Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

My My...look what Google is accused of...

May 23, 2006 4:33PM PDT

...Something frighteningly ominous has been happening on the Internet lately: Google, without any prior explanation or notice, has been terminating its News relationship with conservative e-zines and web journals.

At first blush, one can easily ignore such business decisions by the most powerful company on the Internet as being routine. However, on closer examination, such behavior could give one relatively small technological corporation (when measured by the size of its workforce) a degree of political might that frankly dwarfs its current financial prowess.

The whole article:

http://newsbusters.org/node/5477

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
This should be surprising?
May 23, 2006 7:11PM PDT
- Collapse -
Oh, I don't know. It might be...
May 24, 2006 2:21AM PDT

...''suprising'' to, maybe, accidently, at least one or two people on this planet Earth...let's see, is that over 6 BILLION people currently???...and maybe 400 MILLION more by now???

- Collapse -
There's a conspiracy around every corner, and most of them
May 23, 2006 9:12PM PDT
never ever even existed.

Whether you folks recognize it or not there has been a lot of censorship or difficulty disseminating and finding liberal opinion over the last 20 years. Your comforting fiction about the "liberal media" blinds you to the fact that liberal views are neither accurately nor very frequently represented in the Mainstream Media. Google is running away from potential lawsuits, and the potential banning of its content in places like the Middle East and even Europe, because protection for religious minorities is stronger there than in the US. Google, like all big corporations is a coward regarding free speech. It tries to purvey what it thinks will be the broadest least offensive product available. That means cutting off Muslim Bashers, and seems to mean very little really liberal content, though that may be the fault of liberals themselves because liberals like to debate among themselves too much, and are insufficiently cohesive and agenda driven.

On both sides of the argument, conservatives are offended by everything they perceive as liberal comment (whether it is or not) and thus tend to see it everywhere, and liberals are equally offended by conservative comment and tend to see it everywhere. The truth is that the media in general is biased toward the status quo on the one hand, and towards trying to generate controversy in order to sell newspapers or air time on the other. There are scores of conservative radio commentators if not actually hundreds, and damn few liberal ones, just as an example. There are more conservative blogs than I can count on the Internet and damned few liberal ones, at least that I can find, via Google. I post from The Smirking Chimp because its a good middle of the road though strongly anti-Bush Blog, because most of the rest of them (all half dozen of them) don't appeal as being insufficiently credible. I have a lot of trouble getting used to the Huffington Post because of Ariana Stasianopoulos (remember when that was her name) was a staunch Conservative commentator. I have trouble with somebody whose views change that fast.

Perhaps because they feel threatened (or act and talk as though they are threatened since Nixon thought up that scam) Conservatives tend to be loyal to their base, to listen to and promote media supporting their point of view. Liberals tend to be samplers -- in my opinion as a liberal and one who converses with liberals -- to be glad to find liberal commentary, but not necessarily to follow it slavishly, or to pass it on aggressively and try to enlist everybody else. (I am extrapolating based on my experience with my outspoken Conservative friend whose definitive source on everything was Michael Reagan, and who tried till the day he died to convert me from the error of my ways.) We liberals just complain a lot to one another that there isn't much, and that conservative bias is inescapable in everything.

Oh, and Jack you forgot to indicate that what you posted was a quotation from the article. Courtesy and accuracy, remember.

Rob
- Collapse -
Well Ziks...let me say this about that....
May 24, 2006 2:05AM PDT

...****Oh, and Jack you forgot to indicate that what you posted was a quotation from the article. Courtesy and accuracy, remember.****

I posted the 1st two paragraphs from the article. If you couldn't gleen that from the "The whole article", and from the article itself, I'll write at the 8th grade level for you and be sure to tell you that "water is wet" and "runs down hill" from now on.

AND I am not going to dignify the rest of your post with a response.

- Collapse -
BWAHA HA HA HA
May 24, 2006 2:15AM PDT

You telling someone about accuracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Priceless

- Collapse -
The key word is ACCUSED, by those who
May 24, 2006 4:09AM PDT

committed the offense that got them banned. Most reasonable organizations (including CNet) have policies prohibiting hateful speech on the basis of race, RELIGION, national origin, gender, etc. Unfortunately, some (typically, but not exclusively, conservatives) cross the line from saying that Muslim terorists are evil to saying that all Muslims are evil, or even that Islam is an evil religion. This charge you gleefuly parrot isthe equivalent of the incompetent worker who happens to be Black filing an EEOC complaint alleging that they were "fired because of racism," rather than fired for being able to do a good job.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!