Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publishers for user comments

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by SpicyLemonZest on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @06:38PM (#24487547)

It’s an argument that pulls in a bunch of political baggage and just isn’t relevant to the source article. If Google does indeed have a double standard - if they demonetize other websites for hosting nasty comments while defending their right to host nasty comments themselves - that’s bad regardless of what Section 230 permits.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by ribosometronome on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:06PM (#24487751)

There is no double standard in arguing that platform creators shouldn't be legally liable for racist user comments while simultaneously arguing that platform creators don't need to be paid for hosting racist user comments.

I'm not a Googler, but my impression was that Google mostly holds themselves to this standard. Youtube routinely demonetizes videos with questionable content and blocks ads aimed at racist keywords.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google accused of ‘double standard’ for punishing publish... by floatingatoll on Tuesday September 15, 2020 @07:05PM (#24487745)

For whatever it's worth, I would support the concern you're describing if it were simplified to remove the whole Section thing entirely. Specifically:

"It would be a double standard if Google refuses to display advertising on other third-party websites alongside racist user content, but then displayed advertising on their own first-party websites alongside racist user content."

Google clearly states that they have automated detection of racism, so highlighting examples of Google displaying for-profit advertising on racist speech in Google Groups posts or YouTube comments would be vastly more meaningful an argument that they're applying a more restrictive standard to their customers than they apply to themselves.

Either Google does hold those of their own sites that display advertising on user content to the same burden of moderation that they demand from the advertising customers — or they do not, and are therefore hypocritical to do so with others. Whether or not section 230 exists, or is applicable, it simply doesn't matter.

[ Parent | on HN ]