Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 04:35 AM Jun 2013

The incredibly close links between Google and the politicians who refuse to step in to porn row

Google’s refusal to block grotesque child abuse websites is matched by the refusal of ministers to intervene.

But why is the Government so strangely reluctant to tackle the internet search company?

Google barely pays any tax and merrily snoops on Britons with its notorious Street View cars, so it is not as if ministers lack any provocation.

Google has been allowed to carve itself a reputation as a big friendly giant of the corporate world, brimming with ethical compassion and coolness.

Gradually, the corporation’s ruthless streak is being exposed, but actually confronting the internet mammoth seems to be the last thing on the minds of ministers.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334163/Revealed-The-incredibly-close-links-Google-politicians-refuse-step-porn-row.html#ixzz2Ux4I7dq1

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The incredibly close links between Google and the politicians who refuse to step in to porn row (Original Post) dipsydoodle Jun 2013 OP
There is much entanglement . . . Anymouse Jun 2013 #1
I think the Mail really is mispresenting things here muriel_volestrangler Jun 2013 #2
Yes, it is a terrible article eggplant Jun 2013 #3
+1000! LeftishBrit Jun 2013 #4
testing LeftishBrit Jun 2013 #5

Anymouse

(120 posts)
1. There is much entanglement . . .
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 05:06 AM
Jun 2013

. . . bear in mind that the entire world fought the SOPA and PIPA bills as too draconian. Those bills would have allowed, if passed, the government to do much more.

The bills were flawed.

On the other hand, Google is just one of many search engines. European privacy law being what it is, the European search engine ixquick.com does not record IP or other addresses and offers the same information as Google. No amount of hammering Google will stop searches for Internet child porn. It will take more than that, a paradigm shift in how people think about children. (Good luck.)

Thus, to exercise such vast control powers over Websites and ISPs across the world would require truly draconian measures. The Webcomic The Oatmeal dramatically and humorously demonstrated this with its SOPA blackout page, available here. The author noted that if he could get a koala and a goat making love on CNN, he had reached the pinnacle of his cartooning career.

But we could do it. If we wish to tear out the Bill of Rights from our Constitution we could indeed make things difficult (but not impossible) for people who distribute or produce child porn.

As for search engines themselves, they merely index Webpages. They use crawling mechanisms to find every Webpage they can. HTML protocols allow Websites to prohibit crawling of their sites, making them that much more difficult to detect.

One could make an argument that search engines such as Google do a service to the community by exposing said Websites.

As for corporate ethics, the only ethic a corporation must uphold is profit. Everything else is only upheld so long as it generates profit. If a company is forced by its patrons to change, they will change. (An example of this is the Flush Rush [Limbaugh] campaign, where people are taking their business elsewhere from companies that advertise on the Rush Limbaugh Show. Things have gotten bad enough for Rush that Clear Channel Communications issued an apology letter to its advertisers.)

But that sort of free association works both ways: numerous individuals and companies are boycotting the Boy Scouts here over its decision to allow gay scouts. Atheists are still not welcome though.

As the dubious Citizens United case pointed out, corporations here are allowed a certain personhood (and thus rights under the Constitution).

I, however, will only believe a corporation is a person when I see one executed in Texas.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,319 posts)
2. I think the Mail really is mispresenting things here
Sat Jun 1, 2013, 05:48 AM
Jun 2013

Google does not "refuse to block grotesque child abuse websites". If anyone tells it about such a site, it will block it. What it doesn't do is block adult porn websites, and people often leave links to the child abuse sites there.

Mind you, you'd have to ask what to do about a site which makes a story of Kylie Jenner, 15, looks older than her years in revealing outfit as she supports her friend Jaden Smith at After Earth premiere.

It is good of the Mail to print the list of Google links to politicians; I can't help wonder if they've basically lifted it from the first article in this week's Private Eye, though, which listed the same people.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»United Kingdom»The incredibly close link...