Posted on 05/04/2005 6:40:43 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Google Refuses Conservative Ad, Similar to Liberal Ad By Jeff Johnson CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer May 4, 2005
(CNSNews.com) -- The world's best known Internet search engine, Google.com, stands accused of liberal political bias after allegedly refusing a conservative group's ad, which had text nearly identical to an advertisement the company previously accepted from a liberal group. Google denied the charge Tuesday and said it treats all of its users and customers fairly.
Google provides links at no cost to the searcher or the listed websites in the main section of its search results pages. But it also allows website owners and promoters to purchase advertising in a "sponsored links" section on the right side of each results page. Michael Mayzel, spokesman for Google, Inc., explained the company's philosophy regarding political advertising.
"We welcome political ads and apply our policies equally, regardless of the views of the advertiser," Mayzel told Cybercast News Service.
But William Greene, president of RightMarch.com, accused Google of censoring conservative ads that accompany search results.
"We were using Google, typed in 'Tom DeLay,' and saw all the Google AdWords on the right-hand side that came up there and they were all anti-DeLay ads," Greene said.
Greene decided to buy an advertisement supporting DeLay and to try to spend enough money to get his ad to come up on the top of the list.
"So we did that, and then we decided that - as part of this campaign to expose the hypocrisy of the Democrats who are attacking DeLay - we decided to do a specific ad against Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader," Greene explained.
He noticed an anti-DeLay ad for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that stated, "The Truth About Tom DeLay - Learn about DeLay's many scandals and help us clean up the House! dccc.org." Greene attempted to purchase a similar ad that stated, "Truth About Nancy Pelosi - Learn about Pelosi's many scandals and help us clean up the House! RightMarch.com"
"That's all we did," Greene told Cybercast News Service. "We took the liberal ad and changed the words to make it a conservative ad."
But Google refused the ad.
"At this time, Google policy does not permit ad text that advocates against an individual, group or organization," Google wrote Greene on the administration page of his ad account. "As noted in our advertising terms and conditions, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site."
"Well, that's great! They're a private organization, they can certainly make that decision" Greene said. "But then we looked, and all the anti-DeLay ads were still up, including the one we had copied word-for-word except that we changed the name."
Asked about the nearly identical ads, Mayzel said, "Both ads were taken down. Any assertion to the contrary is false."
Other anti-DeLay advertisements that were accepted by Google including, "Help Us Defeat DeLay," "Don't delay, Oust DeLay," "Tom DeLay's Rear End" and "tom delay [sic] a republican [sic] showing his true colors," among several others. Only two ads that could be construed as not negative toward DeLay were displayed: One for a "Great Conservative Book - Eyes Wide Open: What Liberals Don't Want You to Know About America!" and another exhorting viewers to, "Pray for Tom DeLay."
Page 2 of 2
Tuesday morning, if visitors searched Google under Pelosi's name, anti-DeLay ads were also returned under the "sponsored links."
"We saw that there's some obvious bias going on here," Greene added, "obvious discrimination."
That had apparently been changed by the afternoon, when searches under Pelosi's name returned no ads.
Google officials referred Cybercast News Service to their online policies.
"Stating disagreement with or campaigning against a candidate for public office, a political party or public administration is generally permissible," the policy on "Anti and Violence" advertising states. "This standard applies to everyone who wants to advertise on Google, whether we agree with their viewpoint or not."
"If you've got a written policy, all we're asking is that you apply it even-handedly or don't have the policy," Greene concluded.
This is not the first time that Google has been accused of bias. In October 2003, a federally licensed firearms dealer in Connecticut complained that Google was accepting ads for pornographic websites - which illegally made materials available to underaged children - but would not accept ads from licensed gun dealers selling a legal product to adults. At the time, a spokesman for Google said the policy was "part of our terms and conditions."
I pinged the poster. Usually it is good news if a story like that gets spread around.
Big deal.
There.
I fixed it.
If Google is now public . . . time for conservative poltically conscious investors to dump their stock and make the liberals suffer some pain.
Not a lot safer than playing the lottery.
Icerocket is Mark Cuban's site. Isn't he a big Rat donor? He ponied up a grand for Zoe Lofgren!
Clusty is a Vivismo spinoff which is owned by Carnegie-Mellon University. I don't know what to think about that. I figure it's probably better than Mark Cuban.
I do know Dogpile's donations to candidates ran about 30-70 R-D when I checked opensecrets.com, and it was the best of the bunch. Maybe I'll use Clusty. I sure won't be using IceRocket or Google.
I got an e-mail from Right March the night before the story broke in GOPUSA. I suspect they (Right March) submitted it to GOPUSA because it was identical to the e-mail.
Do any of those search engines contain spyware?
Actually, Google does seem to want to preserve its reputation. Unless there has been some hanky-panky, they took down the Democrat ads after their bias was pointed out to them. So the whole ploy worked out very favorably in the end.
Google has a reputation for honesty in the Spyware area, unlike all the previous search toolbars. Even though the executives may be leftists, I think Google can be kept reasonably honest if people keep after them.
The same goes for their proposal to weigh old-line news organizations more heavily than blogs. If enough people complain, they will probably drop that proposal, because it would end up wrecking their reputation.
google this, google.
Typical liberal half-truth! Yes, both ads were taken down. But only after it was made public that Google allowed an anti-Republican ad but did not allow an anti-democrat ad. Then, and only then, were the anti-Delay ads pulled.
Oh, puhleeze, man! You mean after their bias was exposed, laid bare for the world to see and make up its own mind about.
Good Point, and will do!
Google is free of spyware. It gives you the option, when you install, to avoid installing features that report your web use back to them.
Or you can install all the features, which I do, and then go into Options and clear the two check boxes under Page Information, which are the features that return information to Google. I don't care if Google knows what pages I visit, but sending the information slightly slows your browser.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.