Amazon.com Widgets

New Google algorithm removes Holocaust denial sites: Is this a violation of free speech?

  • Yes, removing sites is a violation of free speech.

    Free speech, is, as it is stated, FREE SPEECH. I don't support any of the actions or things the websites have done; that is for the populace to heckle, insult, and condemn, but when the corporation or government intervenes and censors it completely, that is a violation of free speech. If this is allowed to stand, this censorship could also be used to censor other things that Google deemed "nazi-like" or "deplorable," such as anti-feminism, conservatism, refusal of refugees, and anti-LGBT movements or sites.

  • Yes, the removal of Holocaust denial sites is a violation of free speech

    Yes, the removal of Holocaust denial sites is a violation of free speech. People have the right to post their opinion on this issue just as they do any other issue. It is offensive to many people that people believe that the Holocaust is the big injustice that took place because the victims were white.

  • Yes, it does.

    By removing sites which propaganda certain beliefs or talking points [in this instance: Holocaust denial], you are obstructing one's rights to communicate those said ideas. The internet is best left unfettered by censorship and corporate rule, where freedom of opinion and expression is forcefully dispersed.

    However, I also believe in the power of the unfettered free enterprise to eliminate corporations and sites that do reject the notion of free speech/opinion (for reference, see: Twitter). Several social media sites have begun to falter for their censorship and bias against right-leaning think tanks/public figures. Google is doing something wrong [as much as I hate Holocaust deniers], and they will likely suffer for it.

  • There on the secnd page

    I typed in holocaust denial sites and they aull came up on the secnd page. I am quit shure that there will be more on the pages after page 2. The only thing is that it doesn't come up at the top of the serch page. Use other serch enjines if u wont

  • It violates the spirit

    Of free speech, but not actually legal free speech. Free speech is a concept that, while it was adopted into our Constitution, cannot be enforced on private entities and Google is a private entity. As long as Google isn't part of the government or funded with government dollars, then it's not a legal violation of freedom of speech, but it is a violation of the idea itself. So yes and no, but since the question doesn't specify that it's inquiring on legal issues, I'm going with yes.

  • No, Google is a private company.

    Google is a private company that is free to do what it pleases. People are not required to use Google. If people don't like what Google does, they can use a different search engine website. Personally, I applaud Google for removing Holocaust denial websites. There is an incredible amount of evidence for the Holocaust, and I think it's perfectly fine for Google to remove these false websites.

  • Removing Holocaust denial sites does not violate free speech

    Google's removal of Holocaust denial sites is an important step forward for our democracy, not a violation of free speech. Free speech does not mean that one is permitted to spread falsehoods. The recent spreading of fake news has caused major damage to the functioning of our democracy by creating an ill-informed electorate. Any efforts that companies such as Google can make to limit the spread of fake news are welcome.

  • No, it is not.

    It is censorship. But it is not a violation of free speech, as protected under the US constitution. The US constitution only garuntees that reporters and the general population are alllowed to talk about true things that are happing in the world. It allows people to have opinions, but only prevents the government from censorship, not private companies like Google.

  • It doesn't violate free speech.

    Google is not affiliated with the U.S. Government, therefore is not required by law to practice free speech. The first amendment only provides citizens protection from government censorship and guarantees that people may have their own opinions. However, Google is also not setting a good example by altering search results and practicing internet censorship.

  • No it's not.

    Titles misleading. It's still there, holocaust denial sites are still there, they just aren't top results. I found them on page 2. Google is a private company, they can do what they want, bury what they want. There's plenty of other search engines out there, use them instead if you want.

  • Private Company makes their own choices.

    Simply put google since it is a private company can do what they please because freedom of speech doesn't apply. Freedom of speech as the first amendment states "prohibits making any law.......Abridging of freedom of speech." This only apply to the government not the private corporations. True that the people have a right to make these sites, but they do not have the right for these sites to show up on every search engine.

  • People have the right to say what they want.

    People have the right to express their views on the internet, make websites, videos or books expressing any opinion they hold. However, privately owned corporations also have a right to choose which views they support, I feel not only is it not infringing on the rights of the owners of said websites, it would be infringing on the rights of Google and its owners to force them to endorse sites they oppose.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
cupidgirl777 says2016-12-30T01:48:47.270
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII