Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is NOT to argue the abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. It is not my intention to sound like a conspiracy theorist, I am genuinely interested in the following, and would like to keep as close to the topic as possible.
Background: I was discussing Abu Ghraib with a friend this weekend. She mentioned that, in one of the photos, the word "rapist" was written on the backside of a prisoner. The thing is, it was misspelled r-a-p-e-i-s-t. She seemed to think it was pretty sad and one of those "icing on the cake" moments.
Having never noticed the spelling, I went to Google Images to search for it. "Abu Ghraib" brought up only photos of the outside of the prison. Not a single photo from the scandal. Next I searched for "Lynndie England", not a single picture. Next I decided to look for "Charles Graner" her boyfriend who was also prominently features in the pictures, nothing.
I tried many different spellings for each name, used quotes, didn't use quotes and checked to make sure SafeSearch was not enabled.
Needless to say, I was a little confused. Less than two weeks earlier, I had searched Google Images for Abu Ghraib photos with great success.
Where did the Agu Ghraib photos go?
What is Google's policy on controversial information?
I have heard that Google cooperates with a few countries to filter search results, blocking some content in France and Germany. Is this happening in the US also? If so to what extent? I know some websites are permanently de-linked, but I thought they were primarily concerned with drug trade, terrorists, improvised weapons and illegal pornography pages. Am I being naive?
Isn't Google Images a bot?
Wouldn't the pictures have to be removed by an actual flesh and blood person?
I know Google Images often misses pictures, but there are none! I know they did exist on Image Search.
I quit using Yahoo - unregistered my account and everything when they helped China install GIANT Web Filters to restrict everything that the human beings in China are allowed to read on the Internet.
Originally posted by: dahunan
I quit using Yahoo - unregistered my account and everything when they helped China install GIANT Web Filters to restrict everything that the human beings in China are allowed to read on the Internet.
Originally posted by: dahunan
I quit using Yahoo - unregistered my account and everything when they helped China install GIANT Web Filters to restrict everything that the human beings in China are allowed to read on the Internet.
Are we talking about goolge or yahoo?
We are talking about both AND about search engines who use their powerful filters to RESTRICT FREEDOM
I was reading about 4 guys that may get the same treatment for supposely killing a Iraqi general. (First time in 40 years that a general has died in captivity, or something like that). do we have a thread on this?
__________________
Sugar in the Raw, Natural Cane Turbinado Sugar From Hawaii.
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
He's right, the images files have been stripped. A pultry 96 images, mostly repeat outside photos is all that remains.
The censoring is active even for the U.S.
Disgusting :thumbsdown:
HUH.. so you got some results from my links above??? Maybe MY ISP is blocking them too?
If anyone gets an image of Lynndie England from the links dahunan provided above, I would love to know exactly what country you are searching from. I went so far as to use a few of Google's "foreign" search sites like Google Sweden. Still nothing.
So what search engine filters the least? Where the hell do I go for information?
Again, I don't mean to sound like a "tin hat" idiot, but this feels a bit "1984"-ish!
Originally posted by: Shelly21
I was reading about 4 guys that may get the same treatment for supposely killing a Iraqi general. (First time in 40 years that a general has died in captivity, or something like that). do we have a thread on this?
I think this needs to be publicized. Anyone have any idea where we can submit it to garner some publicity as to why Google feels it necessary to censor images in a free country?
BTW, the images are still available here.
__________________
"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." - Ford Prefect
We aren't concerned with other search engines right now.. this is a test of Googles Power to limit freedom AND WHY THE FVCK WOULD THEY DO IT!
Yes
hotbot
altavista
northernlight
etc etc
Exactly, dahunan!
Internet noobie? I have used Dogpile for years. Heck, I invented the internet! :laugh:
"Where do I go for information" was a bit rhetorical, but I still want to know who filters the least. It is rather hard to rate a service by basing your judgment on its omissions. Quantifying the unquantifiable?
However, researchers at the highly-respected Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University have found that the company is actively removing sites from its database, and that this censorship is going unnoticed.
However, researchers at the highly-respected Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University have found that the company is actively removing sites from its database, and that this censorship is going unnoticed.
However, researchers at the highly-respected Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University have found that the company is actively removing sites from its database, and that this censorship is going unnoticed.
**If anyone wants to get this noticed just send it to all of your political campaign headquarters.. They could be the next censored group
Sorry, I didn't read the OP initially, and I agree that it's more than a little frightening.
Looked through the Berkman Center's stuff, seems like the filtering Google does in the US is minimal, but it exists, they seem to filter much more actively in other countries. They mentioned Germany & France several times.
I just contacted three people in local radio. Just as a start. I know they all use the Internet (along with more traditional media outlets) to research their radio shows.
The Internet is where many people go for news. The possible ramifications of this should be obvious.
Let's not lay the blame on any political party just yet. I feel it would do this thread a disservice, allowing it to degenerate into Red vs. Blue. Censorship is not necessarily a partisan issue until it has been shown that the deck is stack in a particular direction. That fact has not been demonstrated. I have my suspicions, but that fact has not been demonstrated.
Banned sites in europe are mainly to neo-nazi type groups that have been banned.
__________________
Quote:
quote: Originally posted by: Rainsford
And yet despite how oppressed the rich folks are, being rich remains a popular activity. And I bet you could search the rest of your life and not find a poor person who's staying poor because the tax breaks are so excellent.
Where is Lynndie? Where is Lynndie?
:thumbsdown:
