Google Tells Army of 'Quality Raters' To Flag Holocaust Denial (theguardian.com)

Google is using a 10,000-strong army of independent contractors to flag "offensive or upsetting" content, in order to ensure that queries like "did the Holocaust happen" don't push users to misinformation, propaganda and hate speech. From a report on The Guardian: The review of search terms is being done by the company's "quality raters", a little-known corps of worldwide contractors that Google uses to assess the quality of its systems. The raters are given searches based on real queries to conduct, and are asked to score the results on whether they meet the needs of users. These contractors, introduced to the company's review process in 2013, work from a huge manual describing every potential problem they could find with a given search query: whether or not it meets the user's expectations, whether the result offered is low or high quality, and whether it's spam, porn or illegal. In a new update to the rating system, rolled out on Tuesday, Google introduced another flag raters could use: the "upsetting-offensive" mark.

Comments

Google as gatekeeper of truth

[sinij]

I am concerned that Google is attempting to act as a gatekeeper and arbiter of truth. While holocaust denial is certainly appalling, what else are they going to censor? What if China decides that Tiananmen Square is offensive?

Re:Google as gatekeeper of truth

[MightyMartian]

No, they did not emigrate. They were murdered. The only significant exoduses where of wealthier families who had the resources to get the fuck out of Dodge, but since, despite the longstanding ethnic slur against Jews that they were all money hoarders, most European Jews were not wealthy people.

There were millions of Jews in Central and Eastern Europe before the War, only fragmented groups after, there's no evidence they emigrated, since only a few every managed to make it to Israel, Britain or the Americas. So unless you're asserting there's a magic land filled with Jews that nobody knew about, your claims is patently absurd.

But I get it, as with most conspiracy theories, all that is required as retort, even if the retort is utterly moronic and completely untrue.

Re:Google as gatekeeper of truth

[hackertourist]

About 1 million Jews died at Auschwitz. This according to the Nazis, who kept meticulous records of their crimes.
The old sign probably read '6 million Jews died in Nazi concentration camps'. There's no conspiracy behind changing the sign.

The Nazis built factories with the express purpose of killing people in large numbers. The Americans built internment camps. The difference is huge. Calling the Nazi concentration camps "not a great thing" is a monumental betrayal of the people who were exterminated there.

So piss off with your denial. You're not convincing anyone here.

Why is Holocaust Denial Such a Huge Deal?

[Tempest_2084]

I've always been curious about this. It's a dumb thing to do, and makes the person look foolish, but beyond that why is this actually a crime in some places? I mean I can pretend that Obama was never president, but that doesn't make it so and it makes me look really stupid, but they would never make that a crime (Note to Self: Check back in 10 years and see if they did indeed make this a crime). Just ignore the morons and let them play in their little pretend world.

Re:Why is Holocaust Denial Such a Huge Deal?

[Solandri]

It's picked up in the last couple decades as the people who survived the camps and the soldiers who liberated them have been dying of old age. I remember reading an article in the 1980s about a Holocaust survivor who was invited to speak about about her experience to a high school history class What she was saying was so inhumane, so unthinkable, that the students were having trouble believing her, even when she showed them her tattoo. The teacher, who happened to be a WWII vet, had to step in and say it absolutely was true - he'd been there when they liberated the camps and had seen it with his own eyes.

Now imagine if the teacher hadn't been an eyewitness and the woman's testimony had had to stand on its own. With fewer first-hand accounts, it drops to a he said/she said state. And the deniers are working their hardest to speak as loudly as possible. I imagine in 50+ years we're going to have similar problems with 9/11 denial (denying that the attacks ever happened, not conspiracy theories about who dunnit).

Re:isn't that a German thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it unusual when people claim that today's so-called "Native Americans" somehow aren't "immigrants", while pretty much everybody else supposedly is (even those who were born in America, and who had numerous ancestors born in America often going back centuries).

It's well known at this point that today's "Native Americans" are descended from Eurasians who crossed the Beringian land bridge during several waves of migration. For the time being, let's ignore that many of today's "Native Americans" also have significant, if not a majority, modern European ancestry due to interbreeding with European settlers.

So ignoring their partial/majority European ancestry, the reality is that today's "Native American" ancestors were just among the latest to arrive, likely displacing/eliminating those people who arrived earlier, such as the Clovis peoples.

In addition, there's also some evidence to suggest that people from Southeast Asia arrived in the Americas by boat even before then.

So it's absurd to consider today's "Native Americans" to not be immigrants. Their ancestors arrived in the Americas from Eurasia, just like the Europeans did. Their ancestors weren't even the first to arrive in the Americas. In fact, their ancestors could very well have exterminated the peoples who had arrived earlier. So it makes no sense to give them special treatment, ideologically or otherwise.