An interesting article at the SMH has put forward that Google’s ‘autocomplete’ function is encouraging users to seek out websites that contribute to online hate speech by spreading racism and prejudice.
I mostly ignore autocomplete and rarely, if ever, notice Google’s auto completion tool taking place. However, for a laugh, it’s all too easy to write the words ‘Justin Beiber is…’ and have Google’s artificial brain offer up a host of potential (and often amusing) list of popular search phrases. In fact, an entire cottage industry is now devoted to the sacred art of ‘autocomplete fails’. Most of the better ones can be found at AutoCompleteFail , which lists a bevvy of mostly embarrassing search/autocomplete (mis)matches.
But according to the article, Professor Kevin Dunn from the University of Western Sydney, who is a lead researcher on the Challenging Racism Project at the University – puts the blame and focus squarely on the heels of Google’s ‘too-clever-for-its-own-boots’ autocomplete software for offering up the wrong idea:
“If people who have negative views about a given group feel like their views are in the majority, they feel much more emboldened to articulate those views or take some sort of nasty action.”
Given that Google isn’t telling anybody what to think per se, is Google really to blame for a random string of search words? Perhaps users should be responsible for their own actions and the websites they click upon? Crazy idea, I know.
Be sure to offer your thoughts on this tricky subject in the comments section below.
[Via SMH]
Kell
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 12:53 PMThis is the ‘freedom of speech’ vs ‘technology is evil’ argument all over again. If people are narrow minded enough to believe that an auto-complete term is sufficient evidence to demonstrate a majority view, removing the auto-complete won’t change their minds, they’ll simply fixate on something else. It’s called selective thinking or selective attention. The people in the article who claim to be against racism are equally guilty. They focus on the technology which is a-moral and a-political rather than the small-minded people, and demonstrate their own small mindedness.
Big Windows
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:52 PMI tend to agree, by and large, however, because the google search engine is not objective, in that you can use various filters and methods to move your listing closer to the top of search results, you cannot (without absolute knowledge of the google algorithm) state that it’s search engine is either a-moral or a-political.
Kell
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 6:52 PM@Big Windows: You are correct. Without fully understanding how the search algorithm works, I couldn’t say for sure how amoral/apolitical the search algorithm is. I’ll moderate my comment to say that the people in the article are just as ignorant about how the algorithm works. I believe my original point still stands, in that – assuming that radical extremist prejudiced comments aren’t high on the agenda for Google – these scaremongers who project their own facile interpretations of auto-complete as typical of a majority view are demonstrating just as poor a faculty for reasoning as the minority hate-speakers they claim to be trying to protect us from.
Joe Blow
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:00 PMThis is just silly and goes to show how far PC madness has gone. Also Australia in general has a bit of a partronizing culture where government has this assumption that people have no sense of personal responsibility e.g if you ride a bike you must wear a helmet rather than if you ride a bike you can choose to be safe or unsafe about your body.
Scott
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:09 PMBad example with the bike helmet. Your slightly crushed head costs the medical system and hence every taxpayer for a long time to come. I agree about the PC bit though.
Not a socialist
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:52 PMOh we are not allowed to take risks now because your precious socialist medical system that I have no choice but to be coerced to pay into MAY be repairing my broken head so I better step in line huh?
How about skydivers taking risks and making medical treatment more likely? Smokers? Fast food eaters? Motorcyclists? Skateboarders? mobile phone users getting brain cancer? drinkers? drug users? People who speed while driving? People who join the army and go fight in the unjust wars Australia is involved in and get shot up? Guess we should all step in line too to make sure the taxes WE pay don’t end up going to treat OUR medical problems huh?
Maybe we should wrap the whole world in cotton wool too huh you socialist P.O.S!
Studies have shown drivers are more likely to give a wide berth to a cyclist without a helmet hence you are more safe if you don’t wear a helmet.
As for this story on Google’s autocomplete, it is a total non-story that pushes a line from an ivory tower academic of PC internet censorship.
I wonder how many of my tax dollars are funding this academic’s anti-racism circle jerk. Whenever I hear from an academic I just think to myself how much I’d rather hear from a guy who lives in the real world who has actually had to run a business and create jobs/wealth and not just feed off the taxpayers. Hiding away in an ivory tower ‘researching’ racism is more offensive than a handful of hate websites.
The SMH is nothing but a socialist rag and Fairfax, its owner is slowly going out of business which is a good thing. You won’t be missed.
observer
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM“Studies have shown drivers are more likely to give a wide berth to a cyclist without a helmet hence you are more safe if you don’t wear a helmet.”
I can assure you that drivers don’t purposely seek to run down only those cyclists who wear helmets.
LOL
Stephen Earp
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 3:56 PMGreat rant.
Almost wrote your own story there mate!
It does, however, come off as a bit of a “non-story”, as you clearly labelled the Gizmodo article.
I think you’ll find that more people would complain about matters of net neutrality than those who would identify the Australian government and media as socialist movements. Good thing you concluded that bad boy before you said something that didn’t make any sense.
Now my “non-story” has concluded too.
Not a socialist
Tuesday, February 22, 2011 at 3:08 AM“I think you’ll find that more people would complain about matters of net neutrality than those who would identify the Australian government and media as socialist movements. ”
Oh I’m well aware the majority of Australians wouldn’t call themselves or their government socialist. This doesn’t mean that they are not.
I stand by my claims. Australians by and large love themselves some socialism. Just look at all the things you can get that I am forced to pay for. Paid parental leave, Family tax breaks, abortions, IVF, endless list why bother wasting my time continuing… I’ve got tax money to earn.
Michael
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 9:00 PMIs that you Ted Kaczynski?
anon
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:05 PMI’m sorry, it seems like you are saying that Google should filter their search results and go against net neutrality.
You want “Beiber is a douche” to be removed? What about political searches? How about “North Korea is oppressed”? Do you want all negative mentions removed for everything? Then I can’t see “Alienware M15x is a waste of money”.
Seems to me that you are trying to remove neutrality just so that you can make Google ‘carebear-ish’.
Haters gonna hate, deal with it.
matt
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:07 PMauto complete = what power internet users think = what NOT to think if you want to be perceived as a human being!
its pretty strait forward.
Trevor C
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:10 PMGeeezzzzzzz! Go get a life. Political correctness has gone too far. We are continually getting squeezed in by things we can’t do.
Quote from above: “f your comments are excessively self-promotional, obnoxious, or even worse, boring, you will be banned from commenting. All comments are moderated.”
Would I take it that if you do not blindly agree with the owners of this site that you will be banned. Just another example of political correctness and control gone mad.
You can say what you like, providing you agree with them.
Kevin
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:22 PMThe quote that I found strangest from that article was this one:
“”A lot of people sit around on Google when they’re bored and [click on] whatever stands out as being the most antagonistic,” said Mr Gollan, who created the Facebook group Australians Against Racism and Discrimination.”
Who are these people? Do they actually exist anywhere other than in Mr Gollan’s imagination? If so, is he seriously suggesting that people are using random Google searches to form their world view?
Steve Tran
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 7:31 PMBecause the hardcore liberals in this country can be just as obnoxious and manipulative as the diehard conservatives. Blowing racism out of proportion is merely that spectrum’s equivalent of blaming everything on scary black people.
It’s obviously just an inverted version of moral panic. Conjure up an entire demographic of weirdos who for no apparent reason, just click racist links on Google. It’s mind-boggling.
miles
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 1:23 PMAnyone see that recent simpsons episode with the chopper with the fox news logo on the side saying ‘not racist, but no 1 with racists’?
Who owns SMH? Just sayin’…
Greg
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 2:20 PMWhat a ridiculous article, I would have expected something as stupid as this to be published on MSN along with all their other garbage.
I suggest that the author of this research how search engines work before trying to make something out of nothing.
Mick
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 6:02 PMI worked on a project implementing search functionality into a system.
One afternoon the client came to us , pointing out that if you typed “Aboriginal health” into the system, it turned around and suggested “Aboriginal death”.
“Completely unacceptable”, we were told, and instructed to put a blacklist into the system of words/phrases that should NOT be displayed as suggestions, should they arise.
Never mind the fact that it did the exact same thing if you typed “Caucasian health”, or even “Dinosaur health” for that matter.