Google is evil. A cautionary tale for lefty websites...

Google Ads are a major source of income for a lot of websites. Recent actions by Google suggest that it will throw its weight around to engage in political censorship of websites that carry their ads. It may not be smart for lefties to rely on that income.

Recently Google attempted to censor Antiwar.com because they publish a page that contains photos of the American abuse of detainees at Abu Gharaib.

Google decided that what is clearly political speech, was instead an example of gratuitous violence and gore, which violates their policies. Here's a excerpt from Google's letter to Antiwar.com:

Hello,
This message is to alert you that one of your websites is not currently in compliance with our AdSense program policies and as a result, ad serving has been disabled to your website.

Issue ID#: 33539611

Ad serving has been disabled to: antiwar.com

Example page where violation occurred: http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=8560

Action required: Check all other remaining sites in your account for compliance.

Current account status: Active

Violation explanation

VIOLENCE/GORE: As stated in our program policies, AdSense publishers are not permitted to place Google ads on pages with violent or disturbing content, including sites with gory text or images. More information about this policy can be found in our help center ( https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/1348688?utm_source=crs&utm_med... ).

VIOLENCE: As stated in our program policies, AdSense publishers are not permitted to place Google ads on pages with violent content. This includes sites with content related to breaking bones, getting hit by trains or cars, or people receiving serious injuries. More information about this policy can be found in our help center ( https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/1348688?utm_source=crs&utm_med... ).

Alex Pareene at Gawker posted an article about Google's actions which got Google's attention. After being called out by an author with a large following, Google sent something of an apology and said that if Antiwar.com would remove the code that allows ads to run on the page with the Abu Gharaib photos, they would reinstate Antiwar.com in their ad revenue program.

Problem solved?

Apparently not. After the attention was off, Google decided that there was another page on Antiwar.com's site that they didn't like this time it was a page that was, once again, clearly political speech, about the US-sponsorerd war in Ukraine against ethnic Russians:

On Wednesday morning (3/18/15), Google AdSense suspended ad delivery to Antiwar.com demanding that we remove our 11-year-old pages that showed the abuse by US soldiers of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib. We publicized this and got a bit of coverage.

Yesterday (3/19/15) Google contacted us and told us that they had given in and would be restoring ad service to Antiwar.com shortly.

However, this morning they contacted us demanding that we remove this article.

Antiwar.com says that it will not allow Google to dictate its content and is looking into finding another ad service to fill in the hole in its revenue stream.

It seems that we are witnessing the elites exercising another tool to purge the public mind of thoughts and information that run counter to the ruling elites' interests. We can probably expect to see more of this sort of thing.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Big Al's picture

I remember a discussion last year about net neutrality and people saying we needed to fight for it
to keep the internet "free". I said, too late.
What about the advertisers though? Fuck them too. Why not attack them as well as Google?

It's like with Firedoglake, which has been having big problems for a couple months. Every time I try to
access it and change pages I get a full page ad from Princess Cruise Lines which takes forever to clear, really slows
it down. So I decided I'll never use Princess Cruise Lines as long as I live.

There's some incongruity with all these activist, alternative websites trying to fight the establishment,
also getting paid by that same establishment.

up
0 users have voted.
joe shikspack's picture

i fight the advertisers, too. i use adblock plus (a browser plugin) and i almost never see their ads.

up
0 users have voted.
Unabashed Liberal's picture

up
0 users have voted.

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

mimi's picture

were almost all known to me and news services could use them for their TV coverage for years. Now all of the sudden that is not anymore allowed? They search into old articles, years old articles and search for those images in the intent to censor the articles NOW because of those images? That is quite unbelievable.

Oh man, I wished I hadn't seen that. I hated it when I had to search in our archives for those photos, but some of them were used over and over again for certain stories.

Good that German TV broadcasts are not dependent on Google ads. What the ...

up
0 users have voted.

no ads of any kind nor anything that generates income here, but Google is everywhere, sites get crawled by their web spiders almost daily. The war for your mind is ubiquitous, no where to run, nowhere to hide.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

Not sure how I got to that link, but it said that the US is both funding and arming ISIS. If after 16,000 bombs dropped on them, why hasn't ISIS been wiped out? Also stated that the Iraqi army was ordered to run and let ISIS get the equipment that the US left behind.
Another article showed UK planes dropping supplies for ISIS.
Face it, if the US really wanted ISIS shut down, then they'd tell our allies to quit supporting them.
Which country in the Middle East hasn't been turned to shit after the CIA meddled in it?
And half of America wants to put soldiers back in to Iraq to fight ISIS. They don't give a shit how much money is being wasted on the ever wars. Or how many soldiers are killed either.
How can SO many people be so ignorant about our foreign policies?
Most still think that Putin invaded Ukraine.

up
0 users have voted.

There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?

Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.

snoopydawg's picture

Describing UK and US roles in funding ISIS and what their goals are.
I would love to post this on KOS, but I'm sure it wouldn't go over well there. Telling that Obama is lying about his war against ISIS would bomb.

up
0 users have voted.

There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?

Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.

Big Al's picture

How it was created, how it's funded, trained, managed, it's all been lied about. But that's what war is
all about, lies. It's an absolute rule of thumb, there are no exceptions.
Some on Daily Kos would understand it but there is a vocal minority that would rebel against any pushback
to the mainstream narratives about ISIS, and Ukraine/Russia. That never changes and the management
of Daily Kos does not challenge it. They can't because they have to support what the democratic party, and
the Obama administration, supports.

up
0 users have voted.
Unabashed Liberal's picture

Recently, I ran across an older piece about Julian Assange's meeting with Google CEO, Eric Schmidt in 2011.

Guardian excerpt below:

Julian Assange book to recount clash with Google chief Eric Schmidt

Julian Assange is writing a "major" new book, in which the Wikileaks founder details his vision for the "future of the internet" as well as his encounter in 2011 with Google chairman Eric Schmidt – a meeting which his publisher described as "an historic dialogue" between "the North and South poles of the internet".

The book, When Google Met WikiLeaks, will be published in September this year, announced publisher OR Books this morning.

It will recount how, in June 2011 when Assange was living under house arrest at Ellingham Hall in Norfolk, Schmidt and "an entourage of US State Department alumni including a top former adviser to Hillary Clinton" visited for several hours and "locked horns" with the Wikileaks founder. . . .

And this,

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? Eric Schmidt and the Technorati Visit the State Department.

Also, I've also noticed several videos of FSC giving remarks at Google shindigs, included being interviewed by Mr Schmidt himself.

(Which is not to say that he doesn't interview other politicians. I don't follow his activities, and never gave him much thought until I saw this piece regarding Assange's book.)

However, the part about him traveling with US State Department alumni, including a top former adviser to Hillary Clinton sorta creeps me out.

And, in my opinion, is a further indication as to "who" really runs this joint.

And it ain't us!

Wink

Mollie

P.S. Appears at FSC has participated in several Google events, including being interviewed by Mr Schmidt.

Hillary Clinton Talks with Google CEO Eric Schmidt

up
0 users have voted.

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Assange says that Google is worse than NSA

here is a "review" on amazon.com of Assange's book "When Google Met Wikileaks"

Obama with Drama: Translating his comments on Israel’s Netanyahu from the Vulcan

13 of 13 people found the following review helpful
Assange at His Best
By Romi Mahajan on December 4, 2014
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase

If you want to understand the nexus between large technology companies like Google, the foreign policy establishment, and the national security state, this book is a must. Assange recounts an interview of him conducted by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen (and others) in which they discuss Wikileaks, issues of security and privacy, issues of the role of organizations like wikileaks in society and in what Assange refers to as the preservation of the "intellectual record." The transcript of the entire conversation is in the book as is the way in which Schmidt and Cohen warped what Assange said when recounting this interview in their own, trivial book.

What is at stake here is large; this is not an indictment only of one company (Google) but of the entire assault on civil society and individual rights conducted by the nexus.

That Assange manages to retain his optimism is a tribute to him; this book is a real eye-opener and a clarion call for action..by us all.

up
0 users have voted.