Why did the Animal Liberation reports leave Google news?
Google Grunt | 13.02.2008 00:18 | Analysis | Animal Liberation | Repression | World
In the last few months there have been quite a number of reports have were put onto the promoted newswire, therefore they appeared on the google news searches. However recently it has been noticed that google has begun not including the promoted animal rights articles, despite still including other articles from Indymedia UK which discuss other important topics.
Take a search on google news (aparantly the one and only search engine for news across the globe) for something like "climate chaos"...
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=climate+chaos&ie=UTF-8&scoring=n
You will notice how one of the latest articles is from Indymedia UK, and it also appears when sorted "by relevance". This is because when IMC mods put articles as "promoted"; it then appears on search engines such as google news.
However, when it comes to animal rights, despite the following articles being promoted by IMC-UK this month, none have appeared on google's news searches under "animal rights" or "animal liberation"; therefore blinding the general public from alternative news sources.
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/391033.html (10th)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/391014.html (10th)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/391007.html (10th)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390886.html (7th)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390673.html (4th)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390588.html (3rd)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390465.html (1st)
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/390459.html (1st)
This is somewhat dissapointing that google is begining to "cherry pick" topics that it deems necessary, whilst ignoring those that executives probably consider "too extreme" or possibly even too opinionated.
By going back just a few pages, under the search of "animal liberation" you will notice that articles did used to appear:
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&scoring=n&q=animal+liberation&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&start=50
Infact, under the search of "sorted by relevance", animal liberation articles from IMC-UK regularly appeared in the top few; some even for weeks following.
In my personal oversight, thumbnails of vandalizism and arsons with links to the criminals reports where no longer what google wanted to promote and link viewers too.
Great shame...
If there's anything IMC mods can do about this issue it would be greatly appreciated. no doubt that if google hasn't started already, it's going to be ignoring a lot more important news from other growing movements...
Rant over.
![](/img/extlink.gif)
You will notice how one of the latest articles is from Indymedia UK, and it also appears when sorted "by relevance". This is because when IMC mods put articles as "promoted"; it then appears on search engines such as google news.
However, when it comes to animal rights, despite the following articles being promoted by IMC-UK this month, none have appeared on google's news searches under "animal rights" or "animal liberation"; therefore blinding the general public from alternative news sources.
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
This is somewhat dissapointing that google is begining to "cherry pick" topics that it deems necessary, whilst ignoring those that executives probably consider "too extreme" or possibly even too opinionated.
By going back just a few pages, under the search of "animal liberation" you will notice that articles did used to appear:
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Infact, under the search of "sorted by relevance", animal liberation articles from IMC-UK regularly appeared in the top few; some even for weeks following.
In my personal oversight, thumbnails of vandalizism and arsons with links to the criminals reports where no longer what google wanted to promote and link viewers too.
Great shame...
If there's anything IMC mods can do about this issue it would be greatly appreciated. no doubt that if google hasn't started already, it's going to be ignoring a lot more important news from other growing movements...
Rant over.
Google Grunt
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
Google Is As Much A Slut As Any Other
13.02.2008 03:58
Like all sluts, Google will move to its best advantage in any situation....so all anyone has to do......is play the slut's game..(trying very hard not to become one in the process)....promote google within your article and the bitch will come running.
Best of fun.
Coporateslutwatch
robots.txt problem?
13.02.2008 08:00
admin
Define "News"
13.02.2008 14:40
Maybe they don't consider chucking a bit of paint at McDonalds to be news. Or maybe they think that the tone of the articles is quite clearly glorifying a criminal act and encouraging others to emulate it.
Just because you spray "A.L.F." instead of "kev luvs shaz", it doesn't make it any less of a crime - it could be argued that it is more of a crime as it touches on coercion of the victim. That takes it into the realms of terrorism - using force against people or property to force a change in a person's actions.
It may sound daft, but that's how lawyers think.
MonkeyBot 5000
In regards to a bit of paint
13.02.2008 17:46
In regards to terrorism, I don't think you should be so quick to compare 9/11 or 7/7 to somebody writing Kim loves Shaz on the wall, or to somebody painting Love Animals on a building. It kind of diverts the attention from the thousands of people who lost their lives through violent terrorism.
Martin Luther King once said and stuck by the ideology that violence could only ever be through direct physical intervention towards a sentient being. For example kicking a bin over could be done in an angry way, but wouldn't be classified as "violent" unless the action was intended to harm somebody.
Using property destruction to pressure corporations into change can be classified as force, but can not be classified as terrorism. Intentional economic damage towards businesses are common pressure tactics by major charities such as the RSPCA and Greenpeace through activism such as letter writing, phone calls and boycotts. Despite the former being illegal, it is no different to the tactics of aboveground organisations; only that they property destruction causes significantly more economic damage than a boycott.
differ