Weblog people love to jerk off into the Google Kleenex™ (still in beta), rub the resultant mess all over their faces, then post about it on their sites. They’re putting the Goo into Google at thousands of litres per second. They’d pile on and collectively hump it into a smoking hole in the ground if they could find enough holes to plug with their techno-weiners (or grind its G-pelvis to dust, if they’re she-geeks, I suppose).
Investors love the Goo as well. If they got in on the ground floor, they’ve made enough money that they just don’t give a shit what’s going on in the dungeons beneath the Googleplex. “Hell, the cafeteria lunches are legendary, and the corporate motto is “Don’t be evil”, right? Look at that stock price! We’re too busy running around naked with bouquets of rolled-up dollar bills sticking out of our asses to worry about details!”
Advertisers, the whoring undead scum that take everything they touch and convert it to shit, they’re nuts-deep in the Goo. After all, Google is an advertising company first and foremost, now. If it’s not the world’s biggest trader of weapons of shit conversion, it’s certainly the most exciting. “The eyeballs! The delicious sweet tangy eyeballs, filled with goo! Let a thousand text-ads bloom!”
Hell, I use its services a hundred times a day, literally. There’s wonderchicken goo in the bucket, too.
We live in a world where the country that calls itself the Champion of Freedom and Democracy tortures prisoners in an archipelago of secret prisons. Where the evil dimwit homunculus known inexplicably as the Leader of The Free World unapologetically claims the right to spy on the communications of his own citizens. A squinting faux-cowboy weasel who launches his hobbyhorse war in Iraq on lies, grudges, and incompetence one day, sells it as crusade for Freedom, then turns around, drops and mouths the potent rhinohorn-stiffened economic cock of the Chinese the next. Don’t get the wrong idea, though. It’s manly, Texas-style dong-wrangling. It’s realpolitik.
And it’s enough to make your head spin. Rather than green vomit, though, words fountain out, splash and drip down the walls.
But hang on: the plot — convoluted and far-fetched as it already is — thickens. The Freedom Through Torture (Liberty Through Surveillance Department) gang wants Google to disclose information about its users. Google says “No way, we’re like totally not evil!” Almost the very next day, as they used to say in the fairy tales, Google then turns around and says “Hey, we’re totally going to censor search results in China, though! It’s not all that evil, right?” Are you seeing a pattern here, too?
Google is full of shit. The fact that they’re not the only ones does not excuse them.
And though there are a few weblog people out there saying “My little revenue-goo stream is not worth throwing in with this kind of thing,” the river of Goo shows little sign of drying up. Same thing goes for the investors, not surprisingly, and the marketing shit-alchemists know there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
So Andrew McLaughlin, who is Google’s Senior Policy Counsel, whatever that means, says:

“While removing search results is inconsistent with Google’s mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our mission.”

Noted Large and Smart weblogger David Weinberger, who is indeed Smart, and Large in the sense that he is one of the brighter sources of light in our in our texty netherworld, and casts a long shadow in the cashosphere that has attached itself limpetlike to us over the past couple of years, well, he gives Google a bit of a pass, though he admits to ‘being torn’ in face of McLaughlin’s justification. Well, OK. It’s true that nothing is black and white. Grey is the new black.
In classic wonderchicken style, I’m entirely untorn, though.
Andrew McLaughlin is also full of shit. That’s no surprise — he’s a lawyer, right? But his artless waffle tastes a lot like Bush’s pet lawyer, Alberto Gonzales, helping to justify torture. But you know, only some torture. “Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, ‘stress positions’, psychological cruelty? Evil? Well, less evil than thumbscrews, castration, disemboweling, stuff like that, right? We’re totally all about the freedom and the democracy!”
Again:

“While removing search results is inconsistent with Google’s mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our mission.”

What’s inconsistent with Google’s corporate motto — remember, it’s “Don’t be evil!” — is being evil, you asshole. Remember #6, from the ‘ten things’: “You can make money without doing evil.” This isn’t rocket science, and David Weinberger notwithstanding, it’s not complicated.
Google is a company, and more significantly an advertising company, and that means that the truth is that nothing can come in the way of whoring itself out for a sleazy but necessary buck or two. You have to keep your investors happy. It’s evil to get down on your knees in the filth and suck that cock in the back alley, then stab the guy and steal his wallet. It’s less evil to just drain the goo and let him stagger away. Yay! Everyone’s a winner, and you can rest easy, at least after you’ve scored some smack to keep the demon at bay. You have to keep your dealer happy. Not to mention your pimp.
Google doesn’t need to be in China. There are other search engines, domestic and international. The absence of Google is not going to suddenly deprive those poor Chinese citizens — the ones looking over their shoulder to see if the government is watching — of the ability to find information about washing machines and condoms. The only reason Google ‘needs’ to be there is the money. The sweet, filthy, repressive, execution-happy, police state money. Google wants growth, because that’s what investors want. Growth. Not the metastatic cancer cauliflower kind of growth either — they want those graphs pointing skyward, proud and erectile. They want to get in to China, build a foothold. And they’ll do evil to get that market share.
But there’s no actual need. No need to get down in the filthy alley in front of the Chinese government. Let Baidu have the money. Let someone else do it. You can make money without doing evil.
“Removing search results is inconsistent with Google’s mission, providing no information (or a heavily degraded user experience that amounts to no information) is more inconsistent with our mission.”
Let there be no confusion. Google’s mission is to make money. And holy crap, those Chinese have got some money these days.
Words have meanings. We’ve never been at war with Oceania. f–k you, Google.
[Update, long long after the fact (June 07 2006)] : ‘We were evil, Google founder admits.’ The ‘it’s only business’ apologists can commence to sucking my balls….. now.

Category:
non compos mentis, Politics Chafe My Scrote
Tags:
, , ,

Join the conversation! 22 Comments

  1. Stav, I strongly suspect you (and lots others besides) have been biding your time, waiting for a ripe opportunity to give Google a good whack for that nobly pompous “Do no evil” bit. Shit, the whole world’s been waiting for it, carving knives at the ready.
    Well, this is a good one. China, man.
    According to Joho, they’re throwing in some extra bits with the censorship. Important bits. The most insidious evil of censorship is to present things in such a way as to suggest this is all there is on the matter. Google’s thwarted that and also included a trail for the brave.
    On balance, it’s not a bad guy thing they’ve done. On balance, when it is asked, “who here is without cum-dampened kleenex? huh? huh?” do you not skulk back to the coop?
    p.s. David’s gotta watch it with the [purportedly evil schmee]-is-a-nice-guy (you really oughta meet him) thing. It’s dangerous.
    p.p.s. yes, Google’s out for money. I think there are some who might say that particular motivation makes the organization inherently evil. There are some who say there should be a limit to what a company can make and/or for how they can make it. That, i think, is a related topic for another time. True, Google is not a (principally) benevolent entity, but their modifications to the censorship here, imo, should keep them boo-goo free.

  2. Stav, I strongly suspect you (and lots others besides) have been biding your time, waiting for a ripe opportunity to give Google a good whack
    Hell no, memer. I’ve been talking shit about Google for ages already (’cause I’m so cool and contrarian, don’t ya know), mostly at Metafilter.
    Companies make money. That’s all well and good. But Google pretending here that anything other than the lucre is the driver here makes me go all ranty. Obviously.
    And I am aware, though you didn’t bring it up, that Google’s no worse than any other company in this, and perhaps in some way better.
    But those other companies don’t have a corporate motto that says “Don’t be evil”. Like I said, words have meaning, or they don’t.
    Perhaps my argument is that words don’t actually mean anything in this world in which we find ourselves.
    “If god is dead, then everything is permissible,” knowwhaddimean?

  3. Words do have meaning, certainly. If you can trap em — they’re slip’ry critters most of the time. All greased up on that relativity stuff.
    If they’re used even half-way honestly, words at least carry intention. And while that’s a far cry from the resolutely absolute, it still counts man.
    Does too.
    Drunk and bumbling the grey fog, we’re nothing without scale and proportion.

  4. Bonus link: Philipp Lenssen makes some of the same points as I tried to do, in a way less ranty way here.

  5. we’re nothing without scale and proportion.
    I agree entirely.
    But a good rant once in a while helps clear the carbon out of the valves.

  6. I hear what you’re saying, but I find it interesting that almost every blogger that I’m reading who actually lives in China thinks that Google’s decision was, on balance, the right one.

  7. “But a good rant once in a while helps clear the carbon out of the valves.”
    no doubt, yo. plus…(what the) fuck i know, anyway?
    *toasts to the rooster*

  8. We might as well discuss the “scale and proportion” of that ever-so-slippery slope. After all, it’s just another way of justifying…

    Oooh, I get it! Goo! Like cum!
    Hehehe … “goo.”
    Good one.

  9. Jesus, McGee. Way to kill the damn joke.
    Or maybe that’s what you were intending. Ya bastard.

  10. Uh-frickin-oh.
    This is not good evil.

  11. Blocking beer?! Never mind petty unprofitable shit like human rights — this means war!

  12. Oh, it’s on, baby. But on the real, if Google doesn’t fix these “bugs” pdq, this is (obviously) a huuuge hit on credibility/goodwill. What was the goldanged rush to get in there before it was all set to work as hoped? Google knows C|NET has a maayjor hateon for them, they should expect any glaring missteps will get arclight treatment. Do heads roll for this? Will this be quickly forgotten in the next porn search? At this point, I unabashedly concede it’s worth asking if it was worth it.

  13. Hmmm. I’m usually laugh when folks talk about “the slippery slope”… but then there’s this damn footnote to the ten things:
    “This doesn’t mean we’ve changed our core mission; just that the farther we travel toward achieving it, the more those blurry objects on the horizon come into sharper focus (to be replaced, of course, by more blurry objects).”

  14. “After all, Google is an advertising company first and foremost, now.”
    Very smooth how you just sorta slipped in that “now” at the end there, hoping no one would notice. In case you don’t remember, Google started out without ads. The popularity of Google is what forced them to start the ad program, which of course became far more lucrative than they could have imagined.
    What fucking pisses me off about your post is that its really not about China. You were just looking to take a whack at Google. What, did you lose some money when the Google stock fell recently? Or did you just miss your chance to get Google stock at all. Aww, poor baby. When this relatively weak opportunity came along, you grasped at it. It makes me sick.
    “Google is full of shit.”
    You’re full of shit. What the fuck does torture have to do with Google. Get out of your bubble, man.

  15. I ‘slipped in’ the word ‘now’, hoping no-one would notice? What are you talking about, exactly? Do you think I was speaking sotto voce and this stuff comes out a magical autotranscription machine or something?
    Gustaf, it’s pretty clear you’re not very clever judging by how completely you missed any and all of my points (and the fact that I was ranting with a grin on my face). Unfortunately you’re even less amusing.
    Not only that, but it would seem that you’re a bit of an asshole as well. And by ‘a bit’, I mean a flaming gargantuan goatse of an asshole. Do you make a habit of stopping by other peoples’ sites and telling them that they’re full of shit?
    Do you kiss you mother with that mouth?
    ‘Get out of your bubble, man’
    On second thought, maybe you’re just a no-talent blog-comedian, playing a dumbass on the internet for our amusement. That could be.
    Either way, I’ll take back the ‘not very amusing’ thing. I did get a chuckle or two at your expense.

  16. Further: “What fucking pisses me off about your post is that its really not about China.”
    No shit, Sherlock. Fuck China. I don’t give a shit about them, in part because, as I made clear to anyone with a couple of braincells to rub together — unlike you, friend Gustaf — that the Chinese will get along just fine without Google servicing the account.
    The post is about Google, dummy. I don’t really give a shit if you thought it was going to be about China. I didn’t write it for Gustaf, I wrote it for me.
    China, and you, can kiss my shiny metal ass.

  17. I came to this site following a link from a colleague who argued similarly to you, that Google should have just said ‘screw you Beijing’, and at the same time said ‘screw you Chinese people.’ Apparently, I seem to have seem to have stumbled into the slums of the internet.
    But fine, since you claim I missed any and all of your “points,” lets review the main one, shall we?
    “Google doesn’t need to be in China. There are other search engines, domestic and international.”
    True, there are other search engines. But, according to your logic, what makes them any less evil than Google? Why aren’t you spewing curses at all of them? Is Google not allowed to make a stab at providing a service for the Chinese people?
    I think one of my colleagues put it best: “It’s easy to come up with the same thing Google provides to people like you and me: access to a fast, high-quality search engine that lets them find information. But… to Chinese users, Google is also providing another service, one that’s potentially far more valuable and will have far more impact. The service Google provides to Chinese users is a look at just how much their government meddles with what its people are allowed to see, and what topics their government would rather they didn’t know much about.”
    And from you:
    “The Freedom Through Torture (Liberty Through Surveillance Department) gang wants Google to disclose information about its users. Google says “No way, we’re like totally not evil!” Almost the very next day, as they used to say in the fairy tales, Google then turns around and says “Hey, we’re totally going to censor search results in China, though! It’s not all that evil, right?” Are you seeing a pattern here, too?”
    Google follows laws when it find it absolutely necessary to do so. Thus it follows censorship laws in France, Germany and the United States. But Google also pledges to protect individual privacy. Is that at stake with this China censorship? No. Is that at stake with the US Govt beginning to probe into Google’s inner archives? Yes.
    In summary, I think you should get over your Google-hatred. Its unsightly.
    No, I don’t have a habit of stopping by peoples’ sites and telling them that they’re full of shit. This issue, and your ridiculously pompous and derisive tone, struck a nerve. So I made a special exception.
    I’m sorry if I seemed to be a bit of an asshole before. I should have realized that theres only room for one asshole in this weblog, and any retaliatory asshole-ness will be met with territorial stupidity.
    I’ll go now and leave you to your asshole-ness.

  18. Thoughts from inside the bucket

    Now, first off, it bears remembering that I, like so many, am still nursing directly from the distended teat of the Google: everything from my dozens of web searches daily to the servers and infrastructure that carry this sad and shambling excuse for a…

  19. Look, let me try and lay it out for you, point-by-point, in words of two syllables or less, and see if you can follow the roccocco intricacies of my argument this time.
    1) Google the company has as it’s corporate motto ‘Don’t Be Evil’. It lists as one of its ten guidelines ‘You can make money without doing evil.’
    2) No other company, at least in this space, says the same thing.
    3) Google then goes and actually does evil, for what is clearly the profit motive.
    4) They claim that there’s such a thing as ‘not too evil’.
    5) I dispute that and claim that words have meanings.
    6) I say to hell with Google.
    But, according to your logic, what makes them any less evil than Google?
    They aren’t. I thought that was freakin’ obvious. But those other companies don’t claim to be Good and Nice and unEvil. They claim to provide goods and services for money. They don’t hold themselves to a higher standard, and even if I might, who cares? It’s totally moot.
    Is Google not allowed to make a stab at providing a service for the Chinese people?
    They can do whatever they like. But I don’t care for them blowing smoke up our asses about their motivations, as should be abundantly clear by this point.
    So I made a special exception.
    Don’t I feel lucky.
    Look, it’s clear you’re a bit humour impaired, and that’s just dandy. If you couldn’t get a chuckle out of what was clearly ranty performance art, that’s all well and fine. Just because I’m irate about something doesn’t mean I can’t have some fun by going hyperbolic when I talk about it. And don’t expect to come into my house, shit on my living room carpet, and think I’m going to be all smiles about it.
    Apology accepted.

  20. Wait – was that a chicken shit reference?…

  21. Uh, I’m not sure what you mean.
    But sure, why the hell not!

  22. Writing Open Some New Blogholes

    Now, I usually do make a token attempt not to follow up one mock-apoplectic rant with even more negativity and waving of the stiff central digit, but if this isn’t satire, well it should be. Or maybe it shouldn’t. One…

Comments are closed.