Blog Feeds
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Anti-war slogan coined, repurposed and Googlewashed... in 42 days![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() THIS is an article about how seemingly un-democratic Google's PageRank system is. Posting here because so many activists use Google these days but may not know the sinister side of it {insert scary music}. See also http://www.google-watch.org By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
On February 17 a front page news analysis in the New York Times bylined by Patrick Tyler described the global anti-war protests as the emergence of "the second superpower". Tyler wrote: "...the huge anti-war demonstrations around the world this weekend are reminders that there may still be two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion." This potent phrase spread rapidly. Anti-war campaigners, peace groups and NGOs took to describing the global popular protest as "the second superpower" [Greenpeace release]. And in less than a month, the phrase was being used by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. [Financial Times - reg req'd]. And a week ago, a Google search for the phrase would have shown the vigorous propagation of this 'meme'. Rub out the word The details need not detain us for very long, because the consequences of this piece are much more important than its anodyne contents. It's a plea for net users to organize themselves as a "superpower", and represents a class of techno-utopian literature that John Perry Barlow has been promoting - the same sappy stuff, but not as well written - for the past ten years. Only note how this example is sprinkled with trigger words for progressives, liberals and NPR listeners. It concludes - if you can find your way through this mound of feel-good styrofoam peanuts - "we do not have to create a world where differences are resolved by war. It is not our destiny to live in a world of destruction, tedium, and tragedy. We will create a world of peace". In common with the genre, there's no social or political context, although the author offers a single specific instruction that is very jarring in the surrounding blandness: we must co-operate with The World Bank. Huh? It's politics with the politics taken out: in short, it's "revolution lite". Now here's the important bit. Look what the phrase "Second Superpower" produces on Google now. Try it!. Moore's essay is right there at the top. And not just first, but it already occupies all but three of the first thirty spots. The bashful Moore writes: "It was nice of Dave Winer [weblog tools vendor] and Doc Searls [advertising consultant] to pick up on it, even if it's not really ready for much exposure." No matter, Moore is an overnight A-list blogging superstar, at his very first attempt. Although it took millions of people around the world to compel the Gray Lady to describe the anti-war movement as a "Second Superpower", it took only a handful of webloggers to spin the alternative meaning to manufacture sufficient PageRank™ to flood Google with Moore's alternative, neutered definition. Indeed, if you were wearing your Google-goggles, and the search engine was your primary view of the world, you would have a hard time believing that the phrase "Second Superpower" ever meant anything else. To all intents and purposes, the original meaning has been erased. Obliterated, in just seven weeks. You're especially susceptible to this if you subscribe to the view that Google's PageRank™ is "inherently democratic," which is how Google, Inc. describes it. And this Googlewash took just 42 days. You are in a twisty maze of weblogs, all alike Moore's subversion of the meaning of "Secondary Superpower" - his high PageRank™ from derives from followers of 'A-list' tech bloggers linking from an eerily similar "Emergent Democracy" discussion list, which in turn takes its name from a similarly essay posted by Joi Ito [Lunch - Lunch - Lunch - Segway - Lunch - Lunch - Fawning Parody] who is a colossus of authority in these circles, hence lots of PageRank™-boosting hyperlinks, and who like Moore, appeared from nowhere as a figure of authority. Lunchin' Ito's essay is uncannily similar to Moore's - both are vague and elusive and fail to describe how the "emergent" democracy might form a legal framework, a currency, a definition of property or - most important this, when you're being hit with a stick by a bastard - an armed resistance (which in polite circles today, we call a "military"). As with Moore, academic and historical research in this field is vapored away, as if by magic. However, we have an idea of how this utopian "democracy" might look, if we follow the participants of Lunchbox's mailing list. These participants are quite clear about how they define democracy: "Democracy can function perfectly well without people painting their faces and blocking streets," writes one contributor. 42 Days "Words define action," sums up Alan Black. Black helps organise San Francisco's annual LitQuake event and is holding a festival to commemorate Orwell's centenary in the city in June. "Newspeak was one of the planks of the totalitarian regime. Big Brother was constantly redefining history and redefining words - he knew people respond to key words," he says. "It's interesting that they've identified that the only way to oppose the one superpower comes from the people, and sought to redefine that." But the real marvel is that they did it with so few people. Pew Research Center's latest research says the number of Internet users who look at blogs is " so small that it is not possible to draw statistically meaningful conclusions about who uses blogs." They peg it at about four per cent. But we're looking at a small sub-genre of blogdom, the tech blogs, and specifically, we're looking at an 'A list' of that sub- sub-genre. Which means that Google is being "gamed" - and the language perverted - by what in statistical terms in an extremely small fraction indeed. That was enough to make a "meaning" disappear. Googlewash "Contrary to earlier utopian theories of the Internet, it takes very little effort for governments to cause certain information simply to vanish for a huge number of people." Rub out the word 'government', and replace it with 'weblog A-list'. In this case a commons resource, this very potent and quite viral phrase, was created by millions of people. But it was poisoned by a very select number of 'bloggers'. Possibly a dozen, but no more than 30, we'd guess. Who is poisoning the well? The phrase "greenwash" will be familiar to many of you: it's where a spot of judicious marketing paint is applied to something decidedly rotten, transforming it into something that looks as if it's wholesome and radical new, but which is essentially unchanged. This is the first Googlewash we've encountered. 42 days, too. What else is coming down the pipe? ® |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (13 of 13)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13I posted this a brief description of this article (is that not the Eds' rules??) yesterday along with a couple of others within the same article and I came back to the newswire a few hours later and it was gone. What is the URL of the deleted articles Eds? I'll find it myself. So why do you delete some articles and not others? And this is even more in evidence when you've deleted one article that BRIEFLY outlines the intended web link and leave the copy/paste article. And don't go on about emailing you my complaint...do it in the open and explain in the open please.
All articles deleted are sent to a hidden list, which is openly archived,
I'm not on my home PC at the moment but I'll dig up the URL.
However I've looked at the hidden list and can't see a sign of said article of yours.
I certainly didn't remove it.
Just did a search - a wee bit paranoid?????
To Mark O 'Hehir: Where can I search? I've just gone back through the newswire and it is definitley not there. And as far as I'm aware strawberries have not been in my system for many years now, nor any other paranoia-inducing toxins. Obviously you have the open archive address so why not post it?
To Aiden: I cannot remember the full title of the article I posted but it finished with "and other stories" or something to that effect. It also included a link to michael moore's press release along with a connection to a parody site done by RtMark (www.washington.org) and another article,
Only a guess but could it be one of these (from my browser history) as they only come up with "by" on the screen.
http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=41945
id=41966
id=41989
http://topica.com/lists/imc-ireland-hidden/
Everything available.
And Eoin, reposting stories that have been on slashdot and theregister for a week is not advised.
But while we're blogging - did anybody notice the story about the google news service: IMC Ireland was an early contributor to this service (for a few weeks we were the only Irish newswire you got) but now they are offering paid news listings.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/30178.html
The link to the deleted article:
http://topica.com/lists/imc-ireland-hidden/read/message.html?mid=806087611&sort=d&start=1191
So can IMC Eds please give their reason for the deletion?
http://topica.com/lists/imc-ireland-hidden/read/message.html?mid=806087611&sort=d&start=1191
is the article from the archive of hidden posts. Dunno what the reason for hiding was but I'm sure it was reasonable. Best way to get a response on a hidden post is to use the contact form on the site as it's a direct link to the mailing list (rather than a comment on a story that might not get noticed).
Having said that I agree that posting last week's Register stories is not the best idea. But, following C's lead, here's another story on the "press release" thing (kinda parallels the debate we had here a while agon on allowing press releases onto the newswire)
http://news.com.com/2100-1025-996100.html
including a discussion of Infoshop being taken on and off! IT does create an issue, though, the same criteria that some people use to exclude press releases could exclude political sites as well; perhaps putting it all in rather than just the same old same old is more informative. I.e. search Nike and get a NYT story, a Nike press release, and a No Sweat site editorial or something. Personlly though I oppose Indymedia being on the list of sites in the first place (it credits us with deleted stories on a far too regular basis).
.
i have checked and am happy to report I have not been google-washed. I am as gooey as ever.
viscous.
€ does not = $
now houses our emails, logos our "cultural events", censors Chinese politics, bought out all its rivals including the wonderful "ungoogle" and what is most strange, went from weighting some individuals (amongst whom is a regular contributor to indymedia) as radicals and extremists to "nice sort of people". Perhaps I'm getting old. Maybe I'm getting respectable. But all I know is that google is all there is, (other than yahooooooooooooooooo) and we're all on the viscous web. Bots or not.
Do we play this field? obviously we do. metasearching and spidersearching the internet has become harder and harder as the near monopoly of google's database has emerged unchallanged.
Behind it all is a weakness in european copyright law. no European company or state could under current EU patent or related laws assemble such a database. And that is all google is my friends, my daily companions, even if I get up your nose. A database which sets our world vision.
it sucks.
o as if.