studies show that the OP is mostly correct. While the Turkish language is Asian, the Turkish gene pool is not.

    33. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And frankly, Turkey is being a moron here.

      Be glad dictators are morons, else we'd all be slaves to one or another.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    34. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      "I hate Jews" is a point of view.

      If a person says, "I hate X people", they're not expressing a point of view or an opinion, they are stating a fact (or perhaps stating something they want you to believe). If they say, "X people are fools", that is a point of view.

    35. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Some factual errors here.

      "Armenians as the name implies are Aramaic" (I've corrected your spelling too)

      Wrong. Armenia is the name used by non-Armenians to refer to the country. "Hayastan" as we call it, is named after Hayk, the patriarch of Armenians. Depending on your reference, you'll find that Armenia originates in reference to Hayk's descendent Aram (your mileage will vary).

      You might be confusing Armenians with the Arameans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arameans). Armenians predate (and coexisted with) the Arameans. Armenians aren't Arameans nor do they speak Aramaic. Armenian is an Indo-European language - it's predecessor is Proto-Indo-European.

    36. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are neither Hittites nor Arameans. They co-existed with Hittites. Use Google.

    37. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      The standard for free speech can't be whether or not a person believes what they're saying, otherwise we couldn't have religion, politics, or girlfriends.

    38. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you ask deniers of global warming or evolution, they'll tell you those are lies too. What's your solution when two sides are both confident that the other is full of lies? Are you really advocating a system of corporate control where corporations are the arbiters of what viewpoints are allowed on the Internet and which are not? Because if you are it is you who belong in prison, not some kooky Holocaust deniers. That is a belief I'm willing to kill other people over, and be killed myself.

    39. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ban people with an opposing point of view? Google deciding intentionally what's "true" and "not true"? Only people with approved viewpoints get a chance to place ideas out there?

      "I hate Jews" is a point of view. "There was no Holocaust" is a flat-out lie. You are entitled to your own opinions and interpretations, but not your own facts. The latter makes you wilfully insane.

      And frankly, Turkey is being a moron here. They could simply ignore all this, it happened 100 years ago after all. Or they could issue an official apology. They could even frame the Armenians as nasty people who had it coming, evil as such approach might be. But instead they pick the one strategy that has no chance of success whatsoever: pretending nothing ever happened. It's enough to make one question whether someone in Turkey wishes to ride a national persecution complex to power.

      It's about money. Once the accept their crimes then they will have to accept the validity of the land deed claims of the families of the Armenians, Druze, Kurds, Greeks and more recently Cypriots they have killed.

    40. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They learned from the best - Israel.

      To be fair, that people has had some recent re-education...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      The alternative is that people start demanding something be done about dangerous and misleading ads like "Viruses detected on your computer! Click here to install dangerous malware!". Or even ads that directly contain malware scripts and don't even require clicking. Basically, people have made ads distracting, misleading, privacy violating, and directly dangerous and people have no choice but to block them all.

      And before you complain that ad blockers take money away from poor websites, keep in mind that this was a suicide -- they forced our hand by making ads too terrible to allow.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    42. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the definition of a holocaust?

    43. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I don't think that censoring is what is expected here - they should be able to speak their mind on the matter. The problem is that the way Google as a platform is set up, they can buy the most prominent spot for their opinion, on top of everyone's else (unless that everyone has more money, I guess) - and that is questionable.

      Yes, I understand that Google is a private company and it's up to them to decide what messages they carry and in what fashion, generally speaking. However, when 90% of the people start with Google as the first place to search anything, I'm not sure that we can reasonably say so in practice.

    44. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of the Associated Press that's doing all the work in that situation.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    45. Re: The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They always say 'never again' when speaking of genocides but they never learn and keep doing it again every few years. We are due to get a other big one soon.

    46. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Even here, you can see niggers in campus asking 'reparation' for slavery on cardboard and hashtags.

      If only they attended history class, they would know that the white peoples are the one that ended slavery, at great expanse. No other race, culture or nation cared. Slavery was common practice everywhere. The white peoples saw it wrong first and try to force that view on every other cultures. Although many region of Africa, middle-east and Asia still practice slavery to this day. Buy yeah, let blame the white crackers because nigger gotta nig.

      Turkey is right to not admit any wrong. Because if you do, just once, the self hatred social justice entitlement culture that will follow will never end.

    47. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by rs79 · · Score: 1

      What if the video is accurate?

      Have you seen it?

      If not then yours is the fallacy of the argument from ignorance.

      Go watch it then we can talk.

      No question a lot of people died.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    48. Re:The alternative is... What, exactly? by rs79 · · Score: 1

      What is Turkey actually saying? What are the pesky details?

      Why don't you look at the video and tell me which parts are false.

      I've seen it. I was sorta surprised. If it's accurate (and I haven't checked all of it) then it does indeed raise a few questions.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
  3. Not searches. Ads. by Lumpio- · · Score: 2

    There's a difference. Learn to know it. And if you seriously can't tell the difference between a paid link and an actual search result, get AdBlock.

    1. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 2

      I think the issue is more that people who don't know better (probably the majority of people) will assume those ads at the top of the search results are just results, since they look very similar, just with a little yellow box that says "ad" under the main link. This box is easily overlooked by inattentional blindness if you're not looking to make sure you aren't looking at an ad.

      It's all very well telling people to learn the difference, but most people won't, and that's not just their problem, it's everyone's problem if liars can pay google to effectively come top of relevant searches, since we have to live with people who will be potentially operating under dangerous false assumptions.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    2. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Lumpio- · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if people who can't be bothered to tell the difference between an ad and a search results are smart enough to be relevant in the struggle against... wait what was this about again? Something that happened a 100 years ago and is irrelevant to pretty much everybody living today anyways?

    3. Re: Not searches. Ads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so in your view the sheeple must be protected by experts ?

      the rule of experts over the masses, where have i heard of this ?

      no, everybody needs to grow some balls and learn to recognize propaganda.

      wherever it comes from.

    4. Re:Not searches. Ads. by houghi · · Score: 2

      it's everyone's problem if advertisers can pay google to effectively come top of relevant searches, since we have to live with people who will be potentially operating under dangerous false assumptions.

      FTFY

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re: Not searches. Ads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      par example, we are currently fed with a shitload of corrosive marxist nonsense. the objective is to destroy the family and instead make people even more dependant on the state.

      it comes under the label of feminism, gender mainstreaming, inclusion and the like.

      atomize and rule is the motto.

    6. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      It's the general principle and how it could apply to any issue of concern, rather than this one example. And it's the number of people that would fall for this that makes them relevant. I don't think it's prudent to dismiss a large chunk of the population as not smart enough to be relevant. Some very un-smart people get into positions of power all the time. There are plenty of harmful myths that stay around even in the minds of people who are generally smart just because they have a plausible venue to be heard.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    7. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      very true

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    8. Re:Not searches. Ads. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      If you're worried about the bigger principle and the slippery slope, censorship is a far bigger worry than folks not telling the difference between an ad and a search.

    9. Re:Not searches. Ads. by camg188 · · Score: 1

      Adblock and other javascript blockers do not block the Google Search Sponsored Links. Sponsored links are embedded in the page html just like all the other links, although they are clearly marked with an "ad" icon.

    10. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Lumpio- · · Score: 1

      Ad blockers are not plain "JavaScript blockers" and they block plenty of ads that aren't inserted via JavaScript, so that's not a problem.

    11. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adblock is not a javascript blocker, it's a content filter and does, in fact, remove Sponsored Links from the Google search results page.

    12. Re:Not searches. Ads. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately it is not irrelevant for the decedents of the killed people.

      Armenians in Turkey are still suppressed. Many changed their armenian names to turkish names to "hide" at least on the surface. But as most are Christians, they obviously are not really "hidden".

      They get trouble in all legal affairs, like selling/buying a house etc. Trying to get a passport etc.

      The holocaust is also now 70 years ago ... do you consider it irrelevant in our times as well?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    13. Re:Not searches. Ads. by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      I'm using Adblock Plus in Firefox. With it enabled or disabled, I am not seeing the sponsored ads at the top of a Google search. No ads at all.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    14. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      Plenty of things are a bigger worry than plenty of other things. That doesn't necessarily make the lesser of any two worries an invalid concern.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    15. Re:Not searches. Ads. by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      careful, or you might summon him.

    16. Re:Not searches. Ads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if you can tell the difference, get AdBlock anyway.

  4. Ad-based business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The business model of ad-based internet commerce is bound to have "money talks".
    How loud and how visibly depends on the amount paid i guess..

  5. Native American Genocide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we call it that now?

    1. Re:Native American Genocide by zlives · · Score: 1

      its called casino deployment program

  6. ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Germany is illegal to deny the Jewish genocide... in Turkey is illegal to accept the Armenian's genocide!

    Every Armenian, with Greeks (who also suffered horribly), Assyrians, Kurds (who still can't teach their language in Turkish schools or publish/broadcast it), e.t.c., honors the 100 years from the Armenian genocide (about 1,5 millions victims), not only because we dislike Turks (o.k., we even hate them), but because forgetting about it will make us again victims: Hitler once said to his officials about the Jews "but who remembers the Armenians...".

    German almost torture themselves with their continues self-critic about their past because they don't want to repeat it (and even Jews accept that they have repent) - Turks... well, we Greeks know about them and take measures agaist the future they still plan for us.

    They still exist Armenian people who were alive when Turks genicide their families, so some of them could accept the apology of the Turks - but i doubt if ever happens from a nation that make it illegal to even mention the Armenian genocide (warning: you will go to jail if you mention it in Turkey - actually you may be non Turk, mention it outside Turkey, never visit Turkey, and still be convicted from the Turkish "justice"!).

    "... and lied like a Turk when he said it." - Mark Twain

    --
    Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    1. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it seems though that you greeks have learned a lot from the turks. in terms of lying. propaganda and outright murder.

      "europe" actually is a hellhole of violence, not a source of civilization.

      before you ask, i am german.

    2. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's legal to accept Armenian genocide in Turkey. Recently an advisor to the â minister Etyen Mahcupyan, himself of Armenian descent wrote in his daily column that it's an undeniable fact if we accept UN definition.

      Kurds are also able to teach their language, even the government have a Kurdish TV channel. (TRT 6)

      I didn't read the rest of your post since it looks you need a big update on Turkey.

    3. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      it seems though that you greeks have learned a lot from the turks. in terms of lying. propaganda and outright murder.

      "europe" actually is a hellhole of violence, not a source of civilization.

      before you ask, i am german.

      Unfortunatly we Greeks learned a lot from the Turks (from the fall of Constantinople and for almost 4 centuries after, we struggled to get liberated from them): for what you Germans usually accuse us rightly (evading taxes, misusing the state for personal advantages, e.t.c.) we Greeks use Turkish words (it's not that we don't have Greek words for that, we just know they are wrong and ashamed to use the Greek ones - actually for all such negative behaviour we use Turkish words!) - but "lying. propaganda and outright murder", why Sir?

      I understand that we Greeks are not in the level we should be based on our history (in Greece we tell between joking and being serious that to balance the negative influence of 4 centuries of Turkish occupation we should had let the -NaZi- Germany to occupy us for about a decade!), but i don't think we Greeks are known for "propaganda and murder" - maybe you are angry about our current Greece-Germany relation, and because of our debt to you (that i recognize), but remember this: Hitler took a forced loan from the occupied Greece, he repayed some of the -NaZi- Germany's debt back to Greece, then he was defeated. the non-Nazi Germany asked Greece to wait until Germany is rebuild for paying back the rest of the debt, then it asked Greece to wait more until the reunification of Germany, then... when the reunification of Germany happend, west Germany and east Germany did not signed a peace treaty between them only because that would had legaly force them to repay back to Greece the forced loan it took from Greece (the one Hitler payed normaly until his defeat!).

      We Greeks have many negative traits, but i think "propaganda and murder" are not among them Sir.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    4. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      it seems though that you greeks have learned a lot from the turks. in terms of lying. propaganda and outright murder.

      "europe" actually is a hellhole of violence, not a source of civilization.

      before you ask, i am german.

      Maybe, but it's one of the better hellholes on the planet.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    5. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's legal to accept Armenian genocide in Turkey.

      No it's not (even the Nobel prise winner Orhan Pamuk was prosecuted).

      Recently an advisor to the â minister Etyen Mahcupyan, himself of Armenian descent wrote in his daily column that it's an undeniable fact if we accept UN definition.

      He did not mentioned directly the Armenian genocide (and he was ceased as an advisor the next fucking day!).

      Kurds are also able to teach their language, even the government have a Kurdish TV channel. (TRT 6)

      No, they can NOT teach and broadcast their language (they do it only in nothern-easten Turkey, where they are the vast majority and the Turkish military can not force the Turkish laws - and for not "loosing face", the Turkish goverment says that it permits them to do it there experimentaly!)

      I didn't read the rest of your post since it looks you need a big update on Turkey.

      Your "updates" are false Sir (and i am very well updated about Turkey) - you may need to read the rest of my post, especialy the quote "... and lied like a Turk when he said it." (Mark Twain)

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    6. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by loonycyborg · · Score: 0

      We Greeks have many negative traits, but i think "propaganda and murder" are not among them Sir.

      "propaganda and murder" isn't a trait of a people, but tools of ruling elite, including some Byzantine(that is Greek who pretends to be Roman) emperors.

    7. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      We Greeks have many negative traits, but i think "propaganda and murder" are not among them Sir.

      "propaganda and murder" isn't a trait of a people, but tools of ruling elite, including some Byzantine(that is Greek who pretends to be Roman) emperors.

      Since the whole world knows that we Greeks are proud for our past i would not deny that the Byzantine Empire was "de facto" Greek actually (in the begining we called it "eastern Roman" because "de jure" we were under the Roman's authority, althrough the Romans themselves took pride to be Greeks... "roman arms conquered greek civilization, greek civilization conquered Rome" - or "una fatsa, una ratsa" as we Greeks -and Italians, as this is in Italian- say!).

      But the Byzantine (/Greek) Empire was certainly NOT known for "propaganda and murder" (which i would not refuse that may have happened in some -small- degree), and this is not the opinion of only the Greeks, but -in my knowledge- of most non-Greeks scholars also.

      By the way, "propaganda and murder" IS a trait of a people - not biological, but cultural.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    8. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1) The law that was used to prosecute Pamuk was repealed a few years ago. Today, there are quite a few public figures in Turkey who say what was done to the Ottoman Armenians qualifies as a genocide. They may not be popular but there is no legal basis to prosecute them (anymore).

      2) Mahcupyan clearly stated that what happened in 1915 fits the UN definition of a genocide.

      3) In addition to the regional privately-owned Kurdish TV channels, the state-owned broadcaster, TRT, has a Kurdish channel (TRT 6, as the previous poster wrote) that broadcasts to the whole country. The private Kurdish channels can broadcast to the whole country through the free-to-air satellite just like other regional and local channels to if it makes business sense for them, no legal restrictions.

      4) I think you meant "south-eastern" Turkey. It is legal for the last 4-5 years to teach Kurdish as a second-language in schools, open Kurdish language courses. There is at least one university that has a Kurdish language department.

    9. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a different German, have to say I'd find it much better for the relations if both sides could decide to leave the past in the past, it's only going to make finding a solution harder.
      Btw. about that loan part: there are quite a few people in Germany who think it is little enough money and clearly enough calculated that paying it might be the easiest thing to do. However if the German government thinks it won't solve anything but only move the issue to reparations (which you can with enough will calculate up to any value) it's understandable they see no point.
      I am btw in the (about 45% if I remember the statistics right) of Germans that do want to help Greece, even if it costs more money.
      But only if it's reasonably certain it'll actually help long-term and not just used to short-term prop up things in a way that can never hold! And that confidence unfortunately has not been increased by some of the strange actions of the new government (though I wouldn't blame anyone for voting for them unless they actually believed the promises - if people believed them it would be a sign that too little has changed among the voters).

    10. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      1) The law that was used to prosecute Pamuk was repealed a few years ago. Today, there are quite a few public figures in Turkey who say what was done to the Ottoman Armenians qualifies as a genocide. They may not be popular but there is no legal basis to prosecute them (anymore).

      The law still exists - it was "changed" because of E.U. pressure (when Turkey wanted to enter E.U.), but changed back (i admit it was not as harsh as before) when it was clear E.U. was interested in just a "connection" and not a full membership of Turkey. You still can NOT mention DIRECTLY the phrase "Armenian GENOCIDE" (and because it's so "unpopular", even if a law did not existed, you could not mention it publicly!).

      2) Mahcupyan clearly stated that what happened in 1915 fits the UN definition of a genocide.

      Clearly BUT NOT DIRECTLY (even while he is an Armenian) - and he was ceased the next day from his state position.

      3) In addition to the regional privately-owned Kurdish TV channels, the state-owned broadcaster, TRT, has a Kurdish channel (TRT 6, as the previous poster wrote) that broadcasts to the whole country. The private Kurdish channels can broadcast to the whole country through the free-to-air satellite just like other regional and local channels to if it makes business sense for them, no legal restrictions.

      The privately-owned Kurdish TV channels broadcast from the region where the Kurds are the vast majority and the Turkish military can not inforce the state's laws or via satelite (mostly from Germany). The TRT 6 channel is just the way of the Turkish state pretends it follows E.U. ethics so the relations would not stop.

      4) I think you meant "south-eastern" Turkey. It is legal for the last 4-5 years to teach Kurdish as a second-language in schools, open Kurdish language courses. There is at least one university that has a Kurdish language department.

      Yes, sorry... "north/east/south/west" is relative to a Greek like me because... the center of the world is Greece! But the only reason it is "legal" (in some parts of Turkey) the last 4 years (you understand that we are in the second millenium after Christ?) to teach the Kurdish language to Kurds is because a peace treaty with the Kurds was made (and they teached their language to their kids only because they resisted the Turkish army with guns...).

      I understand you may be a Turk - i don't want to insult you, and sorry for my tone, but we Greeks know a lot about the "Turkish way" of doing things, and the "Turkish way" of presenting reality. Anyway, i hope better days will come...

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    11. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      As a different German, have to say I'd find it much better for the relations if both sides could decide to leave the past in the past, it's only going to make finding a solution harder. Btw. about that loan part: there are quite a few people in Germany who think it is little enough money and clearly enough calculated that paying it might be the easiest thing to do. However if the German government thinks it won't solve anything but only move the issue to reparations (which you can with enough will calculate up to any value) it's understandable they see no point. I am btw in the (about 45% if I remember the statistics right) of Germans that do want to help Greece, even if it costs more money. But only if it's reasonably certain it'll actually help long-term and not just used to short-term prop up things in a way that can never hold! And that confidence unfortunately has not been increased by some of the strange actions of the new government (though I wouldn't blame anyone for voting for them unless they actually believed the promises - if people believed them it would be a sign that too little has changed among the voters).

      As i already mentioned to the other German, you Germans can rightly accuse us Greeks for many things (and believe it or not, almost all Greeks admited them, even before any German mentioned them) - but to accuse us as "dishonest" and try to teach us "pacta sunt servanda", when Hitler took a -forced- loan from Greece, repayed some of Germany's debt until the NaZi Germany was defeated, the German state asked Greece twice to wait for the rest of the debt to be payed back to Greece ((once for the reconstruction after WW2 and once more after the reunification of west and east Germany - and Greece was o.k. with that), but Germany finaly decided not to sign a peace treaty between east and west Germany just for avoiding legaly to repay its debt back to Greece... it's a litle too much my friend!

      You Germans are not standing in the higher than us Greeks ethical position to lecture Greeks about how the agreements between states stand regardless of goverments, when the honest German in this case is... Hitler! We Greeks recognize our sad state (of our state, and not only!), and -again, believe it or not- admire Germans - but when, instead of giving, we hear lectures from "barbarians" (when we Greeks built Parthenon, you were still hunging from trees - it's a joke... relax!)... something makes us a litle angry.

      By the way, i am one of those Greeks (who are the vast majority actually) believing that we should bring Germans to run our state!!! But please don't lecture us... please...

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    12. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by ladoga · · Score: 1, Informative

      "propaganda and murder" isn't a trait of a people, but tools of ruling elite, including some Byzantine(that is Greek who pretends to be Roman) emperors.

      Maybe you slept during the history class? Byzantine as a term was coined by Germans in the 1500s in an attempt to revise history as the Holy Roman Empire wanted to paint itself as successor of Rome. (It seems to have worked suprisingly well) Both "Byzantine Empire" and "Eastern Roman Empire" are terms created after 1453 (the fall of Constantinople).

      The Empire now called as "Byzantine" was called Imperium Romanum (Latin) or Basileia Rhomaion (Greek) and it's citizens were called Romans regardless of the language they spoke. It's the very same Roman Empire with uninterrupted line of Emperors from the time of Caesar and not "Greek who pretends to be Roman" as you falsely claim. During the 600s they changed the offical language from Latin to Greek (administration and army) as it was practical to do so since that was the lingua franca in most of the areas controlled by the Empire.

    13. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      By the way, "propaganda and murder" IS a trait of a people - not biological, but cultural.

      Uhh.. I think you better look up those words in a dictionary. No matter Greek or no all rulers tend to resort to them, some more, some less. Mapping it to some nationality traits is nonsense. The very notion of nationality is nonsense. All this is sophistry and waste of time.

    14. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

      You may make up as many excuses as you wish. But did it contain Rome? No. Did it speak Latin? No. There you are. As time went by Byzantine has changed both politically and culturally and at end of its days had no more claim of being Rome than Sultanate of Rum or orthodox Tsardom("Tsar" is from "Caesar") of Russia, "third Rome".

    15. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 0

      By the way, "propaganda and murder" IS a trait of a people - not biological, but cultural.

      Uhh.. I think you better look up those words in a dictionary. No matter Greek or no all rulers tend to resort to them, some more, some less. Mapping it to some nationality traits is nonsense. The very notion of nationality is nonsense. All this is sophistry and waste of time.

      I am a Greek (my nationality/ethnicity) - other Greeks are biologicaly and culturaly like me (to a great degree); and different from others, e.g., Chinese, both biologicaly and culturaly.

      If nationalities don't make sense to you, it does not mean they are nonsense, because they make sense to others - sophistry (a Greek word by the way!): " 1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning. 2. a false argument; sophism.".

      • "trait" - a distinguishing characteristic or quality, especially of one's personal nature: bad traits of character
      • "propaganda" - information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
      • "murder" - the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law

      source

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    16. Re: ... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      An uninterrupted line of emperors since Caesar? I assume you mean Augustus, since there was definitely a gap between the death of Julius Caesar and the ascension of Octavius as Augustus, and then, after they got rid of Nero, the "line" of Emperors was based heavily on who could proclaim themselves Emperor without being laughed at, with multiple Emperors common in disputed successions.

      Also, one later Emperor (Diocletian?) did split the Empire into east and west halves, each of which was supposed to have an Emperor and a deputy for (IIRC) twenty years, after which the Emperors would stand down, the deputies would become Emperor, and then they'd select new deputies. It lasted about as well as one would expect.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    17. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It seems that what you've "learned from Turks" first and foremost is extreme nationalism bordering on xenophobia. You say that you "hate Turks", and demand apology "from the Turks", and go on basically ranting about how Turks are such horrible people whom you will "take measures against".

    18. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      It seems that what you've "learned from Turks" first and foremost is extreme nationalism bordering on xenophobia.

      We Greeks know about extreme nationalism when Turks (and other barbarians - a Greek word!) were still hanging from trees, and thanks to our extreme nationalism we Greeks managed to civilize most barbarians - our extreme nationalism was NOT "xeno-phobic" (a Greek compound word, with the first part -"xeno"- meaning foreign, but also used for "hospitality" - Zeus is called "Xenios Zeus").

      You say that you "hate Turks",

      I wrote "[...] not only because we dislike Turks (o.k., we even hate them), but because [...]" for a reason you probably don't understand or pretend you don't - but even if i wrote that i/we hate Turks just because we hate them, why that would be "bad"? DO YOU KNOW WHAT TURKS DID TO MY FAMILY AND TO OTHER GREEKS? Do you demand to love them?

      and demand apology "from the Turks",

      I wrote "[...] They still exist Armenian people who were alive when Turks genicide their families, so some of them could accept the apology of the Turks [...]" as a "pray", while i am not an Armenian but Greek and this was about Armenians, but it's true that i would be happy with an apology from Turks to us Greeks - why you have a problem with apologies from people THAT DID HORRIBLE THINGS?

      and go on basically ranting about how Turks are such horrible people whom you will "take measures against".

      I wrote "German almost torture themselves with their continues self-critic about their past because they don't want to repeat it (and even Jews accept that they have repent) - Turks... well, we Greeks know about them and take measures agaist the future they still plan for us" because, yes, Turks are "horrible people" AND I PERSONALY (as any capable Greek does) take measures defending ourselves from Turks (here you can pay respect by standing at attention while hearing the names of the Greek heros that died -while i was also serving with them as a marine- when taking measures against the horrible Turks).

      Make no mistake boy: I, and most Greeks, know the Turks, and we are not willing to risk our selves and families just because you may get offended by our "nationalism".

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    19. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      We Greeks know about extreme nationalism when Turks (and other barbarians - a Greek word!) were still hanging from trees, and thanks to our extreme nationalism we Greeks managed to civilize most barbarians - our extreme nationalism was NOT "xeno-phobic" (a Greek compound word, with the first part -"xeno"- meaning foreign, but also used for "hospitality" - Zeus is called "Xenios Zeus").

      You're so proud of your claim (wrong, of course) to have invented hating other people. In this day and age, the civilized world calls people like you barbarians.

      But even if i wrote that i/we hate Turks just because we hate them, why that would be "bad"? DO YOU KNOW WHAT TURKS DID TO MY FAMILY AND TO OTHER GREEKS? Do you demand to love them?

      It's perfectly normal to hate the specific people who did it to your family. It's not normal to arbitrarily extend the target of your hate to an entire ethnicity or nationality.

      it's true that i would be happy with an apology from Turks to us Greeks - why you have a problem with apologies from people THAT DID HORRIBLE THINGS?

      Because vast majority of the Turks who live today participated in the Armenian genocide or Greek pogroms?

      An apology from Turkey as a state that considers itself the legal successor to the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey that carried out those atrocities - yes, that would be meaningful. But you cannot expect an individual Turk to apologize to you for something that some other Turks have carried out. There's no collective responsibility on account of one's ethnicity.

      If you disagree, I would like to hear your apology as a Greek on the matter of, say, Yalova Peninsula massacres?

      ecause, yes, Turks are "horrible people" AND I PERSONALY (as any capable Greek does) take measures defending ourselves from Turks

      Would you say that if it were possible to pre-emptively exterminate those horrible Turks to ensure that they never bother any Greeks or Armenians ever again (since you seem to believe that they will keep trying), it would be good to carry it out?

    20. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      We Greeks know about extreme nationalism when Turks (and other barbarians - a Greek word!) were still hanging from trees, and thanks to our extreme nationalism we Greeks managed to civilize most barbarians - our extreme nationalism was NOT "xeno-phobic" (a Greek compound word, with the first part -"xeno"- meaning foreign, but also used for "hospitality" - Zeus is called "Xenios Zeus").

      You're so proud of your claim (wrong, of course) to have invented hating other people. In this day and age, the civilized world calls people like you barbarians.

      Where in the above part of my comment i claim "to have invented hating other people"? I claim that we invented extreme nationalism (and specificaly the "xenio" type - i.e., the -NON "xeno-phobic"- xenio extreme nationalism)

      But even if i wrote that i/we hate Turks just because we hate them, why that would be "bad"? DO YOU KNOW WHAT TURKS DID TO MY FAMILY AND TO OTHER GREEKS? Do you demand to love them?

      It's perfectly normal to hate the specific people who did it to your family. It's not normal to arbitrarily extend the target of your hate to an entire ethnicity or nationality.

      It was NOT "specific people" - it was the VAST MAJORITY (so, excuse me boy for not mentioning just the "specific people" but instead making the logical generalization every logic person would do).

      it's true that i would be happy with an apology from Turks to us Greeks - why you have a problem with apologies from people THAT DID HORRIBLE THINGS?

      Because vast majority of the Turks who live today participated in the Armenian genocide or Greek pogroms?

      An apology from Turkey as a state that considers itself the legal successor to the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey that carried out those atrocities - yes, that would be meaningful. But you cannot expect an individual Turk to apologize to you for something that some other Turks have carried out. There's no collective responsibility on account of one's ethnicity.

      If you disagree, I would like to hear your apology as a Greek on the matter of, say, Yalova Peninsula massacres?

      Yes, THE VAST MAJORITY OF TURKS participated in the Armenian genocide or Greek pogroms AND OTHER NEWER HORRIBLE THINGS,, and THE VAST MAJORITY OF TURKS LIVING TODAY deny those genocides and pogroms, despite the fucking undeniable evidence. But just because one Turk may was/is just, you expect every Greek, Armenian, Assyrian, Kurd, e.t.c., to... just forget how horrible the Turks was and are! About that "Yalova Peninsula massacres" (which are the usual Turkish rediculus lies created just to justify the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms): sorry - i know that my apology does not count because i just wrote that it is the usual Turkish rediculus lies created just to justify the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms, but what you expect when your excuse for justifying the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms is the the usual Turkish rediculus lies created just to justify the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms?

      ecause, yes, Turks are "horrible people" AND I PERSONALY (as any capable Greek does) take measures defending ourselves from Turks

      Would you say that if it were possible to pre-emptively exterminate those horrible Turks to ensure that they never bother any Greeks or Armenians ever again (since you seem to believe that they will keep trying), it would be good to carry it out?

      I AM NOT A TURK - I AM A GREEK! We Greeks don't genocide people - and that is one more reason why i am not a Turk.

      If you are a Turk i advise you to educate yourself about the Turkish horrible past and present - if you are NOT a Turk, i advise you to educate yourself about the horrible Turks AND GO FUCK YOURSELF (because i grow up with Turks and i honestly liked some of them - what i never liked are the usual libtard)

      Excuse my tone, but...

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    21. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      About that "Yalova Peninsula massacres" (which are the usual Turkish rediculus lies created just to justify the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms)

      Not that I expected anything else from you - you're literally not any different from the Turks who deny the Armenian genocide, after all - but I do have to note, for the benefit of any other readers, that those "usual Turkish ridiculous lies" were painstakingly documented and investigated by foreigners. The massacres were sufficiently large in scale that a commission was created by WW1 allies (UK, US, France) to investigate them. The commission concluded that:

      "A distinct and regular method appears to have been followed in the destruction of villages, group by group, for the last two months... there is a systematic plan of destruction of Turkish villages and extinction of the Muslim population. This plan is being carried out by Greek and Armenian bands, which appear to operate under Greek instructions and sometimes even with the assistance of detachments of regular troops."

      I AM NOT A TURK - I AM A GREEK! We Greeks don't genocide people - and that is one more reason why i am not a Turk.

      You're Greek because your family was Greek and raised you as Greek, you idiot. There's no "reason" to it, and it's not a choice of your own. The only choice you have is what to do about it, if anything. In your case, for example, you deny crimes against humanity perpetrated by people of the same ethnicity as yours, while Turkish nationalists do the same for their own. And so you retards will keep trying to kill each other for many more years to come, for the fear that otherwise people like you on the other side will come and kill you if you don't kill them first. It's exactly what you did in 1920s, and it seems that you haven't learned anything ever since.

      The irony is that more likely that not, you have a healthy dose of Turkish blood in you, especially if your relatives lived in the areas significantly affected by the pogroms, like Smyrna.

    22. Re:... and lied like a Turk when he said it. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      About that "Yalova Peninsula massacres" (which are the usual Turkish rediculus lies created just to justify the Armenian/Greek genocides/pogroms)

      Not that I expected anything else from you - you're literally not any different from the Turks who deny the Armenian genocide, after all - but I do have to note, for the benefit of any other readers, that those "usual Turkish ridiculous lies" were painstakingly documented and investigated by foreigners. The massacres were sufficiently large in scale that a commission was created by WW1 allies (UK, US, France) to investigate them. The commission concluded that:

      "A distinct and regular method appears to have been followed in the destruction of villages, group by group, for the last two months... there is a systematic plan of destruction of Turkish villages and extinction of the Muslim population. This plan is being carried out by Greek and Armenian bands, which appear to operate under Greek instructions and sometimes even with the assistance of detachments of regular troops."

      So, now we have proof that we Greeks are genocidal monsters! Would you interested to know that my ancestry IS FROM THE "Yalova Peninsula"?

      I AM NOT A TURK - I AM A GREEK! We Greeks don't genocide people - and that is one more reason why i am not a Turk.

      You're Greek because your family was Greek and raised you as Greek, you idiot. There's no "reason" to it, and it's not a choice of your own. The only choice you have is what to do about it, if anything. In your case, for example, you deny crimes against humanity perpetrated by people of the same ethnicity as yours, while Turkish nationalists do the same for their own. And so you retards will keep trying to kill each other for many more years to come, for the fear that otherwise people like you on the other side will come and kill you if you don't kill them first. It's exactly what you did in 1920s, and it seems that you haven't learned anything ever since.

      OF COURCE i am a Greek because my family was Greek and raised me as Greek, you idiot! We don't kill Turks - Turks kill Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians, Kurds, e.t.c.! You believe that everyone is the same...

      The irony is that more likely that not, you have a healthy dose of Turkish blood in you, especially if your relatives lived in the areas significantly affected by the pogroms, like Smyrna.

      Actually it's the opposite - research about the forced Turkification. About the Turkish blood: Greek women, being Greek, usually commited suicide if they were raped (and usually before that happen: a VERY OLD -some centuries old!- song about that "rape" thing!). Should i understand from you mentioning the Turkish rapes of Greek women that Turks are horrible people (because that was NOT something rare - and you really can't find so many horrible Greeks doing that to require a song to be composed about that "rape issue"), or you aprove them? And because i think you don't really approve them, i advise you to stop and think if nationalities (as individual people) have differences - ah... and go fuck yourself since we established that you are NOT a Turk but just the usual libtard!

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
  7. Buy your own ad. by goodmanj · · Score: 1

    Dear Armenian folks: while I sympathize with the history of your people, picking a fight with an algorithm is probably not a good use of your time. Everyone knows that Google's search content reflects the views of the wider Internet, and their sponsored links reflect the views of the people who pay them. You might be better off buying your own sponsored link on Google to combat the offensive one.

  8. Dear Turkey: by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

    Have you noticed how Germany is third world nation teetering on the edge of becoming a failed state, so great and horrible is the weight of their collective shame? No? Well, maybe you should considering just fucking admitting. it already. No one cares (except a few Armenians, one assumes.)

    I don't know if you've noticed, but you have a few other things on your plate right now what with the Kurds and ISIS and the religious conservative blowhards (you know, the ones who make Texas look like a bunch of simpering progressives) who have all but torpedoed your EU aspirations. This Armenian thing is a softball. Try not to fuck it up.

    1. Re:Dear Turkey: by gtall · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand Erdogan and his government. They are ISIS sympathizers, as are the clerics in his chorus. He's perfectly potty with killing off a bunch of Alawites in Syria because they aren't Sunni, being much closer to Shi'ites. Erdogan is a whore, and his government is interested in nothing except turning the country into a theocracy from which its religious affliction will never be uprooted.

    2. Re: Dear Turkey: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you seem to assume turkey is against isis. that is largely incorrect.

      sunnis have been playing violent doublecross for a long, long time.

  9. Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Click on the advert several times a day. Encourage friends to do the same.

    The person funding the ads will only have a limited amount of credit with Google. When they hit their limit, the ads will stop appearing. Repeat every day until the advertiser gets pissed off and pulls the ads.

  10. obligatory by fche · · Score: 1

    "Worse, it threatens to poison a nascent willingness"

    [citation needed]

  11. It says "Sponsored Link", right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you know it's probably not unbiased information being promoted by Google as accurate, but something that someone is paying to have a link appear before you. So even if you trust Google absolutely (which you shouldn't, since Google simply ranks sites on popularity, not accuracy), you shouldn't trust the sponsored links. At least google makes it obvious which links are sponsored.

  12. Not in the UK by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    Our top link is the Wikipedia article followed by several links that definitely call it a genocide. I guess the Turks only bought a propaganda ad in America because the UK public is already sufficiently brainwashed with the "religion of peace" crap.

    1. Re:Not in the UK by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      I get the same ad for certain keyword combinations on Dutch-language Google as well.
      I could only find it for search terms "armeense genocide" and "armenie genocide".
      I tried a number of other words, but these are the only hits I found for the ad in Dutch.
      Atleast they don't seem to be limited just to the USA.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Not in the UK by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You never miss a chance to show the world just how bigoted you are. It's a fantastic service, as it allows people to ignore your every word, safe in the knowledge they missed absolutely nothing of pertinence to the discussion. Hint: you are confusing fundamentalist Muslims with moderate Muslims. That is intellectual laziness of the highest calibre.

    3. Re:Not in the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You never miss a chance to show the world just how bigoted you are. It's a fantastic service, as it allows people to ignore your every word, safe in the knowledge they missed absolutely nothing of pertinence to the discussion. Hint: you are confusing fundamentalist Muslims with moderate Muslims. That is intellectual laziness of the highest calibre.

      So he is mixing up "militant Islam" with moderate Muslims like the Turks committing genocide.

  13. Re: What a Big Genocide Ad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please excuse me for not believing you a single word.

    we know how the balcans people react when it comes to one of their neighbours. it is pure, deadly hate.

  14. The reality from inside that country is different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We are talking here as westerners, but try to go to Turkey and talk to the local people. Any mention of the genocide and you have a potential riot in your hands.

    I talked to a Turkish taxi driver recently who turned out to be a politician escaped to Britain in the early 1990's as a political refugee. The way he talked and the things he said backed up his claim that he was indeed a politician.

    The upshot is that that country is a gunpowder keg, large ethnic and religious groups who are ready to get to each other's throats, and only Mustafa Kemal's brilliance of making it a secular state kept it together until present day. Presenting an official apology for the genocide will give the necessary spark to the local politicians to rip the country apart.

  15. Welcome to FoxNews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing but the facts!

  16. So....wait... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    Google is now supposed to 'vet' the sites they link to as far as authenticity and "proper" interpretations of highly-disputed events?

    How the fuck are they supposed to do that?

    (Not to mention, the minute such entities - search engines, ISPs, etc - start value-filtering content, you can kiss the moral justification for net neutrality goodbye.)

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:So....wait... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well, holocaust denial is illegal in some countries, and Google is both multiple entities and a single entity. So if it looks like it might be holocaust denial, Google should really refuse to carry the ad on the basis that it's illegal in some places.

      This is not the same thing as not carrying a search result, although there are worrying implications. But in the end, this is a business and it's about connecting people with products. You'll still be able to get your web page about it indexed, publicize it through G+ and so on.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:So....wait... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Google already vets advertised sites according to their own set of rules (e.g. they prohibit gun adverts). Given that they already have some form of private censorship, is it really surprising when people start complaining about them not censoring something that they believe should be? They've made their bed, now they lie in it.

  17. The problem is the ads don't show the sponsor by hhammermill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is not the ads themselves. Advertising is free speech. The problem is that the ads don't show the purchaser (the sponsor) so the reader has no context on potential bias.

    Basically Google is enabling astroturf campaigns.

    No matter how misleading a political ad is, there is always a "paid for by X" at the end of it. We should require the same of all advertising.

    1. Re:The problem is the ads don't show the sponsor by StikyPad · · Score: 2

      Because that's worked so well for political ads? "Paid for by Citizens for Knowledge? I hate knowledge! I'm not listening to this nonsense!"

    2. Re:The problem is the ads don't show the sponsor by zlives · · Score: 1

      well then i have this other pac "patriotic puppies and kittens for environmental truth" just for you :)

  18. Why so much focus on terminology? by moeinvt · · Score: 0

    Why is the "genocide" label so important? There was undoubtedly mass murder and mass relocation/"ethnic cleansing".
    Do the Armenians get some special prize, or extended privileges because their dead ancestors were victims of "genocide"? Do they get to extort present day Turkey for "reparations" or something?

    Furthermore, why doesn't anyone seem to give a damn about the Ukrainian genocide (The "Holodomor") of the 1920s and 1930s? We hear about the Armenians and we hear a lot about the Jews, but even with Ukraine being a focal point for recent news, the genocide of the Ukrainians by the Bolsheviks is skipped over like it never happened.

    1. Re:Why so much focus on terminology? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Indeed, we Americans are just as guilty of pretending our horrible past never happened. Killing Indians, eugenics, rounding up Japanese during WWII, slavery and Jim Crow laws, segregation, women's suffrage movement, etc. We'd all rather not think about it and our collective memory of the past is a little rosier than it actually was. I think most of us stop short of actively denying it ever happened, but instead we use euphemisms to describe atrocities and downplay how widespread or terrible it was.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Why so much focus on terminology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because the word 'genocide' was invented to describe the Armenian genocide. So it is an intrinsic; if the Armenian genocide is not a genocide then nothing is a genocide.

    3. Re:Why so much focus on terminology? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      That is not how language works. For example, the word "henge" was invented to describe Stonehenge, but under the modern definition of "henge", it ceases to be one. That does not mean that now no henges exist.

    4. Re:Why so much focus on terminology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      , women's suffrage movement, etc.

      Actually, I think the women's suffrage movement was probably a good thing. I mean, yeah, my wife is kinda the exception that proves the rule, but generally women having the right to vote is a plus....

    5. Re:Why so much focus on terminology? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? Americans discuss those topics ALL THE TIME. We even have entire months devoted to the subject. And non of those things were genocide.

  19. Try searching for "Climate Change" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Google's Armenian Genocide ads are trivial compared to the atrocity of scientific-data in the sponsored "Climate Change" listings.

    On the flip side, I guess the "global warming" keywords must be cheaper now that the rhetoric has been forced to shift. Lulz.

  20. It is the Internet by GovCheese · · Score: 1

    Armenians might object to a link that offends them. Turks might object to a different link. Politicians might object to links that (in their view) promotes piracy or terrorism. For god's sake let's not argue that because a link is offensive (to someone) it shouldn't be returned by a search. I worry about Google's undue influence like everyone else, but for the moment, the commercialization of search engines is a better model that politicizing them. Don't like the first return? Click on another link. It's the fucking internet. It's big.

    --
    "He's using a quantum encryption scheme! That'll take hours to break!"
    1. Re:It is the Internet by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      For god's sake let's not argue that because a link is offensive (to someone) it shouldn't be returned by a search.

      By your way of thinking, Google should not work to remove links to kiddie porn, locations of women's shelters, snuff videos, and places to by illegal drugs or drugs illegally. I don't buy it.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:It is the Internet by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      locations of women's shelters

      Isn't the utility of a women's shelter in that women can find them when needed?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:It is the Internet by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      locations of women's shelters

      Isn't the utility of a women's shelter in that women can find them when needed?

      No - they're referred to them by social workers who serve as gate-keepers to help keep the shelter address confidential to protect their clientele.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re:It is the Internet by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      http://www.catholiccharities-m...

      Not sure how hard that is.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    5. Re:It is the Internet by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      The address given is for the day care and other programs, not the transitional housing / shelter.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  21. What about Dresden ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Was there an official apology offered for the massacre of refugees in that city ? Cos' that was the whole reason for fire-bombing it, that it was full of refugees. It had no military value.

  22. Google Searches are promoting Alien abduction... by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    Google Searches are promoting Alien abduction, antivax crap, white supremacy, black power, that Elvis is still alive, that Hitler died in Argentina in 1986, that Hitler has clones, and that Aspartame isn't bad for you.

    The key is that most people quickly develop a sense that they have landed somewhere bad in a moment; just like most people have developed an internal ad-blocker for their eyeballs for that occasional ad that slips through.

    "This domain is for sale." is a huge give away for instance.

  23. Re: What a Big Genocide Ad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    is what the commenter is referring to.

  24. American Indian genocide deniers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    USA is no better. The History News Network offers this careful parsing of international law and past events to conclude that USA's efforts to "relocate" and exterminate its American Indian population was a very regrettable thing but certainly not genocide.

    if there were a Turkish Carl Rove, they'd have deflected media conversation away from their own past to make the USA squirm over its refusal to officially acknowledge its treatment of the American Indians as genocide...

  25. Wiki pops up by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    I get Wikipedia when I search.

  26. Isn't this a free-speech issue? by bradley13 · · Score: 1

    Isn't this a free-speech issue? Or, even more fundamentally, freedom of opinion?

    There are people in the Southern US who refer to the American Civil War "the War of Northern Aggression". From their point of view, that's what it was - slavery was just the excuse. It's not a widely held opinion, but it's theirs to hold.

    Russian history books present a very different view of WWII and the aftermath, as compared to Western history books.

    If the Turkish government and people believe that what happened does not qualify as a genocide, that is entirely their right. I do not understand the pressure to acknowledge the events of 100 years ago. It's like the XKCD cartoon: someone in the world is wrong! It's history, it's past, and a formal acknowledgement by today's government isn't going to change what happened.

    Ok, so someone educate me: what am I missing here?

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Isn't this a free-speech issue? by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 1

      Isn't this a free-speech issue? Or, even more fundamentally, freedom of opinion?

      Well, it is a free speech issue in the sense that the US government can't tell Google to suppress those ads. Of course, Google could do so on its own (at least under current regulations); however, it seems unwise for Google to get too much into that territory, except for cases where it is government mandated or nearly universally agreed upon (such as not running Holocaust denial ads).

      I do not understand the pressure to acknowledge the events of 100 years ago.

      Because people use those events in current political arguments, and because people continue making the same mistakes over and over again. The same ideas, often even the same language, that led to wars, totalitarianism, and genocide a century ago is still in common use in politics today, and then as now, the people using that language delude themselves into believing that they are acting for the good of everybody. Santayana was right when he observed: "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

  27. Very well by Pope+Raymond+Lama · · Score: 1

    Google certainly didn't ask for being mandated for governments. But when governments wanted to seize control of search results in name of "war against terrorism" people aplauded. Governments are in charge now, and there are just a couple information hubs they need to care about. So much for the World we've choosen to live in.

    --
    -><- no .sig is good sig.
  28. Krm by Flavianoep · · Score: 4, Informative

    If anyone is wondering about the Turkish phonology, I inform you that the phrase "Ermeni Krm" is actually something like "Ermeni Kirimi", but with dotless ii. In Turkish, it is not possible a word composed of only consonants, but as you may know, /. doesn't support Unicode.

    --
    Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    1. Re:Krm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's rather stupid that it strips valid HTML character codes out of the input text. &#305; should work, but it doesn't. But the &amp; used to make that code show up without being stripped still shows up (just like good old &lt; and &gt; when you need to illustrate a snippet of HTML).

      It's probably time for slashcode to die a quiet death. It will not be missed.

    2. Re:Krm by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      It's ok, we don't know what a dotless ii sounds like anyway.

    3. Re:Krm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's silly; clearly it sounds like a double-lowercase l.

    4. Re:Krm by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Slashdot does support Unicode. It just strips out most of the characters in it, by (an extremely bad) design.

  29. history by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    Well, one thing should be quite clear: for factual historical information you do not turn to the media, and I say in this case Google qualifies. You read and you ask the proper people, and you learn. You can't argue or discuss about a topic (*) if your knowledge base comes solely from the internet - well, you can, but you won't ever be taken seriously, and rightfully so.

    (*) Of course we're not talking about hardware reviews or celeb gossips...

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  30. Scientologists did it much bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When the secret documents of their cult appeared on the Usenet newsgroup 'alt.religion.scientology', the Internet awareness of their "galactic emperor Xenu killed the alian Thetans, and they have been reborn as all your bad thoughts" inner beliefs grew. But when they tried to censor the newsgroup, awareness *exploded*. Appalled at this and at the increasing rank of anti-scientology websites in Google, they created the largest website in the world. According to the former webmaster, Jurian Massena[sic?], the site had so *much* content that it actually crashed Google databases.

    It was fascinating stuff: I met that webmaster after he left the cult. They simply did not care about the quality of the content on the website, they were just trying to flood the search engine, much as they tried to flood the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup with thousands of bulky messages a night. That led to a lot of Usenet sites dropping the newsgroup, because they couldn't handle the bulk. Over the course of six months while the attack was active, it was roughly half a Terabyte of spam.

    Half a Terabyte: In 1999!!!!

    It's described as "sporgery" in Wikipedia, it was a fascinating attack on free speech.

  31. Google takes money from propagandists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say it ain't so! They'd never do that! /sarc

  32. WE ARE ALL JUST LIKE YOU! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who could have guessed that everyone on the planet thinks JUST LIKE YOU DO, and nobody thinks differently. OH JOY!

  33. Re:It's the media, not Google, who disseminate tur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Frightened of fairies, honey?

  34. What ads? by axl917 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My top 5 search results are;
    1. Wikipedia
    2. Google news, which hits the LA Daily News first
    3. history.com
    4. armenian-genocide.org
    5. NY Times

  35. Re:Endless Armenian propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Aside from Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia - where have European countries promoted genocide?

    Mao's China?
    PolPot's Cambodia?
    Rwanda?


    Or was it the Sandinista's extermination of native americans?

  36. Lying Exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lying is not going away. Learn to detect it.

  37. The truth is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was genocide. A bunch of ad buys and denials by Turkey do not change the indisputable truth that they committed genocide against the Armenians. It was pure, murderous savagery, and that doesn't deserve another "perspective". There is no "other side" to this story.

  38. Re: What a Big Genocide Ad! by RARMagic · · Score: 1

    please excuse me for not believing you a single word.

    we know how the balcans people react when it comes to one of their neighbours. it is pure, deadly hate.

    Do you think all brainwashing happens as shown in horror flicks, with mad scientists attaching electrodes to people violently fighting back? No, most of it happens in broad daylight, where unsuspecting and naively trusting minds are manipulated at places just like good old slashdot, with finely controlled messaging and carefully orchestrated hit-jobs just like the one we have going here. You're brainwashed and you don't even know it.

  39. search term by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Search tearm is wrong, it should pretty much be "Ermeni Soykrm".

  40. Google has been working on this already by SinisterEVIL · · Score: 1

    There is a current project to rank websites based on the quality of info contained in them.

  41. We all benifit from genocide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone living and alive today is only alive because their forefathers were blood thirsty racist bastards who killed and raped those whom they considered to be unequal to themselves. The jews whom the media loves to play the part of the martyr engaged in enough genocidal killing in their days to make isis blush. (ask about King David's penis belt). Similarly the so called native americans killed of and slaughtered whole sale the real indigenous populations. Life is brutal. Everyone of you liberal bleeding hearts who lament the injustice of the world have a duty first and foremost to kill yourself. You have no right to your priveleved white position just based on an accident of your birth. When you are dead it will allow room for others who do not have the qualms about using violence and power to rise to power to rise to power. Might always makes right, and the winner writes the history. e.g there has never been a war that to good guys lost. This is as it should be. The really bizarre phenomeno is people willing choosing to opt out of the struggle to power. These people will be written out of history. (talking about you white people. no kids no future)

    So let's have a shout out for genocide. If the turks han't killed all those Armenians, turkey would be called Armenia. Of coarse We would have bleeding hearts lamenting the genocide of turks by Armenians. Thank god the side of right won that war.

  42. Japan killed 80M, Not so fast there by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 2

    Check your facts before spouting off about the Mass Media.

    According to this link http://www.nationalww2museum.o... the death total for WW2 was 90M so 80M for Japan might be a tad high. Granted the totals for China are in dispute but still complaining about the Mass Media getting it wrong then putting in such a number is just wrong.

  43. Re: With AdBlocking/Hosts blocking, it's different by fightinfilipino · · Score: 1

    the first result i see is the Wikipedia page on the Armenian genocide. that's got it's own problems, but that's neither here nor there. using a proper Ad Blocker (i have uBlock installed) plus a good Hosts file (i'm using Hostsman and the MVPS hosts file) prevents Google's sponsored crap from showing up at all.

  44. OP's keyboard is missing the character ı by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's "ermemi soykırımı" not krm (though i can't explain how the s and the y disappered).

  45. If you click a sponsored link, you are a moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But, since 99% of all humans are morons (plus or minus 3 percent margin of error), you have a good point.

  46. Apples and oranges--Turkey isn't selling anything by Rujiel · · Score: 1

    ..except for their own reputation. It's not like there will soon be an election where americans will need to vote fot turkey.. so this isn't comparable to ads for products or elections.

  47. Not seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A US-based search for "armenian genocide" does not show the link (I get wikipedia, history.com, news links, armenian-genocide.org (probably partisan, I'm not checking), unitedhumanrights, genocide-museum...). "Ermeni Krm" does bring up the link, but it's clearly marked as a paid ad just like any other sponsored link, so I can't say it disturbs me too much.

  48. Re:Google Searches are promoting Alien abduction.. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    I can understand most of those, but why add this as it is clearly a scientific truth.

    and that Aspartame isn't bad for you.

    Numerous scientific studies have returned that Arpartame is perfectly healthy in the doses used unless you have a genetic issue with it that causes much worse issues.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  49. What about the white genocide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the white genocide?
    Will you censor it with -1?

  50. Assumptions is the mother of all f$@k ups by haldunk · · Score: 0

    It is very unfortunate that this article has a "baseline assumption" that the Armenian Genocide claim is true. Building on this assumption the author is suggesting that any attempt to pose an opposing opinion is bad and must be blocked. Where is the scientific method in this mind set? How could one find the truth, if that is the objective, with such a single-minded stance? We hear awfully a lot what the Armenian side has to say. Shouldn't we also listen the other side of the issue? What is wrong with the Turks trying to reach out with paid ads? Don't you think it is relevant to know that Armenian citizens of the Ottoman Empire had started an insurgence with the support from Russia and killed thousands of Turkish people right in the middle of WWI? During WWII "without any tangible reason" US government had brought Japanees descendant American citizens into camps. Now, consider what the US would have done if those same citizens had sided with the Japan and started an insurgency in the US homeland while the US Navy is fighting a war teeth and nail in the Pacific? How is that any different from the story back in 1915? Shouldn't we talk about why no scholar from Armenia or any Western country for that matter has looked into the Ottoman archives that were made available years ago by the Turkish government to help clarify the topic? Shouldn't we talk about the lack of any physical evidence of "systematic extermination" of Armenians in the Ottoman era? Shouldn't we talk about the Armenian terrorist organization ASALA and numerous Turkish diplomats they murdered in 70s thru early 90s. The article paints Turks as the bad guys and offers Cyprus conflict as yet another example. However, I see no mention of the EOKA and the atrocities committed by the Greek Cypriots. How was that not a genocide? The Internet, as in other dimensions of life, is full of good and bad information. As an information age citizen it is everybody's responsibility to use this powerful tool, that is the Internet, to discover the truth for theirselves. Several commenters here hit the fundamentally broken argument in this article---it is outright stupid to trust and ask any organization (Google, US government, EU congress, etc.) to make decisions about what is right and what is wrong on our behalf. It is stupid to ask Google to block ads and it is stupid to have senates pass laws to label some event 100 years ago as something. If we start letting that what is to stop this filtering and labeling at this rather peripheral topic i.e. Armenian genocide claim. May be next time "the deciders" will focus on something that has more immediate impact on our daily lives and choose to block climate change supporting pages or deem any discussion of police brutality to be harmful for the society or suppress any page that argues that distribution of wealth in the world is skewed. If you think about it all these arguments offend some group in the world. So, how would you feel about that?

  51. So... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Someone is suggesting Google is responsible for the content of it's ad customers?
    The political/religious/historical views portrayed in a website should determine if Google accepts them as an ad customer?

  52. Re:It's the media, not Google, who disseminate tur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, [citation needed] for your whole frickin' post. Japan are portrayed as the victims of WW2? Not in any "mass media" I've ever seen they're not, and I've lived in four different western countries.

    And the '80 million' figure is just not credible, any way you slice it. In 1941 the Japanese army numbered about 1.7 million men. Did they really kill more than 40 people each? How?