Google says no to China censorship, but Australia ok?
With a reported 338 million internet users, China undoubtedly has a massive online presence to be reckoned with. Like everything else of value in China though the internet population is treated as a commodity and the government does everything it can to control it.
Google made headlines earlier this week when they announced they’d had enough of being compromised by the Chinese government unidentifiable Chinese nationals definitely not working for the government.
In response to these attacks Google pledged that they would no longer be censoring internet search results made from Google.cn.
Despite internet filtering being relatively easy to circumvent, having search engine results filtered at the source was a major setback for online freedom of speech.
Less then 24 hours later however came the announcement that Google Australia would be censoring the entry for Aboriginies on Encyclopaedia Dramatica.
It seems that internet censorship isn’t fit for the Chinese but Australian’s are more then willing to bend over for it.
For those of you not in the know Encyclopedia Dramatica is the Wikipedia equivalent for the notorious online community 4chan. 4chan is essentially a massive anonymous imageboard and has been the source of a lot of internet sub culture over the years.
The page in question is Encyclopedia Dramatica’s entry for Aboriginals which, like the rest of the site is loaded with satire.
The decision to drop the entry came after Australian Steve Hodder-Watt launched legal action against Google. He found the Encyclopedia Dramatica entry after entering the search string ‘Aboriginal and Encyclopedia’ into Google.
I’m not a big fan of blunt racism just for the sake of being racist but underneath the deliberate offensiveness there is somewhat of a hollow ring of truth. Well, at least as far as drug abuse goes.
When asked why Hodder-Watt launched the action he replied,
It portrays indigenous Australians in the most unsavoury light possible, and you wouldn’t want a child stumbling across it.
Like I said I’m not saying the site isn’t racist but unless racism is explicitly refused classification (currently no such system is in place) who does Hodder-Watt think he is dictating what Australian’s can and can’t see?
I applaud Google for taking steps towards opening the internet up in China despite the likelyhood that unless they back down then the end result will be pulling out of the country.
What I can’t understand is why they’ve gone and decided to restrict our search results. Hypocritical much?
If you’re offended by content online then by all means petition the host of Encyclopedia Dramatica to remove the offensive content. Launching government funded legal action via the Australian Human Right Commission just creates a dangerous legal precedent.
What about my human right to access legally published information, regardless of how offensive it might be?
January 16th, 2010 at 8:55 am Leper(Quote)
It’s nice to see China’s hacking addressed publicly and hopefully Google’s claims will see some change in their behaviour.
Google has previously dropped several other offensive Encyclopedia Dramatica pages from its index (See http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Missing_White_Womyn_Syndrome). While this does make it more difficult to accidentally stumble across such material, its still on their website and can still be accessed. Publicly complaining about the material has just raised the public’s awareness of the site and will do wonders for their traffic as curious people go looking to see what this banned material is. So the net effect of the legal case was to direct curious Australians to a site containing offensive material unsuited for children. Well done.
While Encyclopedia Dramatica isn’t intended for children, using children as the means for filtering it is dishonest. It’s even worse that the taxpayers are footing the bill for this near-pointless legal action.
January 16th, 2010 at 11:05 am Mr Minit(Quote)
All hail precious China Steve!
Obviously Stevie’s been at a loose end this holiday season, just pray that he goes back to work soon whilst there’s still an internet.
Watchout Bing , Yahoo etc, here comes The Ultra-Politically-Correct Stevie coming to the rescue of the children of Australia. Yes that’s right, save the kids from what is largely the unedifying truth: the pisspoor state of a lot (not all) of our indigenous population.
And forget the Howard government’s pre-election intervention stunt.
‘Idle hands do the devil’s work.’
January 18th, 2010 at 12:09 pm Narambi(Quote)
Who said the legal action was Govt. funded?!
You’re presumptions prove your bias!
You also proved the point of how dangerous this is,
“…What about my human right to access legally published information, regardless of how offensive it might be?..”
It’s not information, misinformation, if anything.
The site (most probably) has contributions from Australian authors with content that breaches Australian Law, what’s the deal here, some cowards need their heads pulled in sometimes & you show your true colours when you back up the anonymous nobodies pointlessly picking on anyone & everything!
Fair Go Mate!?
January 18th, 2010 at 11:25 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
I have no idea why, but News Limited have pulled the story and the link is no longer available. The story does appear in their search results though under ‘aboriginie google’ on the second page (screenshot below).
The story is also still showing up in google search results.
In any case the original article mentioned legal action was taken via the Australian Human Rights Commission. What happens in these situations is someone from a token minority group raises a complaint and legal action is taken at cost to the taxpayer.
In this case it appears the Human Rights commission threatened legal action on behalf of Hodder-Watt. Rather then have a cyber Mabo on their hands Google decided it’d be in their best business interests to can the pagerank of the Encyclopedia Dramatica entry.
What, my bias against censorship? I’m not going to pretend I don’t have one… I don’t get your point.
Misinformation is still information by definition. Who are you to judge what I can and can’t read?
In the context of Encyclopedia Dramatica you’d have to be a numbnuts to not realise you are reading satire. It’s not like the entire site is setup to trash Aboriginals, the entry referenced is just one of many covering a wide range of topic. All keeping within the same context of the site.
If you don’t like the site by all means petition to have it taken down. Don’t try and babysit me by getting search engines to drop the page.
Where’s my fair go? One day it’s racist sites and the next someone complains about an Aboriginal politician and the site is pulled in the name of political correctness.
Beyond Aboriginals who knows what other information gets canned at Google’s discretion because of our nanny governments taxpayer funded ventures into censorship.
January 19th, 2010 at 10:50 am Narambi(Quote)
This is not satire, it is Racism promoted as so called humour.
There are rules in our society, they are called Laws. If they break the Law, we are entitled to act.
If censoring Racism is so bad, I suggest you get some ‘taxpayer funded’ councelling or petition to have the Racial Discrimination Act removed.
Your bias is towards the protection against censorship rather than towards preventing promotion of Racism. They threw the first punch.
Regardless, the debate is futile when the Govt. filter comes in (which I don’t necessarily agree with) so perhaps a classification system (you mention) may be the lesser evil?
Should Google have better policies to deal with differing laws?
January 19th, 2010 at 5:37 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
Who are you, the funny police?
As far as I know Encylopedia Dramatica is not hosted in Australia so whether or not they break our laws is irrelevant. If the site was hosted in Australia then by all means apply our laws to it.
I have massive problems with our government censoring (on behalf of precious individuals or otherwise) information that maybe illegal to produce and distribute in Australia but is not illegal to view.
Racism will not be stopped by censoring information on web searches. Just look at the US and the massive push towards political correctness and the social problems they have.
Then there’s also the UK and their hopelessness too.
Racism hasn’t been stopped here, the information is still there. If you want to stop racism go after the source. Censoring information is not productive.
Classification on a dynamic platform like the internet is useless. Then there’s the general ineffectiveness of Australian classification laws anyway.
The government refuses classification of anything and people just order from overseas. Our classification laws extend to selling media but owning it is fine. This obviously doesn’t apply to illegal media which we are prohibited from possessing.
I think Google shouldn’t have to do a thing. They can’t themselves remove information off the internet they just index it.
Local authorities themselves should be responsible for the removal of illegal content in the country it is being hosted. If the information is not illegal there then welcome to the internet.
The sharing of ideas and the relative freedom in which we are able to do so is one of the greatest strengths of the internet. Hopefully that never changes.
January 19th, 2010 at 10:05 pm Jay(Quote)
The page on Aboriginals was offensive to me and I’m as vehement an anti PC activist as you’ll find.
The point that everyone misses regarding the Filter is that the decisions on what goes on the “List” will be made by another independent tribunal, not the government.
Experience overseas, in Canada for example shows that these tribunals are not fair, not objective and are politically motivated.
The Canadian Human Rights Commissions for example have a 100% conviction rate, no one is ever found not guilty and more than a dozen people are in jail as a result.
The trouble really arises when agents of the tribunals start acting on their own initiative, and work to entrap people and provoke people into breaking the law, Google the name Richard Warman, you’ll see what I mean
http://richardwarmanhatesfreedom.blogspot.com/
So don’t worry too much about what Rudd and Conroy are “doing” to freedom of speech, worry about who they’re contracting it out to and who’s going to be working for the tribunal, you’re going to have people like George Newhouse deciding what you can and can’t see.
January 19th, 2010 at 10:55 pm ozsoapbox(Quote)
That’s just it though, what you find offensive somebody else doesn’t care about. Likewise there’d be things they found offensive that you didn’t care about.
What’s wrong is the use of the Human Rights Commission to threaten legal action against a search engine who didn’t even write the content.
I mean what exactly does human rights have to do with a satirical/racist webpage? Exactly what human rights are being breached here?!
As for children, well they can now use another search engine to stumble across the content, or alternatively maybe head out with their parents into the outback to see the alcoholism, petrol sniffing and rampant drug abuse firsthand.
January 20th, 2010 at 11:56 pm Bushrat(Quote)
Well, In the interests of objectivity, I had a look for the page in question but couldnt find it. Did find the site though, it seems not to have a search area, but it does have a “view random page” button.
Dear oh dear,I had to have a look, didnt I? After the second page (which referred to practicing “goate”) this case-hardened old mind was scarred for life!
No, guys, I kid you not, don’t even look – you DON’T want to know! DONT EVEN GOOGLE IT!
I will say no more…………..
EEEEUUCCHH!
January 21st, 2010 at 12:15 am ozsoapbox(Quote)
Lol I had my first encounter with goatse over a decade ago now I think.
If you want to see the specific page in question google ‘aboriginal dramatica’. It’s the first result.
January 21st, 2010 at 9:35 am bushrat(Quote)
But WHY would anyone DO that? It’s truly disturbing!
January 21st, 2010 at 10:38 am bushrat(Quote)
OK, found the page and had a look.
I think its a bit of a mixed bag of insult, fantasy, attempted humour (Dodo’s?), and a little bit of historical fact thrown in, such as the references to cannibilism, but all races have been guilty of that at some point.
Why go for Google? Well, Google would have the capacity to pay a fine, wouldnt they?
Would the operators of the website in question have that sort of dough? Probably not!
It aint fair, but you can bet thats what the bottom line is, besides, they know where to find Google……
January 21st, 2010 at 2:09 pm Narambi(Quote)
What fine?
I think you will find that Google Australia has to comply with Australian Law, whereas Google.com or the site itself doesn’t, meaning this was the only legal avenue to comply with the Racial Discrimination Act…
..But feel free to make the typical ASSumption that any time someone stands up, it has to involve finacial gain (or make that excuse to justify the perpetuation/promotion of Racism).
January 21st, 2010 at 2:41 pm bushrat(Quote)
Point taken, you are correct in the first paragraph, but I think you misunderstand the point I was trying to make.
Namely, anytime a complaint is made, the authorities seem to go after the target that is easiest to hit. Wether it is to fine or issue a warning. They have to be seen to be doing something, and to me it’s a bit of a double standard, as it doesnt really address the problem.
If it did, the page would no longer be there, would it?
As far as me making assumptions about anyone gaining financially from making complaints against racism, that is NOT what I said or implied. I really don’t understand how you arrived at that conclusion.
I found the content on this site just as offensive as some other people did. And in some respects, due to the racial make up of my extended family, probably more so.
If and when the government fines somebody, nobody gains, as usually the cost of the proceedings exceed the fine anyway.
And they certainly do not hand the fine to the person who made the complaint, that goes to a little fund called “consolidated revenue”…………….
Personally speaking, I think there are many aspects of the new internet filtering, such as kiddie porn, racism, terrorism and the like that we will be well rid of.
But thats just my opinion. Then again, I find Rap Music particularly offensive, maybe they might like to ban that as well
January 21st, 2010 at 5:11 pm Narambi(Quote)
Fair enough bushrat, I guess I am just as guilty of making assumptions & I apologise for that.
I don’t agree with censorship to a degree(especially by govt.) & in terms of racism (in hindsight) Pauline Hanson was positive in defining where people stood rather than hiding how they felt (thus giving a gauge of what they thought & what they need to know)but sometimes laws are there because extra protections are needed.
LOL, I try to appreciate all forms of music in the hope that it gives me better understanding (emphasize ‘TRY’)
January 21st, 2010 at 8:40 pm bushrat(Quote)
No worries, it was fair enough to assume that I was assuming…….:-)
I think the really tricky part about censoreship is in its similarity to playing chicken – you gotta get when you swerve JUST RIGHT – and that can be near on impossible.
Sadly, there are a lot of stupid, immoral people that we are forced to share our planet with, (of every nationality), and to a degree, censoreship is one of the management tools for this purpose.
Sometimes (often) it doesnt bloody work – period. Some things that SHOULD get censored dont (for the common good) , some things that SHOULD’NT be censored are (again for the common good). Very hard to get it right methinks!
Your observations about Hanson are pretty right, I saw a lot of her speeches, and read many of her transcripts, and I NEVER heard or read anything remotely rascist in any of them. Unfortunately for her, because she was not a seasoned “political animal”, and very naive, it didnt take long for her opponents to shake the finger at her and scream “RASCIST!” at the top of thier collars.
Good strategy that, she lost, they won. I wonder if that tag hadn’t been applied to her what the end result would have been?
From that point on, the outcome was inevitable. Nobody wants to be seen as supporting a rascist!
Mind you, a lot of the people at the anti Hanson rallies were there, I think, out of hysteria rather than fact. I saw a news report early in her campaign when the intrepid news reporter asked a wild eyed young woman, “what has she said to make you feel this way”? Her reply was “er, um, nuffing really, but she’s a RASCIST!” (eyes bulged wildly)
I doubt this women even knew what rascism was, let alone experienced it.
Then of course it escalated, with faeces and urine filled balloons being hurled by the anti-Hanson mob, old ladies being shoved over and the like. All for trying to give this country a new and perhaps better direction.
Sad really, in my mind, those demonstrations did more to promote rascism than any other single event in this country’s history. Imagine throwing a piss filled balloon at an old lady, what kind of arsehole would DO THAT? FOR ANY REASON?!
I said to a relation of mine at the time (who happens to be Aboriginal) “what do you think of her?” – She told me in no uncertain terms that she was going to vote for her, because she felt that it would improve things for ALL Australians, and then told me that there was widespread support for her within the Aboriginal community.
The thing is this, give people something to believe in, and they will get behind it. They will overcome the artificial barriers of race, and work together as a team.
So, yes, I believe there are rascists in our midst, but deep down I think the problem is not as bad as it has been made to look.
And of course, there are those that see rascism in totally stupid things, that were never meant to be rascist, Coon Cheese being one example that springs to mind. Big kafuffle over that! “COON FUCKING CHEESE??!!” They howled, never mind it had been around for years, NO it was RASCIST and it had to go. Thankfully, common sense won out in the end when it was proved that the cheese was named after its originator, Sir Frank (?) Coon.
And so it goes on, and on, complicating things and blurring the lines further with every passing day.
And distracting us all from seeing and fighting the REAL faces of rascism.
At the end of the day, we shouldn’t let things like web pages written by dimwits get us riled up. We should self-censor and just get on with life.
BTW, is “Rap” really music, or is it somebody reading bad poetry to a tune?
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:15 am ozsoapbox(Quote)
What exactly has been achieved though?
The site is still indexed by Google, all they’ve done is give it a pagerank 0 meaning you have to be a bit more specific to find it. The content is still readily available and searchable. I’m sure that even with a pagerank of 0 that ‘aboriginie dramatica’ isn’t the only search string that brings up the page.
If anything it’d be in the best interests of Hodder-Watt to petition whoever hosts the material to have it removed so the rest of the world who can’t just go to the outback and witness drug and alcohol abuse don’t get their information from the Dramatica.
January 22nd, 2010 at 11:48 am Narambi(Quote)
May as well contribute 2 ED urself Soapbox? I live outback (& am well aware of the issues) so maybe getting info from the appropriate blackfellas themselves as well, rather than forming opinions from a US based so called satirical webpage might give some balance (although ur probably more comfortable with ur preconceptions right where they are).
bushrat, I meant I think Hanson is racist, ignorant & ill informed but representative so U can’t ignore the reality that this is what people think (not necessarily what they know) but at least that gives a starting point to help create better understanding because, using ur example, who’s going to listen when ur screaming at them.
LOL! Fair enough, must be why it appeals 2 me, my singing sounds like a strangled cat!
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:54 pm bushrat(Quote)
Not trying to pick a blue, but can you tell me specifically what Hanson said that made you consider her rascist? Just curious, I have asked a lot of people this, and nobody can give me a specific example. Mind you if she DID in fact say something rascist, I personally didnt hear it, and would be interested to know what it was that she said.
Just curious in the context of this discussion.
Singing? Shit, you should hear me, I start singing and dogs begin to howl!