[IP] Google blocking opinions with which it disagrees regarding "network neutrality?" EXPLAINATION?? and comment djf

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

If Google relies on an external orgization to tag then they had better have very good guidelines and enforce them on that organization. Any blockage of PFF (an organization that I seldom agree with) is certainly going to appear as if they are making polictical decisions. BAD IDEA. Also I , for one, want to hear all sides.  djf

________________________________________
From: Dana Spiegel [dana@nycwireless.net]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 7:46 AM
To: David Farber
Cc: ip
Subject: Re: [IP] Google blocking opinions with which it disagrees regarding "network neutrality?" EXPLAINATION?? djf

Dave,

1) PFF is a sock puppet/astroturf for the telco industry (see: http://wifinetnews.com/archives/006422.html)
2) I believe google doesn't decide who to tag, but rather relies on an
organization called StopBadware.org, which maintains the list.

Regardless, Brett is jumping to conclusions. This is likely either a
mistake, or PFF has employed some questionable website tactics (though
they may not include spyware) or was associated with sites that do and
didn't respond to Google's/StopBadware's attempts to contact them.

Though I personally think the statement "This site may harm your
computer" is rather amusing in this case, given that PFF supports the
incumbent telcos' positions absolutely, especially in creating fast
(for pay) pipes on the internet. Maybe "This site may harm your
computer _experience_" may be a little more accurate...

--
Dana Spiegel
Executive Director
NYCwireless
dana@NYCwireless.net
www.NYCwireless.net
+1 917 402 0422

Read the Wireless Community blog: http://www.wirelesscommunity.info

-------------------
NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and
enables the growth of free, public wireless networks
-------------------

On Jul 14, 2008, at 6:50 AM, David Farber wrote:

>
> ________________________________________
> From: Brett Glass [brett@lariat.net]
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2008 9:26 PM
> To: David Farber; Ip ip
> Subject: Google blocking opinions with which it disagrees regarding
> "network neutrality?"
>
> Everyone:
>
> Google has been a strong supporter of the agenda of Free Press, an
> inside-the-Beltway lobbying group which has spent hundreds of
> thousands of dollars lobbying for regulation of the Internet under
> regime known as "network neutrality." While some of the tenets
> included in this agenda are not reasonable, one of those that IS
> reasonable is the notion that large corporations such as Comcast
> should not block content with which they disagree.
>
> However, Google -- itself a large corporation -- appears to be
> blocking a site which expresses opinions with which it does not
> agree on this very issue. When one does a search for the terms
> "neutrality" and "site:pff.org" (the link
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=neutrality+site%3Apff.org&btnG=Google+Search
>
> will perform this search for you), many of the pages and documents
> on the site -- in particular, white papers expressing views with
> which Google disagrees -- are tagged with a warning that "This site
> may harm your computer." One cannot click through to the documents
> and pages in Google's search results without cutting the URL from
> the page and manually pasting it into one's browser.
>
> The Web site, operated by a group known as the "Progress and
> Freedom Foundation," does not appear to contain any malware. When
> one queries Google as to why the site was blacklisted, it claims
> that "Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 1
> time(s) over the past 90 days." Yet, we could find no malware or
> other exploits in the blacklisted PDF files, some of which contain
> very well presented and cogent arguments against the agenda which
> Google has been actively supporting.
>
> Could it be that Google (whose motto is, reportedly, "Don't be
> evil,") saying, "Do as I say, not as I do?"
>
> --Brett Glass
>
> P.S. -- What's especially interesting is that if one queries Google
> using just the term, "site:pff.org" (you can use the link
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Apff.org&btnG=Search
>
> to do this query), one can see that the majority of the supposedly
> dangerous site is not blocked. But most or all of the documents
> expressing viewpoints on "network neutrality" are.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------




-------------------------------------------