said by justin :

google should understand their popularity rests on transparency. If there were told by the government to remove those images because of [insert stupid reason] then they should tell us that is what happened.

said by DaDogs :



Justin,

If they WERE told by the government to remove the images, it would have leaked and caused one hell of a stir. Indeed, it would have leaked just prior to the election as that would have been the worst possible time for it to leak.

Conspiracy theory is the province of the pseudo-intellectual, not the intellectual.

said by justin :

We first need an official theory that works well, before there can be a conspiracy theory.

said by justin , earlier:

hidden censorship is rarely satisfying

said by Steve :

That's not a theory?

said by justin :

If it *is* hidden censorship then it isn't satisfying. I'm not decided until someone puts up a decent theory that tests out. What is yours. the "six month blind spot for all images" theory? You predict pages of abu ghraib torture by, what, xmas?

said by Steve :

I find it nearly impossible to believe that they are actively censoring anything.

said by justin :

I'm not confusing the two.

Google can (and probably does) remove something based on a DMCA request because the rights-holder does not wish it to be searchable or visible or whatever.

This is why the DMCA is criticised so often because it can, and has, been used to "chill" rather than just to remove copyright material (google has also bowed to pressure from foreign governments rather than fight court battles).

said by DaneJasper :

Here's a point. The Abu Ghrabe prison photos were taken by US soldiers - people on the payroll of the US goverment. I'd guess that makes their photos "work product", and that the government could try to assert some copyright.

said by justin :

You believe they don't do anything despite that their images index FAQ tells people who believe their images have been reproduced unfairly, to follow the instructions on this page ? »www.google.com/dmca.html

said by Steve :

I don't know anywhere near enough about Google's indexing methods (which seem to be really responsive even for middle-of-nowhere website like mine), but I find it nearly impossible to believe that they are actively censoring anything. If they had some kind of exclusive access to things, then maybe one could make the case that they could be effective, but "censoring" things that are available everywhere is utterly ineffective, not to mention lousy PR.

said by Steve :

This week has been chock-full of tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, and even thinking out loud "they might be censoring" is just more of that silliness.
Steve

said by DaDogs :

...
Conspiracy theory is the province of the pseudo-intellectual, not the intellectual.

said by vrp :

.
... something like ... calling Iraq an imminent threat in the pre-war period ... falls under conspiracy theory ... isn't it? ...
.

said by joebear29 :

Uh, no.

Unrelated, can you provide link where Iraq was called an immenent threat?

said by joebear29 :

I do not argue that he stressed the urgancy of dealing with Iraq, but my understanding was it was important to deal with Iraq before it became an imminent threat, as he said quite clearly in his State of the Union address.

said by justin :

lol
I'm sure there IS a reason for it.
And I'm sure i'm not going to find it satisfying.
hidden censorship is rarely satisfying.

said by justin :

lol
I'm sure there IS a reason for it.
And I'm sure i'm not going to find it satisfying.
hidden censorship is rarely satisfying.

said by tcp1 :

Google is NOT a government entity, and they are wholly within their right to choose to include or not include certain things for whatever reason they want

said by biggbrother :

I think your missing the point. No one is saying the can't censor. The point is that many people would stop using Google if it were discovered that they were systematically censoring results because of a certain reason. The can censor all they want. I could just choose not to use them if they did.

said by drew :

I'm sure there's a reason for it.

said by drew :

I'm sure there's a reason for it.

said by biggbrother :

Given that the owners of Google are very rich now... I wouldn't doubt if they are fairly Conservative also. Look for the photos to appear now that the Election is over.