Amazon.com Widgets
  • Google should not promote the spread of lies

    Google is correct to control the search for the topic of Holocaust denials. Google should not allow the spread of false information, of which the denial of the Holocaust is clearly an example. When people become unable to distinguish fact from fiction, society as a whole suffers, because the electorate is less informed on the issues.

  • Google can do what they want

    Google is an company that can choose what it does and does not do. They are in the search engine business, and if they decide that they do not want people to be able to search for false topics, then they can do that. They are only helping the greater good.

  • Google shouldn't control any searches.

    The Internet should be a free information sharing thing that educates as well as entertains. Once one entity starts controlling a certain subject then that leads down the road of censorship and all kinds of other bad ideals that give one individual too much power. People have the right to know things and what they search for should not be controlled by anybody.

  • No, Google should not control search results for people who look for Holocaust denial information.

    No, Google should not control search results for people who look for Holocaust denial information. It is not ethical for Google to hide the results of a search due to political concerns. However, it would be good for Google to include a disclaimer letting the viewers of these ideas know that they are false.

  • It depends on the context, as presented no

    If you are arguing google is a privately owned company and can only present information it agrees with then the answer is yes (in which case I argue google should have competitors rise up that we should switch to, and is precisely why I don't use google)

    The arguement that google should be able to censor something becuase it is false is basically the same argument for censorship in general, and is a big fat no. Either position you take on a topic censorship loses, if 99.9999999% agree something to be true then it should be no effort for those to refute the evidence being presented, also must be taken into account is the "Streisand effect". This issue is a great example, I only became aware of it because of censorship on it and looked into it and found out that a lot of the claims of the revisionist are not without merit, and need adequate rebuttals, esp when you look into the actions of those supporting the Holocaust narrative as presented. (research david cole, for an example of this) These are not the actions of intellectuals countering ridiculous positions rather they are actions of tyrants pushing ideology, in which case we need to ask why. The more emotionally charged an issue is the more call for level headed debate there needs to be, calls for censorship are the cries for unfair advantage in the world of ideas, and almost exclusively made by the side that has the weaker position no matter how many people agree with that position.

  • Google can NOT do what they want

    This search engine should not control what it provides to the public, because if it did, then it would be deceiving. Nobody would want that. However fictional the topic is, I think it should be present for the people with this piece of information. We are an open minded generation and we can discuss topics pretty well, but if someone chose to hide something then it definitely would be used against them.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.