In retrospect it seems less and less surprising that Google ever agreed to the Communist Chinese government's demands on censorship (see here and here). It seems the Internet giant and Democratic campaign contribution engine is banning anti-MoveOn.org ads (h/t Malkin):
WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Internet giant Google has banned advertisements critical of MoveOn.org, the far-left advocacy group that caused a national uproar last month when it received preferential treatment from The New York Times for its “General Betray Us” message.
The ads banned by Google were placed by a firm working for Republican Sen. Susan Collins’ re-election campaign. Collins is seeking her third term.
Earlier this week, Google told Lance Dutson*, president of Maine Coast Designs, that the ads he placed for Collins had been removed and would not be allowed to resume because they violated Google’s trademark policy.
Google’s Web site states, “Google takes allegations of trademark infringement very seriously and, as a courtesy, we’re happy to investigate matters raised by trademark owners.” That suggests Google acted in response to a complaint by MoveOn.org.
*Dutson is a NewsBusters contributor.
Update/Correction (15:52 | 16 October): An earlier version of this post mistakenly conflated MoveOn's work to ban parody T-shirts on Cafepress with the controversy about Sen. Collins' campaign. My apologies for the confusion. Michelle Malkin has more about the CafePress controversy here.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
}}---> back to webcrawler
October 11, 2007 - 09:32 ET by Cool ArrowOr Excite. I still have a copy of Webferett.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
So.... what can be done
October 11, 2007 - 09:38 ET by bigtimerSo.... what can be done about any of this?
Not much.
October 11, 2007 - 09:43 ET by sarcasmoIt may be disturbing because google's so-big, but (much like Southwest Airlines when they ban a t-shirt) google is private property. You're free to boycott them, or sell any shares of google stock you own, but that's about it (or should be, IMO...)
I mostly use "Ask.com" these days anyway. I will admit to resorting to google-too for important searches, and whether I like google's behavior as a company or not, gmail rocks.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Howdy sarc... Plus I
October 11, 2007 - 10:02 ET by bigtimerHowdy sarc...
Plus I agree with the sentiments in your post...boycotting and such is about all that can be done and changing to ask or such.
Also just switched to gmail myself...big improvement so far for me.
To an old man like me...
October 11, 2007 - 10:09 ET by sarcasmoGmail is truly a wonder. I grew up in a world where long distance minutes and gigabytes of email storage were both a precious commodity. Both were used carefully (along with bandwidth) because they cost a lot, but as I got older, Moore's Law quickly happened.
Getting my mind around the concept that a provider not only didn't care if I ever deleted an email again, but was actively going to make it hard for me to delete-not-archive emails(!) was at least as difficult as getting over the fact that long distance phone calls don't cost that much anymore.
Part of me feels thrifty and good about myself over this misplaced concern over now-minute costs, and part of me is jealous of kids who aren't as warped by the former price-structures of information as I obviously-am. Hope this made sense!
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
As much as I dislike the
October 11, 2007 - 10:18 ET by fosstenAs much as I dislike the extremely large tort judgments these days, it's high time somebody took a bite out of Google.
So where do we get these Tshirts?
Forget 911, I dial 9MM.
Courts would only get the opposing shysters rich (I know...)
October 11, 2007 - 14:50 ET by sarcasmoBy far, the funniest possible outcome of this incident would be if a whole bunch of these particular shirts sold, today. I'm surprised you have to ask such a question here, but it's a good one.
Asking & Googling around seems to reveal that moveon.org's attack wasn't just on Google-ads, but also involved Cafepress, and Ms Malkin again has more. But that article is on different anti-moveon shirts, so it's still not clear how to buy one of these, and a brief look reveals quite a number of references to http://www.cafepress... -- which has OTHER tshirts moveon.org cares enough to want to ban, but not shutup.org.
Also, and sadly, it appears http://ShutUp.org is in one of those domain-parking businesses, which would no-doubt want $$$ for it now that we've been talking about it. Ideally whoever it was with the cafepress account would have tried to snag the domain before selling the shirt promoting it.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Trademark Hillary
October 11, 2007 - 10:38 ET by SouthernRootsTrademark Hillary Clinton™, Barak Obama™, and some other Dems and their organizations and see if Google™ refuses ads mentioning these trademarks. Additionally, Republicans™ should trademark their names and organizations so as to force Google to refuse negative ads against them.
Did Google refuse ads that criticized Microsoft®, Wal-Mart®, or other organizations they don't agree with?
MoveOn.org™ is being stupid. They are a political organization that is trying to hide behind their ™ to avoid political discourse. If they were an individual, they would not be able to get away with this, unless their last name wa Clinton™.
I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them. - J.B. Books (John Wayne)
Googletopia
October 11, 2007 - 09:56 ET by CrashWe all ready know how Google has created self-censoring software for the tyrannical behemoth "favorite trade nation."
I just didn't think they'd use it to promote communist ideals in a free society (sarcasm alert). Got Orwell?
Yet the liberals cry over the patriot act and the FCC; perhaps it's the conservatives who should be crying the loudest.
I found Google's new
October 11, 2007 - 10:00 ET by bws53I found Google's new logo:
http://www.brianwsny...
Hillary
October 11, 2007 - 10:09 ET by iveseenitallYou aint seen nothin' yet! If Hillary wins, commie-style censorship will be the order of the day. Hold on to your hats (and your wallets).
P.S. Check out the Elliot Spitzer debacle in New York. It appears this Democratic, liberal "governor" was going to sig the IRS on his politcal enemies until he was caught in the act.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
isia.... Good ol' Spitzer
October 11, 2007 - 10:19 ET by bigtimerisia....
Good ol' Spitzer seems to be getting stopped in some of his tracks quite a bit lately...(thank God)
I was also meaning the illegal aliens in NY and their driving licenses issue used for voter fraud and such...
ask.com
October 11, 2007 - 10:06 ET by CarlosSI switched from google.com to ask.com when google "forgot" to put an image for Veterans' day(?).
I only use google.com to search for "ShutUp.org" these days :-)
one problem with Ask...
October 11, 2007 - 10:45 ET by Ken Shepherd...is that their News search doesn't yield comprehensive results for NewsBusters like Google does. Yahoo! also is not that great with NewsBusters hits in the News section.
So that's one nice thing I'll say about Google vis-a-vis NewsBusters content searchability.
Thus a point that bears
October 11, 2007 - 10:26 ET by dscottThus a point that bears repeating that I raised during the Youtube sponsored political debate, Google is liberally biased, we have seen the anecdotal evidence to this in the childish banners used there at times. I also contend that searches are skewed in such a way as to convey liberally desired view points. YouTube is owned by Google, and Google makes it's money via advertising. When the Repubs agree to participate in liberally sponsored site or TV network that financially gains when they participate, all we do is support the opposition. BTW- Does anyone dispute that Dems get free and positive exposure via the MSM, Air America and other liberally biased organizations? So in effect, perversely, liberally biased organizations are handed money by Repubs to subsidize their favorite poltical party, the Dems. Why should it be any different with Google?
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
our consolation is that
October 11, 2007 - 12:41 ET by TruthMongerour consolation is that even though the left enjoys a huge publicity advantage - they essentially sqaunder it all with their IDOTIC VIEWPOINTS:)
we should be paying them more:)
A service of the new NB respect police
Stick-Stock Stick-Stock
October 11, 2007 - 11:14 ET by BondPlainBondGeorge Soros owns a small amount of Google stock, last time I checked, it was in the upper 5K shares area with a value of about $2.5M. Think THAT may have anything to do with the "favored hate-filled Leftisit extremist website" status of MoveOn?
Wait, I'm not following...
October 11, 2007 - 11:46 ET by Evil CapitalistWait, I'm not following... somehow this deserves some form of action? I thought no one cared about what these silly internet companies do because the left-wing message is fundamentally flawed? Or did right somehow start waking up and smelling the coffee? Did right suddenly find that this peculiar thing called "internet" can in fact change political views by preventing conservative message from being visible? What a preposterous idea.
Hint, dealing with Google is very simple. It is called "money". Right spends no money on the internet. This means that right is not a customer for Google therefore right's position is irrelevant. Unless right wakes up and becomes a customer that spends money, Google, Ask or anyone else in this business will continue to support left agenda.
Boycott
October 11, 2007 - 11:53 ET by Vivian LeeKen,
I've suggested we boycott Google Ads until they change their policy.
ConservativeBelle
http://conservativebelle.blogspot.com
Living Leftists free and loving it
October 11, 2007 - 12:28 ET by acumenAnd I've applied your suggestion in deciding which search engine I should use CB.
Break the leftist monopoly on the internet. Why use Google when Scroogle will do?
Living Leftists free and loving it...
Because as of now Google's
October 11, 2007 - 12:44 ET by Evil CapitalistBecause as of now Google's competition sucks?
Would you drive a Yugo because you dislike Toyota's policies?
Nah
October 11, 2007 - 14:41 ET by Vivian LeeI'd walk.
ConservativeBelle
http://conservativebelle.blogspot.com
I get good results from Ask
October 11, 2007 - 14:52 ET by bassndudeI get good results from Ask and tho I hate to admitt it, I do use Yahoo, even tho they are part of the Google empire. But as far a Google goes, I never use it. Havent for more than a year.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
A Yugo?
October 11, 2007 - 14:55 ET by bassndudeI wouldent drive a Yugo or a Toyota. I drive a GMC 4X4. A big un. Wife drives a Chevy, kids drive Chevys and Fords and one Dodge. Youngest has a Honda tho. Lots of other good ones to chose from.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Ive been telling everyone
October 11, 2007 - 13:28 ET by mattmsince I started posting here that Google and Yahoo are just as biased as the MSM. Their search engines seem to be designed to bring up pro-liberal and anti-consevative results regardless of the search criteria.
It is not surprising in the least that Google would engage in Left-Wing motivated censorship.
Try www.IceRocket.com
Google too liberal?
October 12, 2007 - 09:21 ET by MikeDThen why not pick a serch engine company that is publicly traded and buy stock in it. Yahoo is selling for about $29, Google around $600 and who knows who else is out there.
Worth Noting
October 11, 2007 - 17:01 ET by allanfIt is worth a mention that Nobel Peace Prize Winner to be Al Gore sits on the board of Google. John Gibson had a nice commentary on this at 5:58PMET on Fox News.