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 the 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? Apparently Google did attempt to remove the image: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/25/michelle-obama-google-images-removed But it doesn't negate Rubin's comment of being "biased toward free speech" to the extent of racism! Doctari: You don't understand what a distortion of rights is if you think you can say, "I have every right in the world to be a insensitive racist." That's not a "right." You have no clue what the concept of "rights" is about. Millie: Again, you're not referring to what is RACISM.

Public Comments

1. Your rights end where the next persons begins. People dont understand that. Just cause a person says gays are evil and bad, he or she is labelled homophobic, but heterosexual parents dont want homosexuality promoted in schools. so where is the line of where each person's rights were offended. I am Irish American and my ancestors were treated poorly just like Blacks were. Yet, we do not have monuments for deeds popping up all around America, neither do Germans, Russians, Italian, Chinese, Japanese. Yet if someone mistreats blacks they are racist. So why is it that their culture is the only that is mainstreamed as being oppressed when the every other culture just made their way through and let it be. It is 2009 almost 2010 GET OVER IT. You are not slaves or segregated anymore. You want to fight for a cause help me track down the new slavers and end slavery for all. You dont talk about the slaves still coming from AFRICA or ASIA or SOUTH AMERICA that come to the US as slaves and are even trafficked by AFRICAN AMERICANS. SO get a real cause other than what some white redneck did to michelle obama.
2. There can be little doubt that the images are racist and not scientific. We know for certain that only one line of humans bears any genetic lineage to chimps, and that is Bush and all his neo-con followers. Well-known photographic evidence has proven that many years ago. But Obama's detractors have tried using crude photo manipulating techniques to put forward a different theory which is so blatantly untrue that all reputable scientists have rejected it flatly.
3. because every form of media engages in the practice. the word racism has been used far too many times as a means to cower people and causes that had no intention of racism. every person has the right to pick and choose causes, friends and associates. you choose who and what to like none of which is racism. if i choose not to like blacks or asians, thats my right and is not racism. its time to get over hurt feelings and realize there will never be a perfect world.
4. Your attempt to control my speech, my thoughts or my actions are a clear violation of my constitutionally granted rights. I have every right in the world to be a insensitive racist. That may or may not influence my thoughts about whether or not Michelle Obama looks like a dead on photocopy of a chimpanzee but if it does you have no right so silence my opinion on the matter. Just as I have no right to silence your opinion that she is a beautiful and cultured African American woman. This is the price you pay to live in a free country.
5. But what Kanye West did to Taylor Swift was right because Swift is white........! Where were you when the pictures of George Bush were doctored to look as anyone want. To change Bush's pictures was free speech but to change *your* first lady picture is not. Don't ask for what you're not able to give.
6. political speech [images included] are protected here.The Bush's[ G BUSH,GW BUSH ,Barbara ,Laura Bush] all were photoshopped to monkey images in both the mainstream press and online . It is actually racist to assume that racial rather than political motives exist in this case .