http://www.bowmansbrigade.com/google.htm

Chris,

Thanks for the url. I took time to read through the whole thing and the embeded links. I don't mind them pursuing whatever agenda(s) they have, but I sure as heck mind that they do not let one know up front. They used to be a search engine of choice for me; no longer.

Actually, I had started to wonder about that - I couldn't get many obvious hits for some innocuous topics from them lately - holes in the search results. Now I know why.

Regards,

Tom

Thanks Chris,

This is an eye opener, if I wanted others to make choices for me, I would have left this country long ago. I will no longer use Google or their advertisers.

Neal

I hesitated to post this. Our forums try to avoid the charged arena of Politics. But censorship and hidden agendas offend me, regardless of cause. I can tell you this isn't one of them <img src="images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

That's unbelievable. It's really sad that people can be so short sighted.
I have a question though; The very last line of text on Yahoo's search results page is "Search Technology provided by Google." Does this mean those ads and results are censored on yahoo's pages as well, or just that Google sold them the software they use? Thanks in advance.

Chris.

That's a damn shame. I rely upon search engines like Google to find good deals on gear. For those of you looking for a great alternative, try AllTheWeb Search.

Hutch: Google provided (sold) their search algorithms to Yahoo, so it's roughly based on Google technology. However, I'm not sure if they use the same censors.

John McIntire

I agree that censorship can lead to problems, but I fail to see the problem here. Google.com, while known worldwide as a search engine, is still a business, and the owners of that business reserve the right to what they accept and don't accept. While some may find their refusal to allow advertising from sites which sell guns or knives as selective censorship, they have to agree that Google reserves the right to what they display, since it is a private company.

If Sextracker.com was willing to hand over enough money to Doug Ritter and Equipped.org to keep this website up and running for another 20 years as long as Equipped displayed its ads, do you think Mr Ritter would accept this proposal? I doubt it, and that is Doug Ritters right as the owner of this site.

The issue is exactly about 'ownership'. Theoretically, in the USA radio and television are to provide access for non commercial exchange of information and opinion. It does everything but. Regardless of political view, the media censors information constantly from the people.The deliberate stifling of legal trade to manipulate social access to THINGS is but another step to manipulate social access to information. There was a reason Hitler banned THE WILLIAM TELL OVERTURE.

Couldn't have said it better myself...

"the media censors information constantly"

The media censors nothing. The media in question would run anything if the price was right. It's the viewers and listeners who dictate what is shown and what isn't. If NBC ran a Remington rifle advertisement on a Monday night during prime time, the number of complaints would be staggering. This is not censorship, this is common business practice. Do you want to keep the viewers you have or [censored] them off so they go elsewhere?
If you disagree with Google's idea of what is acceptable and what isn't, then don't use them. There are hundreds of other search engines on the internet. Everyone has a choice. It's up to you. You either turn the channel or sit there and complain.

If Yahoo.com and Equipped.org go to WNBC and wish to place an ad in the same time slot, are they going to choose Yahoo, with millions of users or Equipped with a few hundred? Is that censorship or deductive reasoning?

Wal-Mart isn't the biggest company in the world because they sell bullets and fishing gear. Perhaps in certain areas those are big sellers, but overall, Wal-Mart could drop those items entirely and it would barely register in the overall bottomline.

Chris, you and Mr Ritter are very knowledgeable and have a clear passion for this lifestyle/hobby/job. But even you have to admit that the overall meaning of being "Equipped To Survive" is for a select portion of the population. It's a fringe hobby. Something like Ham Radio is no different. Many people enjoy it, but it isn't mainstream.

Google isn't censoring anything. They are listing what the mainstream internet user wants to see, and those are the people that pay the bills.