As both a writer and a student, I often engage in research on the Internet. Primarily, I use search engines for this task, and, like nearly everyone else on the Net, I use Google for the majority of my searches. However, while clearly a potent source of information, Google may not be as reliable as I once thought.
As reported by the BBC, Google cooperates with national governments in censoring the results of its search engine. For instance, in Germany and France, sites with racist material and sites that argue that the Holocaust never happened are not returned by a Google search. While it is unclear as to why these sites are not returned in the searches, Google is most likely collaborating with German and French laws that limit such speech.
Google may be doing the same in the United States. As noted on slashdot.org, searching for images related to Lynndie England or Charles Graner, two soldiers implicated in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, yields no image results related to either person, though previous searches did yield such pictures. Other search engines such as Yahoo or Dogpile can find the images. Also, Google’s standard search still finds information related to both Graner and England. Many of the images are graphic and may be triggering censorship on those grounds. However, this seems unlikely, since some notoriously graphic images remain in the database.
Clearly, the missing images and the blocked sites in Germany and France call into question whether Google censors its searches. It is likely that it does-possibly even in the United States. It may do so at the behest of a government or it may decide to do so internally. One reason for this may be that Google recently became a publicly traded company. Company executives or stockholders may be pressuring the company to censor its returns. Of course, it is also possible that the Graner and England images have not entered Google’s image database.
Without doubt, search engines such as Google should not censor their returns except as their individual users request-especially since it claims to be “the most comprehensive image search on the Web.” Censorship is morally wrong and the limits on expression it brings not only limit freedom of speech, but allows the erosion of all other freedoms as well. Even in cases of “hate speech,” censorship is a danger to freedom, as “hate speech” is an arbitrary classification. Mississippi’s voters recently (and wrongly) voted to limit legal marriage contracts to between a man and a woman, but its not hard to imagine a world where such a stance is considered anti-homosexual “hate speech.” If Google is censoring, especially since it is not notifying users of its censorship, it is setting a dangerous precedent.
So what if Google (or any other search organization) is censoring its material? There are three important ways to approach the problem. First, as a moral issue, we should avoid using Google. If we ignore the company’s moral breach, then we condone its actions. Even if it admits the limits on its searches, censorship is wrong (short of child pornography) and this applies to any group that provides information on the scale Google does. Since Google is a private organization, attempting to legally disallow Google to censor material would only be right if it had a monopoly on searching.
Second, Google is a corporation in a capitalist economy. Thus, it will respond to market pressure. Not using Google and supporting its noncensoring competitors will force it to adapt or die. Google will respond to market pressure if it is large enough. If we find Google or any other search engine censoring material, the best way to force a change in their policy is to not use them.
Third, it is impractical to use a search system that provides inaccurate or censored results. If Google cannot provide the most complete information, whether or not it is actively censoring its material is irrelevant. Since Google does not have the Graner and England images while other search engines do, using Google alone is a bad choice, since there’s no guarantee for good results. Furthermore, other search engines are likely to have discrepancies or holes in their results, too. The best workaround, especially without confirmation of Google malfeasance, is to use multiple search engines.
While it’s not certain, search engines such as Google may be actively censoring their search results. As both citizens and college students, we need the most and best information possible. No single source is going to provide that, and especially not a search engine that censors its database.
Nathan Alday is a senior aerospace engineering major. He can be reached at [email protected].