Latest Lists

Why do Google and some Americans confuse "free speech" with what is obvious racism?

in ref to: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-google-obama25-2009nov25,0,98932.story This is not a simple matter of where do we draw the line on censorship. This is a matter of the distortion of rights. It's INTENTION that reveals racism, and racism is a form of violence. The news article says an image (manipulated to make the face of Michelle Obama look like a monkey) was posted on a blog called "Hot Girls" (may have been removed), but currently the website linked to the gross image is a forum that's ridiculously over-the-top anti-government. The thread that was supposed to have contained the image reads like it was written by a Timothy McVeigh, or maybe the person you'd see at a G8 summit riot. Big quotes from civil rights leaders and news of their assasinations, lots of talk about "globalist pigs" and the government using "psychotechnology," mind control programs, social engineering, etc. The moderators of the forum apparently removed the image because it's no longer there, but Google thinks it's appropriate to leave it up on image search, apparently in the name of freedom of speech. About Google blogs from the news article: "Rubin [Google spokesperson] said Blogger users have to adhere to the site's terms of service, including a ban on hate speech, which the agreement defines as "content that promotes hate or violence towards groups based on race, ethnicity, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status or sexual orientation/gender identity. ...a determination of hate speech, under company terms, would heavily rely on whether a site was 'attacking or advocating attacks on a person.' 'An image alone may not provide enough context to constitute a violation of the policies,' he added. A different website containing the same altered image of Obama was banned by Google several days ago, but only because the site was deemed to contain malware that could spread a virus or similar online malady. When a site is dropped from Google's index, the search engine will not present it as a result." --The spreading of a computer virus is intentionally inflicting harm, and this is the same intention with the manipulation of an African-American's face into that of a monkey. It would be sheer ignorance to not know in American culture that this image is intended to do harm. Google is allowing people to spread harm through the Internet, in support of people who don't understand what racism is. This is not simply about "freedom." It's freedom without responsibility. Even Yahoo Answers realizes you can't just let all people say whatever they want without there being consequences for what is obviously intended to be harmful! Why do some Americans believe that the "right" of free speech gives them the "right" to engage in a form of violence and racism and cause obvious harm? Do they just think there's no such thing as racism? Dan: Racism is not making fun of the "Hill Billie." Do you understand what racism is? It's a form of violence against African Americans. It's not INTENDED to be funny, it is intended to inflict harm. FleetTech: You're suggesting racism shouldn't be disturbing in a culture that so values freedom? Absolutely wrong. Racism is just as wrong as any inflicted harm.

Public Comments

1. First off I do not agree with this one bit: "Even Yahoo Answers realizes you can't just let all people say whatever they want without there being consequences for what is obviously intended to be harmful!" Also we do have freedom of speech, everyone laughed at the Hill/Billy. Everyone makes fun about presidents and presidential figures. Also, do you know how much money google is making right now, why would they care.
2. In a free society you have to take the good with the bad. One must also realize that what offends one person may not offend another. To impose censorship is flat out wrong and the beginning of the end for the freedoms we enjoy as citizens of ht eUnited States of America. I may not agree with someones opinion, choice of jokes, etc, but I respect their right to express their opinion. Time to go re-read some history books and see what happened when peoples freedoms were taken away from them. God Bless America
3. This is no different than the argument against pornography. "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." Since neither you nor I know the intent of the author, if racism, rather than poor taste or juvenile humor, is what you want to see, then that is what you will see. "...but names will never hurt me."
4. Sometimes free speech and racism are one in the same. It is unfortunate some people feel the need to hate somebody for superficial reasons, but it's even more unfortunate when people are not allowed to speak their minds.