Tangible Impact of Censorship on Search Engines 110
An anonymous reader writes "NetworkWorld is reporting that Indiana University Informatics researchers have created a site that highlights the differences in query results provided by country-specific search engines. cenSEARCHip looks at engines like the versions of Google and Yahoo built to accommodate free-speech restrictions in China, Germany and France."
countries (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:countries (Score:3, Funny)
Re:countries (Score:1)
Re:countries (Score:2)
No.
(Or are these the only ones that google cooperates with?)
No. AFAIK, the local Googles cooperate with national laws in all their respective countries. However, in terms of pages filtered, I think Germany and France are some of the more restrictive countries in the West, with their anti-Nazi laws.
For instance, some countries ban child pornography (possession, not just dissemination), so that material gets filtered in those countrie
Re:countries (Score:1)
Search for 'democracy'
China: About 309,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
United States: About 307,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Re:countries (Score:1)
There's always the US. (Score:5, Informative)
Now, try using this search on Google and scroll to the bottom: scientology site:xenu.net [google.com]
Woo-hoo! Land of the free!
Re:There's always the US. (Score:1)
Re:There's always the US. (Score:2)
Re:There's always the US. (Score:1)
Re:There's always the US. (Score:2)
I feel that they shouldn't be censored, but I always feel a sort of queasy moral indefensibility about that stance when defending the truly repugnant speech. Even so, slippery slopes and all that.
Re:There's always the US. (Score:3, Insightful)
Certainly it's uncomfortable to have to do. Think about it this way: nobody needs a right to free speech to say nice things. Nobody ever went to jail for saying 'Dear me, Fotherington-Thomas, isn't the sky such a lovely blue today?' A right to free speech is only worth having at all if you want to say something that somebody, somewhere, doesn't want y
Re:There's always the US. (Score:1)
this has been going on since at least 2003. maybe someone should start a website listing those links removed by google* because of DMCA or other censorship issues.
in fact i may do so. please send info to [my
-----------
the rest of this message has been removed due to a D
Re:There's always the US. (Score:1)
Not the Goverments fault. (Score:2)
Re:Not the Goverments fault. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not the Goverments fault. (Score:2)
The site in question was posting copyrighted material. There where LOTS of links to that "blocked" site that was critical of Scientology. The site was not limited in creating any statement that they wanted too. Just can not post material that they didn't own the copyright on.
Unlike the examples of France, Germany, and China. Not
Re:Not the Goverments fault. (Score:1)
Right, and I can threaten you with a lawsuit for making puppies sad. If it weren't for the fact that scientologists have won lawsuits in the past involving copyright and further that the DMCA basically makes it the case that caving in is the easy way out (ie, without the DMCA scientologists could sue Google even after they took whatever links down, since not only would it be a sign that they recognize the copyright violation but further had infringed in t
So you just hate the US and copyright law? (Score:2)
And there's lots of links to sites blocked by China."
Visable in CHINA??? I think not.
"Unlike the examples of France, Germany, and China. Nothing in US law would prevent that site from saying that they believe that Scientology is a cult and is dangerous.
Until the Scientologists write a skeptics handbook, copyright it, and then claim sites are copying from it. What better way to use the system?"
Okay you do know that is just nut
Re:So you just hate the US and copyright law? (Score:1)
>Visable in CHINA??? I think not.
There you go, adding extra qualifiers. I'd assume lots of links to blocked sites are visible in China, simply because news organizations end up pointing out sites that are blocked and the great Chinese firewall is still limited to humans blacklisting stuff. So, Google removing links just makes it harder for external to China mirrors from being easily found through Google. Sounds pretty similar to the situation
Re:There's always the US. (Score:2, Informative)
From uscode TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > 107:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."
-- Bold emphisis
Re:There's always the US. (Score:2)
My bad. I forgot that there were acceptable levels of censorship when maintaining a free society.
Re:countries (Score:1)
The German constitution for example does say that "there is no censorship, but..." and then there are some exceptions.
The US, on the other hand, are censoring without anyone knowing it...
Take your pick, but I'd prefer Germany over the US.
Europe needs to commit to human rights (Score:3, Interesting)
Is that "European Court of Human Rights" thing just a total paper tiger, or what?
Re:Europe needs to commit to human rights (Score:4, Interesting)
I assume you're referring to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed, published in Jylland-Posten, and later circulated in the Middle-East by some imams trying to whip up an artificial controversy?
If so, then I have to ask whether you've actually seen them. Here they are [muhammadcartoons.com]. I can't see anything there that's racist. Some are critical of Jylland-Posten itself, referring to the whole thing as a publicity stunt. Some are critical of militant Islam. One - with the schoolboy, whose name apparently happens to be Muhammad - seems quite optimistic about integration and multicultural coexistence.
The only ones that anyone could conceivably take offence at are the ones criticising Islam or certain sects of Islam. But Islam is not a race, it's a religion, an ideology. Ideologies can never be said to be beyond criticism. Was it racist against Russians to criticise the ideas, the founders, and the results of Communism?
Re:Europe needs to commit to human rights (Score:3, Interesting)
What exactly kind of message does it send that racial agitation against arabs is being championed and celebrated as a "we must do this to demonstrate we have freedom of speech" kind of thing-- at the same time that search
Just do this... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Just do this... (Score:1)
This is your chance, Taco. You could be one of the great freedom fighters of the information age.
Re:Just do this... (Score:2, Funny)
Did you mean Britney Spears?
Re:Just do this... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just do this... (Score:1)
What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:3, Interesting)
*Actually, it does.
I just did a search from google.co.uk (for kazaa lite) and got the following:
In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 2 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org.
Now, since I don't live in America and aren't governed by their rules, why in the hell is that
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:2)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
Who gives a shit where google 'lives'? .cn sites.
the search was done on google.co.uk from (I am assuming) the UK, it should only be obliged to submit to UK laws in that instance, in the same way it feels subject to Chinese laws with their
It seems that google wants to comply with the US DMCA even when it doesn't have to.
That is an editorial decision, I am honestly not sure if that is censorship or not.
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:2)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:4, Informative)
The response Google sent to me when I complained about their censoring google.co.nz because of US laws:
The e-mail continued with general information about the DMCA. They didn't specifically address the .co.nz (or .co.anywhere_else) question.
Google.fr, google.de, and google.cn also censor sites on the basis of the DMCA, in addition to censoring on the basis of local laws.
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
Re:What are the free speech restrictions in the U. (Score:2)
If it's the same one that's been going all around the net as an example of Oh Noes Google r t3h 3vil!!!!1!!!111!! then that's not Google censorship; apparently the person who uploaded it set those restrictions, and Google just honoured them.
After all, some material might be public domain in one country and copyright in another; or it might contain footage from the BBC Creative
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
Try going to the site [indiana.edu] and search for the word peace, telling it to compare the results between the United States and Germany -- there are over twice as many sites returned in Germany than the United States.
Re:What about free speech restrictions in the US? (Score:1)
And yes, that was after it finished tallying up its word counts.
Re:Example (Score:1)
Re:Example (Score:1)
A Search Result Falling in the Woods... (Score:4, Interesting)
I've always been amused by search result comparisons -- especially when they compare total results since most results beyond the first 1000 (as in the case of Google or Yahoo) are inaccessible.
What's the point, for instance, of Google saying there are 16,000,000 results for your query when they will only show you the first 700? I think this is even true of their API.
Incidentally, if for some reason you need to quickly find the last known google result, there's always http://www.lastgoogle.com/ [lastgoogle.com].
Re:A Search Result Falling in the Woods... (Score:1)
Truly, Alpha to Omega, and all in between...
Re:A Search Result Falling in the Woods... (Score:1)
The API work on a subset of the full index.
For example: search for "car" on the site. It shows a total of 1,480,000,000
now fire some python code and search for "car" trhu the api
you will get 1/1000 of the site total... or less! as it's change from request to request.
I had code to get the first 100 results, so i did several searc
Re:A Search Result Falling in the Woods... (Score:2)
Hi, this is offtopic, but the behavior is similar to many commerical search engines. If your query is too broad, you are getting too many results. The assumption is that if there too many documents, then the query term is not that relevant; therefore, you need to modify the query and reduce the recall. Example: If searching for 'moo' returns you 100,000,000 results, then 'moo' is a common term and chances are that the result #10,000 will never been seen by a user.
Please remember that there is a difference
Re:A Search Result Falling in the Woods... (Score:2)
Well, in this case you buy special software that is tweaked to return all of the results. I am dead serious. This is what law firm use. You search, get results, save them on a DVD (with all the relevant stuff) or whatever you have and that is it :)
Silly (Score:4, Interesting)
Ultimately it comes down to your level of trust in whatever system is doing the filtering. What most people don't get is there's almost always some "non-partial" element to messages. News media can't report on messages that the government deems as critical to national security. And now we are finding the same thing with google. And people are suprised?
Re:Silly (Score:2)
Sure. The point of the internet is that it's an international resource. Suppose that, say, the son of a cabinet minister has been caught offering to supply an undercover reporter from the Daily Mirror with a small quantity of cannabis. And, continuing this entirely hypothetical situation, let us suppose that the Government has hurriedly
try a search on falun gong (Score:3, Informative)
children cries falun gong tears unheard unseen
I'd have thought that China wouls be encouraging webpages talking about Falun Gong in such glowing terms. Bizarre.
Strange. (Score:2)
China:
action affected bureau chief china chinese civil cult denouncing education engineer evil experts falun gong gong's hijacking leading movie news ni professor programs radio related report said satellite sept signals special television transmission tv xinhua xinhuanet
United States:
1999 according april article articles body ccp china chinese communist considered crackdown cultivation dafa dharma edit fa f
Re:Strange. (Score:2)
1999 a.m abilities article articles assistant beings bodies body buddha circuit consciousness crackdown cultivate cultivation dafa dan edit energy exercises fa heavenly high law level levels li main meridians method methods mind-intent movement one's order passed person person's practice practitioner practitioners public qigong school society supernormal torture universe xinxing york
google results
Chinese govt and Falun Gong (Score:2)
Actually, the Chinese govt strongly disapproves of Falun Gong, and has been cracking down very hard on it for some time. You can read more about this if you search Google for "chinese government falun gong" [google.com] or "china falun gong" [google.com] etc., as long as you're using Google from outside of China.
The Chinese govt also maintains an official anti-Falun Gong website [china.com.cn], though it's unreachable from he
I'm moving to the free world... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm moving to the free world... (Score:1)
Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:4, Informative)
----Compare Google results between China and United States:
Censor Chinese Internet
China: About 810,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 7,140,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Censor Chinese
China: About 1,790,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 11,700,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Human Rights
China: About 879,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 878,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Jack Daniel's
China: About 1,800,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 68,700,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
xxx
China: About 108,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 107,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
China: About 108,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique) United States: About 107,000,000 results (Fetching first 10 unique)
Well, there goes their boilerplate excuse about "making the web safer" for the Chinese people.
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
Or maybe they are just doing a lot of research on triangulation plotting?
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
Jeez, I never realized how grim things really are in China. Life without Jack Daniel's?!? That's just savagery!
-Eric
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2)
One man's decent drink is another man's sewer water.
-Eric
Re:Sample Google Searches: China vs. USA (Score:2, Interesting)
More to take into account... (Score:5, Informative)
A search on Tiananmen Square, for example, results in many text references and images of the Chinese government crackdown on protesters in 1989 on the U.S. search site, but mainly hotel and tourist information on the Chinese version
Case in point. People in China are more likely to want to visit Tiananmen, and therefore would likely click on more links for hotels and tourist attractions. People in the U.s. are less likely to be interested in travelling there, and more likely to look up the history associated with it.I looked up "Wyoming" in both Chinese and U.S. googles (not using this site, but actually using google with the Chinese translation of Wyoming). The Chinese site brought up a Wiki entry, a site showing history and demographics, and another page showing its famous landmarks... stuff that people in China might be more interested in. The U.S. site brought up the official Wyoming state government website, the official local travel website, and the University of Wyoming website... stuff that people in the U.S. would be more interested in.
Looking further down, the chinese site brings up more about history and international travel, while the U.S. site brings up more about hunting, skiing, local state departments, etc.
I also looked up Tiananmen Square in an image search, and yes, the first couple pages do indeed show nothing of protests. But its not like its completely blocked, the tanks show up a few pages down.
One thing I noticed in doing my own comparisons is that Censearchip is only showing you the first unique differnces. On some simple searches, those differences don't even show up for a couple pages... the results are more or less the same.
Now before everyone goes jumping down my back... I'm not arguing that there's no censorship, because I know its a proven point that there is. And I do think that this site is indeed indicative of that. I just think that there is a possibility that some of these measures aren't completely accurate and that there are other factors involved.
--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
Re:More to take into account... (Score:2, Informative)
FreeBSD search results (Score:1)
In the Global Village the Medium is the Message (Score:2)
As governments struggle to literally get a grip on the world web, the world web citizenry is building a new hierarchy of cultural cross development.
We can individually and collectively point fingers at one another, but the greater fact is that we have in place a
Looks like if it isn't about China, it is ignored (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Forget China, so called "Free" countries censor (Score:1)
Re:Internet searches a public good? (Score:3, Insightful)
It could be done, but it probably wouldn't work. The nice thing about the search engine business is that it doesn't lend itself to monopolies. The moment Google stops being a reliable search engine, the moment it censors enough that it's no longer the best source of information around - that's the moment it vanishes. It c
Re:Internet searches a public good? (Score:1)
Google disappear The People's Cube (Score:2)
http://thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=637 [thepeoplescube.com]
not so (Score:1)
Purged? I think not.
Google China... (Score:1)
Makes you think... (Score:1)
Tiananmen Square Massacre (Score:2)
But the number of sites returned for China and the U.S. for the phrase "tiananmen square massacre" is dramatically different.
Hmm... (Score:1)
Google searches are not consistent (Score:2)
political censorship makes finding porn easier (Score:1)
Comparing China and US with the search phrase "teen girls" results in the following unique word lists...
For China...
animal aqua beastiality bestiality blowjobs breeds brunette cheerleader cheerleaders com cum cute dog farm force fucked fucking galleries hardcore horse hunter masturbating mature milf milfhunter milfs models petite porn posing pussy rape schoolgirl seeker series shaved showing spre
impartial comparison? (Score:1)
How are we supposed to "explore the differences in the results returned by different countries' versions of the major search engines" (TFA) if the results returned by identical countries' versions of the major search engines are not the same?
seems from this that the results returned by t
Re:impartial comparison? (Score:1)
Re:impartial comparison? (Score:1)
Hitler = Bush (according to Yahoo France) (Score:1)
Food for thought or just curious?
Compare the United States and ... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Anal Sex" (Score:2)
Results:
China: About 855 results
United States: About 683,000 results
The images retrieved and displayed were, to say the least, markedly different.
One would think a country with mandatory birth control would want its citizens to know all about about non-reproductive sex techniques, and encourage them.