Google Has Too Much Power
Michael Gray has an insightful comment on Google’s reaction to Lyndon‘s linkbait hoax story: Google has too much power. This quote in particular struck a chord with me:
“Remember friends authoritarian dictatorships start by controlling what information the people get to see, hear, and read. It doesn’t matter if they are censoring jokes, or hoaxes today, what matters is they are going in and changing the rules of the game, midstream, just because they didn’t like the way things were turning out.”
Like I asked in the Independent Webmaster’s Manifesto:
If knowledge is power;
And information is knowledge;
And Google controls the distribution of the Western world’s information;
Then isn’t Google the most powerful entity in the West?
Government is going to have to step in sooner rather than later, because Google is Big Brother. Consider the Google/Google-related services you probably use, and how much information this gives Google on you:
- Google search
- Google blogsearch
- Gmail
- Google chat/ Google talk
- Orkut
- AdWords
- Google Desktop search
- Mozilla w/ Google toolbar
- Blogger/Blogspot
- Google Page Creator
- Youtube / Google Video
- Google Analytics
- Jotspot (G Wikis)
- Google Docs, featuring
- Google Word
- G Excel
- G Powerpoint
Google’s already shown that they’re willing to censor their results, by altering the Tiananmen Square SERPs to remove references to the massacre committed by the Chinese government against its own people there in 1989. (They make a note of the fact that the SERPs are censored, but so what? Admitting that you’re doing evil doesn’t make it any better.) It’s a matter of time before Google censors results in the West.
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion. I mean, I agree with the general sentiment expressed by Grey but this is a classical case of FUD, nothing more than that.
What really scares me is the fact that people read Matt’s blog and treat his posts as if they were the rulings of the Supreme Court, to say the least. If Matt said that what Lyndon did is wrong, then we can burn him on a stake. Up until Matt said something, there was a discussion. After that point, all discussion is finished, the prophet has spoken. Hell there was a much weaker response to the Tienanmen square censorship than to Lyndon’s bait and that is exactly what scares me – not Google, they are a profit driven company – the fact that people will get genuinely upset if you try to game Google, as if you are upseting some kind of world order…
Reply
Comment by Neyne — May 25, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
I see your point Gab, but I think there’s a difference between censoring the web from fabricated content (Lyndon’s case) and censoring the web from political and cultural fact (Tiananmen Square).
I have no problems with censorship of fabricated linkbait. But in reality there’s no way to automate that form of censorship. So it’s not likely to become a widespread issue. Political censorship is another story. But if it was likely to become a reality in the West, wouldn’t the whole WMD disaster be missing from the SERP’s already?
Reply
Comment by James Duthie — May 26, 2008 @ 7:06 pm
Neyne, that’s an excellent point about Matt Cutts being treated like a prophet. It’s a huge problem that won’t be ending anytime soon, unfortunately. But we can do something by talking about it as you have, and speaking out about Google’s unreasonably great power.
James, that’s a good argument about the difference in what’s being censored. But I don’t find it persuasive. It’s like that commentary on the Nazis’ practices, by Pastor Martin Niemöller:
“When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.”
I’m not saying that they’re Nazis, to be clear. I am saying that such distinctions lend themselves to sliding down a slippery slope. What about content that is politically damaging to a party but then is denied by the other side? Is Google going to be the arbiter of truth there too?
As to the WMD issue, if you consider the liberal tendencies in the tech industry generally, and California (Google HQ) specifically, there’s no reason that would be gone.
Reply
Comment by Gabriel Goldenberg — May 26, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
GOOGLE printed false info about me on
the Internet, posted things I never
said. You’re right, GOOGLE has way
too much power and they think they
can do whatever they want. Something
needs to be done.
Reply
Comment by Debbie Jurkovac — October 20, 2008 @ 11:40 pm
youtube is owned by Google
as well and the block on
there doesn’t work. I had
a person harrassing me.
Reply
Comment by Dee — May 20, 2010 @ 11:43 am
Google demoted my website inexplicably. It’s still #1 for its keyword phrase on Bing and Yahoo, but it suddenly can’t be found anywhere on Google. It’s a bad place to be when a single company has the power to make you invisible to the world. Should we have to beg Google to make sure all our work isn’t for nought?
Reply
Gabriel Goldenberg Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 10:57 pm
I would use a tool like Majestic SEO or Open Site Explorer and dig through your links. If you find that there are obvious paid links in the group or low quality commentspam links, you’ll want to get rid of those and keep a record of where they are. Then request reinclusion from Google and share where the bad links were.
If that’s not the case, I’d speak to your SEO or whoever handles that and ask for an explanation.
You shouldn’t have to beg Google, but you should also not build your business to be dependent on it either.
And neither should you (you in general, not you personally) be surprised by something like this unless a significant algorithmic change has taken place. Outside of algo changes, the more common reason is greyhat/blackhat SEO, which takes a calculated risk. If you can’t take the risk, don’t do it…
Reply
Comment by Daniel C. — August 20, 2010 @ 1:27 pm
I filed a few complaints about some
websites and privacy issues and
whenever my info gets removed, GOOGLE
manages to find more websites that
list your name and city and state
and that you can pay to get the rest
of your info. I will still keep
filing complaints.
Reply
Gabriel Goldenberg Reply:
August 21st, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Debbie, those websites get data from Acxiom and other whitepages/yellowpages data providers. I’d try to speak to those directly to have your info removed.
If that still doesn’t work, make your own website(s) and have them show up in the top spots on Google. Then you’ll control what does/not appear when people look you up.
Reply
Debbie J Reply:
August 23rd, 2010 at 6:08 pm
What gets me is we have an unlisted phone number so our address and number is
not in our phone book here yet you can get it on the internet! Thank You for your advice.
Reply
Comment by Debbie J — August 20, 2010 @ 5:53 pm