Google Blogoscoped

Forum

National Vanguard in Google News  (View post)

Michael Zimmer [PersonRank 1]

Tuesday, March 22, 2005
15 years ago

"Google News, however, still pick their sources manually; a human editor at Google, not a computer, selected National Vanguard as Google News source."

Do you know this as a fact?

Susan Kuchinskas [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Yes, where does that info on the human editor come from? Everything I've seen or heard from Google points to an automated process.

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

Yeah, they make you think it's all automated, and I guess that's the point. Google Blogoscoped has been accepted as a Google News source by a human; around a year ago, it had been rejected by a human. So I know for sure indeed there's a human editor picking the site initially.

Other people, like the blog I've been pointing to, also say they've been rejected as Google News source.

"And LGF [the Little Green Football blog] has been turned down. Twice."
littlegreenfootballs.com/weblo ...

Google News lately has been accepting more and more blogs; this again is a human policy, not an algorithm. They have around 4,500 sourcs (at least that's the official number – I suspect the actual number to have grown in the past). Google News on their "About" page says:

"We'll continue to improve Google News by adding sources and fine-tuning our algorithms, and your feedback can help; send us your ideas and suggestions."

They continue saying:

"We're as shocked as you are! If we're missing a publisher that we should be covering, please send us your ideas. While we can't guarantee that we'll heed your recommendation, but we do promise to review all the suggestions we receive without regard to political viewpoint or ideology."

*Humans* review suggestions and add them to Google News manually once. It's only after that the algorithm takes over.

At the moment, it is reported humans are excluding AFP from Google News, because AFP sued. Humans were also responsible from excluding certain Chinese source from Google News China to meet the censorship guidelines of China. For that case, Google said:

<<"Google has decided that in order to create the best possible search experience for our mainland China users we will not include sites whose content is not accessible," company spokeswoman Debbie Frost said Friday.>>

Quoted is a CNN article from September 27, 2004
66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:an ...

Not an algorithm decided on inclusion or exclusion of a source – a human editor did.

Stephen Buggy [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Im confused, suprised and disgusted

firq krumpl [PersonRank 1]

15 years ago #

racial identity is absurd. one of the tactics that white racists use, especially to appeal to troubled youth, is to point to the observable hypocrisy of implicit acceptance of racism when practiced by those of darker skin tone in the name of “racial pride”: “they’re proud of their race, why aren’t you?”

outrage and objection should be equally and objectively applied.

amit agarwal [PersonRank 3]

15 years ago #

is there a way to include my blog in google news ?

labnol.blogspot.com/2005/03/my ...

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

Amit, just write to the Google News support and ask!

Oskar Johansen [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

To my it is a disappointment that Google
includes racist organisation in its Google
News . We do not need this!
OJ, Norway

Robert Moore [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

I consider myself to be "white," and after perusing some of the stories on nationalvanguard.org I don't see what all the fuss is about. Nationalvanguard.org is no more biased than any other news sources I've seen, albeit the bias is from a different perspective and one that's seldom (if ever) seen in the mainstream media.

I really loved the article (apparently by the same guy who runs the site) entitled "Who Rules America?) found here:

natall.com/who-rules-america/i ...

Mark Neufeldt [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

National Vanguard must really be making an impact to garner this overreaction. This is just the type of an overraction that will make people curious and hopefully will throw off the yoke of the self-appointed thought-lords. Every American should read, "Who Rules America" a research report by the National Alliance

Nick ... [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Whatever happened to free speech? NationalVanguard.org is just as legitimate as Fox News, as far as I'm concerned. If you don't like it, don't read it. It's that simple.

Rob Wostal [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

After reading this blog and looking up National Vanguard, I do have to ask, "why is racial pride allowed to everyone except whites?" That's a darn good question.

Because of this, I think I will bookmark National Vanguard. There was also a very good article there about the fact that the New York Times has settled the question about whether race is real or not. My college professors were all saying, "race is a social construct with no basis in biology," but it turns out that Stanford medical school has discovered that there is a biological basis of race, as reported in the New York Times.

Rob

Joe Carlson [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

I am more worried about censorship of news services that may or may not be something I would care to read than I am about being offended by a distasteful or abhorrent philosophical underpinning to that news service.

I believe the solution or answer to bad speech or news is <b>more</b> speech, more news, more viewpoints.

Stalin had the <b>Death penalty</b> for anti-semitism do we want to go down that road really?

We may or may not find the news reported by Natinal Vanguard or the story selections valuable but the mere fact that they are on the table of open discourse is healthy.

Paul Turner [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

The censors who are mentioned in "Who Rules America"

+ Show PDF

[PDF] got the approval of his ethnic kin in Mr. Kandler in the report.

Mr Kandler and his ilk are choosing the Internet as the new battleground to supress freedom of speech. If fredom loving people don't take a stand against this censorship, then we as freedom loving people are all lost.

Andrew Reilly [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

I read mainstream articles from the pipelined sources of AP, Reuters, UPI and the likes. Then I go to National Vanguard and get their take on the some event. It is quite funny and makes their point of controlled media valid. I agree with Mark's post. National Vanguard must be making some progress to elicit such rabid protest.

Len Smythe [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Without freedom of the press we are doomed to live like fools. That includes bloggers .
Censors hold knives to our throats.
If an American may not express their needs hopes and desires then there is no America.

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

I'm following up with a post here, and it also discusses free speech vs narrow selection of news sources:
blogoscoped.com/archive/2005-0 ...

Paul Turner and Robert Moore, I find the article you are pointing to ridiculously anti-semitic. If you guys approve this stuff now, in a context where your thoughts are considered radical by society, I wonder how much more hate you would have managed to spread in an environment like the Third Reich, in which this kind of anti-semitic views were in the mainstream.

Does this mean I'd prefer to censor that article? No. It's good it's there free for everyone to see it and disagree. If someone could be brainwashed by this article, it would be a mere symptom of a lack of his education.

Google News, on the other hand, is a selection of the web. They include only a part, and they choose which part. Many sources are not included.

Tim Pyne [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

I just thought I'd say that google's decision to cowardly remove "hate" news sites from news.google.com is entirely contrary to ideal of freedom of information and free inquiry. Who will be the one to decide which news is hate? Is anything not subject to the discretion of our would be censors and the petty tyrants among us. If google continues along this path of political censorship and buckling to the political whims of the age, it will find itself among a heap of failed search engines whom the masses left in favour of an honest search free from the mental-shackles of tyrants big and small.

ynot [PersonRank 1]

15 years ago #

The media is controlled and that's a fact. Now google is at risk. Uphold freedom of speech and information any way you can. I believe in the right to choose my news source, everyone should have that right.

Timothy D. [PersonRank 1]

15 years ago #

Someone asked, who is to decide what is hate. I'd like to opine that the word hate has and is being misused purposely to further so-called political correct ideological and political goals. The people who want to destroy the supposed "hate" aren't looking to create a rosy world where everyone smiles at eachother and sings kumbaya. They want to obligerate any source of opinion that disagrees with the growing but – quite frankly – forced multiculturalism (that they are the proponents of). This is evident by the fact that many things mainstream are hate and hateful (listen to some mainstream rap or pop lyrics proclaiming the wish to shoot or injure someone, for example), while a text by a white school kid gently pointing out the validity of race is being labelled hate and evil incarnate of the first degree.

If people stopped and carefully thought about what "emotional conditioning" is, how it can be used, and its likeness to brainwashing, I think they would be very upset, because they would come to realize how much of it they themselves are being exposed to daily.

ynot [PersonRank 1]

15 years ago #

Good point Timothy D. when a white is proud of their white race, its automatically neo-nazi and hate. No, the fact is that they are percieved as powerful and a threat to those trying to control what people hear and see everyday.

Timothy D. [PersonRank 1]

15 years ago #

May I add;

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
RACIAL LOVE IS HATE

That was a cheap shot, but hopefully I'll get away with it. ;)

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

Just curious – why would someone be proud of their race and skin color?

Michael T [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Because Race is an extended family and being proud of your race is taking pride in your self and your family.

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

Hmm. Going by your logic Michael T., does that mean mixed kids have reason to be twice as proud?

And when you say a race is like a family, does that mean when two white people sleep together it’s incest?

Anonymous [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Mixed race kids have no race. In other words they have no independent identity. It's tragic and thanks to thinking like that which is enforced in the mainstream. If you want to infer that isolated intra-racial reproduction is incest then I'm afraid it is you who should be on the defensive about your educational standing.

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

I didn't infer anything – as you can read, I was playing through Michael's logic. Why do you stay anonymous? Well, this thread is growing tired, and really off-topic for this blog. Last orders please.

Dan Williams [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

National Vanguard News is not a hate group nor are they nazis. National Vanguard News expresses the voice and oppinions of White European Americans and to censor their oppinions and refer to them by the generic name "Nazi" is not only an insult against any readers intelligents but is pure discrimination and outright political censorship.

Please allow Google News to be a search engine for all races of people to get all levels of views and oppinions, not just a selected few.

Pro NatVan.org [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Without any ambivalence, my 'name' above states my position. Google, listen very closely. You are entering dangerous waters. You are in league with those whose implied goals are the eventual suppression of any form of dissident speech. See the link here? You, Google, are in bed with these tyrants...you are their clone.

stormfront.org/forum/showthrea ...

You have taken it upon yourselves to knuckle under to them. Your shame should have no bottom to it.

National Vanguard is just one of many voices making up the din of the web. But it provides a badly needed source of no-nonsense information and gut-level perspective. If you wish to be consistent then by all means either manually or indirectly remove and / or delete ANY website espousing ANY sentiment of racial / ethnic solidarity.

Same goes for the porn sites.

member: National Alliance USA

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

By the way, if you read my posts on the topic closely you’ll see I never referred to it as “hate” or “nazi” site. I referred to it as racist, nationalist, white-pride, and anti-semitic. Read on for proof if you don’t understand.

Here’s the definition of anti-semitic from Dictionary.com:
“One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews.”

And here’s an anti-semitic quote from National Vanguard:
“Jew Gilbert Lederman (pictured), who exploited the dying man with the kind of gall that only a Jew could muster.”

Here’s the definition of racism:
“The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.”

And here’s a racist quote from National Vanguard:
“White Europeans constitute a body of people that is both spiritual and intellectual – we have an ethereal connection with each other. We have a way of looking at the world, and a way of feeling that is uniquely our own. We have ideas that bind us together which the Jews and other races cannot see at all – and so they attempt to destroy us in direct proportion to their power and representation among us.”

Here’s the definition of nationalist:
“Devotion to the interests or culture of a particular nation including promoting the interests of one country over those of others”

Just look at National Vanguard linking to what it calls “one of the best and best-looking White Nationalist sites out there”, a site linking to Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” on their links page.

And here’s a quote showing the “white-pride” approach:
“If racial pride can be understood as a gift, then we have a right to that feeling.”

The hate, on the other hand, is carefully crafted between the lines. And of course, the similarities to Nazi-speak – e.g. comparing Jews to rats, or constantly talking about the endangered survival of a race – are apparent throughout the site.

Then again, you sometimes don’t have to read between the lines even for that. Here’s a CD linked from the National Alliance home, which itself is linked from the National Vanguagrd. The page is titled “National Vanguard Books”, and the merry songs include:

– Panzerlied (Panzer = tank)
– Aryan Man Awake
– Hate for Hate

Mary Smith [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

I don't think National Vanguard is a hateful site.
National Alliance is not a hate group either, it is White separatist.
I read National Vanguard sometimes because I find it interesting.
The hateful people are those that attacked Iraq and lied to us.
We need sites like National Vanguard otherwise we'll only see one point of view.
Was the war in Iraq for oil or for Israel?
We have the right to dissent. I do not like people like Gliebe or Shaun Walker but I still believe National Alliance is a good site.
There's freedom only if everyone can speak not only when you yourself is free to speak.

Ted Style [PersonRank 0]

15 years ago #

Mr. Phillip Lensson--

You haven't asked yourself one simple question: why is it that "anti-semitism" exists in the first place?

Answer: Because of the behavior of Jews in their host contries.

I challenge you to look into the behvaior of Jewish Supremicists throughout history, and you will soon understand the roots behind "anti-semitism."

Furthermore, why is it to love ones heritage, and one's own people is called "racist?" And it is not a "belief" that race accounts for differences in human behavior, it is a simple FACT.

Ted

Philipp Lenssen [PersonRank 10]

15 years ago #

Mary Smith, who says National Vanguard doesn't have the freedom to speak? I can see their site is running and everyone can access it. By the way, there's equal freedom to listen... and to not listen.

Ted, I disagree, and I suppose so does the majority of smart people. As for the majority of not so smart people, well, maybe one future day advances in spacecraft technology make it possible for them to shoot themselves near Mars, where they can build their one-race utopia.

OK, I will close this thread now as it seems everyone had a chance to make their point.

This thread is locked – no further replies are possible. 

Forum home

Advertisement

 
Blog  |  Forum     more >> Archive | Feed | Google's blogs | About
Advertisement

 

This site unofficially covers Google™ and more with some rights reserved. Join our forum!