Skip Navigation

Eli Rosenberg - Eli Rosenberg is a writer in Washington, D.C. whose work has appeared on Esquire.com, Salon, and The Onion's A.V. Club.

What Does Google's Subtle Censorship Say About Us?

By Eli Rosenberg
Jan 28 2011, 5:05 PM ET Comment

The latest news from Google is that searches related to online piracy through torrent downloads are being dropped from the much touted 'autocomplete' and 'instant search' functions. As we have noted in the past, the notion of Google shaping or even suggesting searches is a relatively strange concept on its own. And now terms like 'BitTorrent,' and 'Vodo' will no longer show up automatically in your search bar. Yet the filter seems somewhat arbitrary: An autocomplete search for 'how to pirate music' yields the large torrent site the Pirate Bay, and as plenty of critics have pointed out, a significant number of torrent downloads are legitimately legal. What gives? Did Google buckle to pressure from the MPAA, RIAA, and other entertainment industry interests?

Type 'Jews have' and Google spits out 'horns.' Enter 'Black people are' and the search giant recommends 'lazy.'

Even if we were to pretend that all torrent downloads were illegal, Google's blocking has raised some interesting questions about its relationship with potentially criminal activities. Last I checked, making an explosive is a pretty serious crime; but when we type 'how to make a bomb' in the search bar, Google suggests 'out of household items' to complete the phrase. Write 'where to buy drugs' and 'where to buy crack in D.C.' is the instant result. Enter 'how to kill a person' and 'and get away with it' is what Google recommends. Gosh, it's really swell of Google to do its part to shut down all of the menacing downloading out there! I'm all for the freedom of potentially scandalous, even illegal information, but shouldn't it be consistent? Autocomplete has even blocked the phrase 'Google and crime.'

Or what about autocomplete's questionable assistance with what may be legal, but still offensive terms? Type in 'Asians have' and autocomplete is right there with 'no souls.' Try 'Jews have' instead and 'horns' is the result that the search giant recommends. Enter 'Black people are' and Google spits out 'lazy.' And why do we get help with 'sexual predators' but not 'sexual positions'? There are no obvious answers.

It's a known fact that Google's autocomplete filters out searches for things like curse words, pornographic terms, and a handful of potentially illegal activities. And what they do and don't filter could simply be a result of various company biases and decisions. But if, as the leader in digital queries, Google's search is more a reflection of ourselves and the times we live in, we might want to wonder why it's easier to get information about 'giving drugs' (you) 'to a minor' (Google) than 'giving a massage' (Google goes blank). Is the mirror broken, or is it us darling?



Presented by

More at The Atlantic

This Photo Uses Every Single Instagram Filter How to Go From Kinkade to Rothko in 18 Easy Steps
A Message to Law Grads: Instead of Corporations, Help Ordinary People A Mission Statement for America's Lawyers
How 'Natural' Is Stevia? How 'Natural' Is Stevia?
The Pathbreaking Flight of SpaceX's Dragon Capsule, by the Numbers The Dragon Space Capsule, by the Numbers
Get Ready: Milky Way to Collide With Neighboring Galaxy in 4 Billion Years Get Ready: Milky Way to Collide With Neighboring Galaxy in 4 Billion Years

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Just In

View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Afghanistan: May 2012

Jun 1, 2012

The Atlantic Wire

what matters now in technology
Last Update: 7:00 PM

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)