censorship

Whaleoil now part of Google’s “dark net”

Seems the European Data law that forces Google to filter search results with certain, erm, search results, has hit us too.

Due to a request under data protection law in Europe, we are no longer able to show one or more pages from your site in our search results in response to some search queries for names or other personal identifiers. Only results on European versions of Google are affected. No action is required from you.
These pages have not been blocked entirely from our search results, and will continue to appear for queries other than those specified by individuals in the European data protection law requests we have honored. Unfortunately, due to individual privacy concerns, we are not able to disclose which queries have been affected.

Please note that in many cases, the affected queries do not relate to the name of any person mentioned prominently on the page. For example, in some cases, the name may appear only in a comment section.

The following URLs have been affected by this action:

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2010/04/page/6/
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2010/page/147/

So, you too, as commenters anyway, are possibly censored.   Read more »

Google’s demise starts here, ctd

Not only are Google changing history, they are effectively censoring you, and me, and journalism too.

This morning the BBC received the following notification from Google:

Notice of removal from Google Search: we regret to inform you that we are no longer able to show the following pages from your website in response to certain searches on European versions of Google:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/thereporters/robertpeston/2007/10/merrills_mess.html

What it means is that a blog I wrote in 2007 will no longer be findable when searching on Google in Europe.

Which means that to all intents and purposes the article has been removed from the public record, given that Google is the route to information and stories for most people.

So why has Google killed this example of my journalism?

Well it has responded to someone exercising his or her new “right to be forgotten”, following a ruling in May by the European Court of Justice that Google must delete “inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant” data from its results when a member of the public requests it.

Let’s pretend, 8 years from now, Len Brown petitions Google to have all of Whaleoil’s articles on him suppressed.  After all, it’s no longer relevant, he’s no longer  mayor, and it is definitely out of date.

This is insidious stuff.   Read more »

Google’s demise starts here

BrmSmukCUAIWcDE

“Do no Evil” is wrongly attributed to be Google’s credo, but it has become the de-facto one.  By erasing factual information from its databases, they are signalling the beginning of their decline.   The public have been very happy to trust Google, as they have been careful guardians and been able to balance their needs to make a dollar with those of their customers by only assuming a tiny footprint in their lives.

No organisation is large enough to sustain the damage that a loss of trust brings about.

The decline of Net neutrality.  Now the changing of history for those who have done things wrong but are publicity shy.

The rot has started.

It wasn’t Labour, or John Key, so who ordered the censorship at Fairfax?

Earlier today I busted Fairfax with their radical censorship of an article that was published yesterday.

Huge amounts of the original article were expunged and replaced with additions that made no sense. So much was removed that it shows clear manipulation of the story by someone.

WOBH contacted Labour and received an emphatic denial that they were involved in censoring the story. The spokesman for David Cunliffe said “We aren’t that powerful”.

Contact was also made with John Key’s people who as predicted said it wasn’t them.

I stand by my statement earlier that John Key probably laughed out loud when he saw David Cunliffe was calling him a liar.

Fairfax have now added a disclaimer to the bottom of the edited article.

balance Read more »

Back in ya box: Mark Steyn discusses the silencing of dissent

Mark Steyn is confrontational, he is also challenging and there are some out there that don’t like that, including Michael Mann (inventor of the hockey stick climate fraud) who is suing him for defamation.

Steyn is fighting it with the best defence of all, the truth.

In his latest offering at The Spectator he discusses the left’s willingness to shout down dissent, to silence opposition, and to use whatever means necessary.

These days, pretty much every story is really the same story:

  • In Galway, at the National University of Ireland, a speaker who attempts to argue against the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) programme against Israel is shouted down with cries of ‘Fucking Zionist, fucking pricks… Get the fuck off our campus.’
  • In California, Mozilla’s chief executive is forced to resign because he once made a political donation in support of the pre-revisionist definition of marriage.
  • At Westminster, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee declares that the BBC should seek ‘special clearance’ before it interviews climate sceptics, such as fringe wacko extremists like former Chancellor Nigel Lawson.
  • In Massachusetts, Brandeis University withdraws its offer of an honorary degree to a black feminist atheist human rights campaigner from Somalia.
  • In London, a multitude of liberal journalists and artists responsible for everything from Monty Python to Downton Abbey sign an open letter in favour of the first state restraints on the British press in three and a quarter centuries.
  • And in Canberra the government is planning to repeal Section 18C — whoa, don’t worry, not all of it, just three or four adjectives; or maybe only two, or whatever it’s down to by now, after what Gay Alcorn in the Age described as the ongoing debate about ‘where to strike the balance between free speech in a democracy and protection against racial abuse in a multicultural society’.

I heard a lot of that kind of talk during my battles with the Canadian ‘human rights’ commissions a few years ago: of course, we all believe in free speech, but it’s a question of how you ‘strike the balance’, where you ‘draw the line’… which all sounds terribly reasonable and Canadian, and apparently Australian, too. But in reality the point of free speech is for the stuff that’s over the line, and strikingly unbalanced. If free speech is only for polite persons of mild temperament within government-policed parameters, it isn’t free at all. So screw that.

Read more »

Dodgy Socialist Council try to censor Media

4204644791912149-t640

The tipline is saying that the extremely dodgy Hawkes Bay Regional Council have had a press conference yesterday where they tried to exclude a photographer from local newspaper Bay Buzz.   Read more »

Game of Thrones out now, but not at Warehouse

game_of_thrones_season_4_teaser

The latest season of Game of Thrones is out now and people can buy it everywhere…except The Warehouse. I went down to the local store and they don’t have it…I asked about it and was told they won’t be stocking it because it is R18.

Barack Obama is a fan and he has asked HBO for an advance copy so he can watch it on the weekend…lucky he doesn’t have to ask The Warehouse or he’d be disappointed.

The Warehouse seem to have decided to become censors and moral arbiters of what we can or can’t buy and watch Their stance that it is because it is R18 might be valid if it wasn’t for they hypocrisy.  Read more »

Censorship is alive and well on Whaleoil

There.  Bet that got your attention.

I implemented the need for verified email addresses to be used when commenting on Whaleoil.  This process isn’t needed if you use Twitter or Facebook to log into Disqus, but if you only use Disqus, and you don’t verify your email address, your comments will be held.

And this is why   Read more »

Right you lot, time for some navel gazing

A Whaleoil reader, we’ll call Paul, writes

I am a Subscriber to your Blog, and as such I appreciate your comments, fact finding and your opinions.

The whole issue is well put together and informative and sometimes fun to read.

However, increasingly I find that I am offended by the silly comments and messages left by some of the readers….most of whom seem to have personal opinions, but are often expressed in an offensive and childish manner.

I really feel that they detract from your publication.

Have you ever thought about “reining them in a little” as it were?   Read more »

They may take our lives but they will never take our freedom!

More and more of the Internet is being beaten down by trolls and destructive commenters.

Mix blatant bigotry with poor spelling. Add a dash of ALL CAPS. Top it off with a violent threat. And there you have it: A recipe for the worst of online comments, scourge of the Internet.

Blame anonymity, blame politicians, blame human nature. But a growing number of websites are reining in the Wild West of online commentary.

Companies including Google and the Huffington Post are trying everything from deploying moderators to forcing people to use their real names in order to restore civil discourse. Some sites, such as Popular Science, are banning comments altogether.

The efforts put sites in a delicate position. User comments add a lively, fresh feel to videos, stories and music. And, of course, the longer visitors stay to read the posts, and the more they come back, the more a site can charge for advertising.

What websites don’t want is the kind of off-putting nastiness that spewed forth under a recent CNN.com article about the Affordable Care Act.

“If it were up to me, you progressive libs destroying this country would be hanging from the gallows for treason. People are awakening though. If I were you, I’d be very afraid,” wrote someone using the name “JBlaze.”

We get our share here, including death threats, although most of those come via email.  But for however long we can, Whaleoil will let the community look after its own standards.   Read more »