FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Why is calling a Jew, "Jew", a crime?





ThePolemistis
Type Jew in google, or check out: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=jew&meta=
in which you will see "Offensive Search Results" by google as a sponsored link.

in which a special explanation page is given from google themselves:

Quote:

If you recently used Google to search for the word "Jew," you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We'd like to explain why you're seeing these results when you conduct this search.

A site's ranking in Google's search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for "Jew" brings up one such unexpected result.

...

The beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google, as well as the opinions of the general public, do not determine or impact our search results. Individual citizens and public interest groups do periodically urge us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Although Google reserves the right to address such requests individually, Google views the comprehensiveness of our search results as an extremely important priority. Accordingly, we do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it. We will, however, remove pages from our results if we believe the page (or its site) violates our Webmaster Guidelines, if we believe we are required to do so by law, or at the request of the webmaster who is responsible for the page.

We apologize for the upsetting nature of the experience you had using Google and appreciate your taking the time to inform us about it.

Sincerely,
The Google Team

p.s. You may be interested in some additional information the Anti-Defamation League has posted about this issue at http://www.adl.org/rumors/google_search_rumors.asp. In addition, we call your attention to Google's search results on this topic


If only google provided this political correctness for every race/group. Bloody biased.

I call them JEW. Nothing wrong with that. Google and the Zionists are teaming up. ADL is a bunch of crap. They cry anti-semetic to everything, even toilet paper on a saturday. Smile
Billy Hill
ThePolemistis wrote:
Google and the Zionists are teaming up.


Laughing Laughing Laughing That's funny shit right there... Very Happy

Maybe Google people ARE the Zionists... Razz
PMK-Bear
This is sort of old news; their explanation is that the vast majority of websites calling jewish people jews were neonazi braindeads, so they added a warning.

EDIT:
====

Apparently the warning stems from the algorithmically favored hate site jew watch (which, btw, is among the most disgusting things I've seen in a long time, thus I'm not linking to it)
Bikerman
It seems to me that PMK-bear is correct. There is no 'crime' in using the word Jew, but the simple fact is that many websites which are indexed on 'Jew' are anti-semitic. Google is simply warning users that the views expressed in these websites is not representative of the Google organisation.
LumberJack
It always depends on the context. If I call you a yank, is that offensive?
Moonspider
LumberJack wrote:
It always depends on the context. If I call you a yank, is that offensive?


Only because I'm a Southerner. Wink
paul_indo
This is absurd. Obviously freedom of speech is a dead issue these days, not even a pretense of it any more.

Maybe someone would search the net for "jew" actually looking for derogatory information in order to research it or even combat it. To make it unavailable for search seems to me to be a Nazi, fascist attitude.
Billy Hill
paul_indo wrote:
This is absurd. Obviously freedom of speech is a dead issue these days, not even a pretense of it any more.

Maybe someone would search the net for "jew" actually looking for derogatory information in order to research it or even combat it. To make it unavailable for search seems to me to be a Nazi, fascist attitude.


Who said it was unavailable? Shocked
Bikerman
LumberJack wrote:
It always depends on the context. If I call you a yank, is that offensive?
No, simply inaccurate - I'm a Brit.
liljp617
paul_indo wrote:
This is absurd. Obviously freedom of speech is a dead issue these days, not even a pretense of it any more.

Maybe someone would search the net for "jew" actually looking for derogatory information in order to research it or even combat it. To make it unavailable for search seems to me to be a Nazi, fascist attitude.

It's not unavailable -.- There's simply a warning saying Google isn't responsible for or represented by the material presented in the search hits (if one understands that many anti-semitic sites would probably be hits, this is understandable by Google).
coolclay
Quote:
To make it unavailable for search seems to me to be a Nazi, fascist attitude.
Where did you get that idea from? No one is blocking anything. They were just using it as an example. Just like if I was searching for nigga, because it was in my favorite hip-hop song, it would probably come up with some offensive stuff. They are just explaining how it works, and how they aren't responsible for what comes up. And they used Jew as an example.
MaxStirner
Out of interest, I attempted to duplicate the Yahoo! response but was not able to ("nig˛er, wop, chink ... as well as any number of sexist and racial slurs)". Regrettably I found no data on Yahoo! why "Jew" seems to be the only indexed word in this context. Assuming there is no undue influence, it does suggest that, very regrettably, antisemitism is still at the top of the list of racial bigotry Sad . Very sad.
smarter
That's bs. Is there somebody who does not know that the web is full of crap?
Why warning only for the word ''Jew"? Any special treatment is wrong!

Anyway, the first results from google.com are:
1 wikipedia = neutral
2 jewwatch = hateful
3 jewfaq = pro
Billy Hill
smarter wrote:
That's bs. Is there somebody who does not know that the web is full of crap?
Why warning only for the word ''Jew"? Any special treatment is wrong!



Then stop using Google. Laughing
HalfBloodPrince
I have to say…think about it. Say Google decided to use the word "niigger". I don't really think it would go so well if they said "We apologize for the hateful results you see when you search 'niigger'. We have no control over it." Well duh! You're searching one of the most racist terms in English! What do you expect? "Jew" isn’t supposed to be a derogatory term, and so they are right to apologize for any hateful results that pop up when you search for it.
quex
o.o? Google and Zionists aside, calling a Jewish person a "Jew" is not necessarily negative... it is, however, connotative of stereotypical treatment. More sensitive press will pay attention to the following argument, noun v. adjective in identifcation.

Please consider this:

"You're a Jew." versus "You're Jewish."
"He's a black." versus "He's black."
"She's a goth." versus "She's gothic."

It's not necessarily the word that makes the difference, but rather, whether it is used as a noun or an adjective. Using the noun derivation of the word, marked with an article like "a" or "an" automatically announces a stereotypical category into which the person being spoken of is neatly pigeonholed. There is no allowance for the person to deviate at all from the stereotype; no consideration that, in addition to the characteristic you have observed and are commenting upon, the individual may have a more complex character.

Used as an adjective, the observation may contain the same information without the same absolute connotation. While some more sensitive persons may still be offended that you have identified them by their color, ethnicity, religious affiliation, etc. at all, the overall comment is neutral in the eyes of the English language. The "stereotype" function is mostly lost and the sentence becomes a pure observation. For example:

"You're a Jew." = You are one of the Jews, who behave X and whom I think Y about.
"You're Jewish." = You practice Judaism. (pure observation, made perhaps upon seeing a person don his yarmulke on a Friday evening)

This is just another subtlety of English that drives ESL foreigners mad. ^_^ Cheers!
smarter
Billy Hill wrote:
smarter wrote:
That's bs. Is there somebody who does not know that the web is full of crap?
Why warning only for the word ''Jew"? Any special treatment is wrong!



Then stop using Google. Laughing


1. I have nothing against Google.
2. Your suggestion is ...useless ...to say the least.
smarter
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
I have to say…think about it. Say Google decided to use the word "niigger". I don't really think it would go so well if they said "We apologize for the hateful results you see when you search 'niigger'. We have no control over it." Well duh! You're searching one of the most racist terms in English! What do you expect? "Jew" isn’t supposed to be a derogatory term, and so they are right to apologize for any hateful results that pop up when you search for it.


I understand your logic but it is flawed. It's like the knife maker warning you that you may cut your finger because the knife is sharp. The internet brings into your house not only information and entertainment but also loads of crap. What's next? My ISP apologizing for the smut that entered my PC while I am surfing "safe" web pages?
Bikerman
smarter wrote:
I understand your logic but it is flawed. It's like the knife maker warning you that you may cut your finger because the knife is sharp. The internet brings into your house not only information and entertainment but also loads of crap. What's next? My ISP apologizing for the smut that entered my PC while I am surfing "safe" web pages?
Quite possibly. Fear of litigation often drives rather 'obvious' warnings on many products.
The example that is normally quoted is the supposed warning on Microwave ovens against using them to dry pets. Whether this is true or not I can't say (here in the UK there are no such warnings on any microwave I have owned). The story behind it is certainly an urban myth (the woman who dried a poodle in the microwave and 'blew it up').
There are, nontheless, warnings on many products that seem to defy common-sense and perhaps Google are following the trend.
http://www.crazywarnings.com/
coolclay
It most definitely comes from the fear of lawsuits. Unfortunately everyone has to worry about everything they do, say, because of the fear of lawsuits.

On a lighter note some of the warning labels that come from Asia are absolutely hilarious. Check the warning out on this product!
Related topics
My list of musics
Cheney's top aide indicted; CIA leak probe continues
islam is...
violent rioting earns respect... murder a necessary outlet
why the mobile phone you have?
Conservative Christian Dictionary.
"Why I published those cartoons" [mocking fascism]
sms jokes
sms jokes
Life is a game?
2 to 7 crimes stopped by guns for every crime using guns.
Do you have a right to be offended whenever you feel like it
The value of being fake
Is it immoral to write a story where the characters suffer?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.