Get three services for $100/moSo now Eric Schmidt is an al-Qaida fellow traveler?
Senator Joe Lieberman earlier today publicized a letter he sent to Eric Schmidt demanding Google remove "content produced by Islamist terrorist organizations from YouTube."
The Connecticut Senator wants all videos mentioning or featuring these groups removed from YouTube--including videos featuring legal nonviolent or non-hate speech.
When I learned that Lieberman wanted Google to pull what he described as "terrorist content" from YouTube, my first thought was that his PR director obviously was incapacitated. But no, this was a team effort in scare-mongering.
Searches on YouTube return dozens of videos branded with an icon or logo identifying the videos as the work of one of these Islamist terrorist organizations. A great majority of these videos document horrific attacks on American soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan. Others provide weapons training, speeches by al-Qaeda leadership, and general material intended to radicalize potential recruits.Google isn't going to play ball. Here's what the company had to say:
Senator Lieberman's staff identified numerous videos that they believed violated YouTube's Community Guidelines. In response to his concerns, we examined and ended up removing a number of videos from the site, primarily because they depicted gratuitous violence, advocated violence, or used hate speech. Most of the videos, which did not contain violent or hate speech content, were not removed because they do not violate our Community Guidelines.
That important distinction was glossed over in Lieberman's official communications with the company. Of course, Google's refusal to play ball may get it featured as a candidate for Bill O'Reilly's Talking Point segment, but management's entirely right to stick by its principles. Lieberman's gone hunting with a blunderbuss, lumping violent and hateful content together with unpopular points of view. In this instance, Google did no evil.
I know we're about to get into the thick of the political silly season, but no less than a veteran U.S. Senator should take a look at the United States Constitution now and then. It's one heck of a document. Really.
Charles is an executive editor with CNET News. He has covered technology and business for more than 25 years. A graduate of Queens College and Columbia University, Cooper began his career in journalism at the Associated Press before moving to technology coverage. Before joining CNET News, he worked at Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. He received the Excellence in Journalism award from the Northern California branch of the Society for Professional Journalists for column writing. In addition to his blogging and podcast appearances, he is a co-host of the CNET News Daily Debrief. E-mail Charlie.
As one of your Connecticut constituents, please stop trying to be my nanny. If you are worried about me seeing offensive content on YouTube, don't be. I can handle myself. If you are worried about kids accessing this content, please ask the parents of said kids to be parents and take responsibility for their own children. If that means locking down the computer unless parents are in the room when it it being used, well then that's the way it has to be.
Why do you think that my rights to view speech - hate or otherwise - should be be determined by someone else's delicate sensibilities?
One would also want to look at the Oath of Office, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00003331----000-.html
Please note that the Senator has sworn to defend and protect against enemies, which congress determined Al Qaida has clearly stated was enemy number 1.
To that end, what is wrong with trying to disrupt efforts of these groups by any and all means necessary? What is the benefit of keeping the videos, other than they can possibly make more profit now that you have pointed them out, and more lemmings can go and learn how to be a better school shooter?
The Senator is trying to do his sworn duty, and bringing to light efforts that according to Google's statement, "removing a number of videos from the site, primarily because they depicted gratuitous violence, advocated violence, or used hate speech. Most of the videos, which did not contain violent or hate speech content, were not removed because they do not violate our Community Guidelines"
In my opinion then, what he did was absolutely correct, he pointed out violations, they (google) removed the ones they agreed with, and the general population is better off.
Now, you ACLU card members who think terrorists should have open access to all that US businesses allow, you can go on complaining while our soldiers are killed by bombs that were made by instructions on YouTube. Just remember to explain that to the family members of the fallen ones who...ok?
I'm not aware of any current war where our solders are fighting for our freedom. I know of a war where the're fighting for oil. As far as I know people of that country don't quite understand ideas of liberty and freedom, and are happily killing each other. Which the deposed dictator didn't let them.
http://www.intelcenter.com/
http://www.lauramansfield.com/subscribers/
The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
It's one heck of a document for Americans, but many of these terrorist videos are being uploaded from areas outside the country. I know there's a habit among the left to extend the protections of the Constitution to foreign nationals, but thankfully here in this land we call reality that's not the case.
But it's really beside the point. The Constitution only applies to the state; Google is not bound by free speech provisions. They can, and should, yank any video that even remotely relates to terrorist speech. And I think a logo branding the video from a known terrorist group would fit squarely within that camp.
And, even for a former AP hack and a Columbia grad, Coop's profound misunderstanding of the Constitution, at least concerning the application of the First Amendment, is surprising. Lieberman has violated no part of that amendment, in fact or spirit.
So follow your own snide advice Coop: "take a look at the United States Constitution now and then. It's one heck of a document. Really. "
By the way, alegr, if we're fighting for oil, we've done a lousy job, since we're paying through the nose for oil at the pumps. I'd love to have some of that oil actually funnelled to the U.S.! Fighting for oil, my foot.
I know that the food I'm eating is produced with tractors that run on oil, fertilizer that is made with oil, and transported to my supermarket in trucks and trains that run on oil. Without oil, most of us will die.
Grow up.
And Coop, why do you think the Bill of Rights puts limits on what Lieberman can say? It limits what the Federal government can do.
-
by mikele11111
May 20, 2008 6:18 AM PDT
- Hey Joe, Your 15 minutes of fame were over a long, long time ago. Very few people care what you have to say about anything anymore. As a resident of Connecticut I wish you would spend your time doing something about gas and the traffic on I-95 instead of grandstanding for the media in a poorly planned attempt to put yourself in the news.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 28 Comments >>