Updated 6/4/08: Inquiring minds want to know more (see PS at bottom)
On May 19, U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman called on Google to remove Internet videos produced by terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda from its YouTube subsidiary. Google did not remove all the terrorist-sponsored videos in question.
Today, Bloomberg reported that “Google Diplomats Bend Free Expression to Preserve Global Power,” by blocking a single clip from being seen by YouTube users in Thailand because it “ran afoul of a law against insulting the 80-year-old monarch.”
Andrew Cochran at the Counterterrorism Blog charges Google with a double standard, stating that the Internet giant “claims to ‘encourage free speech,’ then censors its content outside the U.S., but won’t remove terrorist-produced videos visible worldwide which could incite terrorist attacks? That is the very definition of hypocrisy.”
Lieberman: “Islamist terrorist organizations use YouTube to disseminate their propaganda, enlist followers, and provide weapons training. YouTube also, unwittingly, permits Islamist terrorist groups to maintain an active, pervasive, and amplified voice, despite military setbacks or successful operations by the law enforcement and intelligence communities.”Google: “(W)e examined and ended up removing a number of videos from the site, primarily because they depicted gratuitous violence, advocated violence, or used hate speech. Most of the videos, which did not contain violent or hate speech content, were not removed because they do not violate our Community Guidelines.”
But Google did not remove all terrorist-sponsored videos.
Lieberman (May 20): “Furthermore, Google continues to allow the posting of videos by organizations the State Department has designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. No matter what their content, videos produced by terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda, that are committed to attacking America and killing Americans, should not be tolerated.”
Google: “While we respect and understand his views, YouTube encourages free speech and defends everyone’s right to express unpopular points of view. We believe that YouTube is a richer and more relevant platform for users precisely because it hosts a diverse range of views, and rather than stifle debate we allow our users to view all acceptable content and make up their own minds.”
Obviously, this is not all the background and detail, but as responsible citizens, at a minimum it is a question to file away in our minds, given how much information about you and me that Google has accessible to it.
PS - For the journalistically inclined, I’d welcome any comments or further investigation. The following links could be a start:
- Google the backbone to an Intelligence-community a Wikipedia-style system, dubbed Intellipedia
- Wikipedia overview of the Google platform
- As of 2005, 10 billion Web pages and tens of terabytes of data ran on Google’s servers
- To get deep into the weeds, follow this thread.
- Custom Google Search
