Netscape/Google filtering search results like AOL was.

[rfgdxm1]

Reading about Netscape using Google now on Usenet, I checked this
out. I couldn't find my site, which is in .ws TLD namespace, by any
means. I wondered if Netscape was using censored Google results like AOL
was recently. Yep. Try "Prince Charles" at www.netscape.com. The
official website of the Prince of Wales is being censored from the users
of Google/Netscape. Dunno if this censorship is permanent. IIRC AOL owns
Netscape now.

Is Google selling out, and allowing people to use their name on
half-baked, lousy search results that totally stink? Looks like it. I am
surprised that Google would want to risk this sort of brand
contamination. Netscape I can see. Netscape Navigator has been garbage
for years. It is times like this that I am grateful that I am an
Internet Explorer loyalist. At least msn.com doesn't censor my site from
the search results.

I am really beginning to dislike Google immensely.

[mbauser2]

I've got too much of a headache to write a new essay right now, so I'm just going to cut-and-paste what I said yesterday in Google's support newsgroup, talking about AOL's flirtation with filtering non-US sites:

...the insinuation that Google should only partner with companies that show the exact same results as Google is short-sighted. Not only are there plenty of legitimate reasons to want a language- or region-specific indices, but the very idea of "same results everywhere" would be odds with one of Google's core values: innovation. If you don't give companies the option to reinterpret things, there's no chance for them to do something innovative.

Google *wants* to see people try different things with the Google index. That's why they unleash things like the Google Web API on us. While I agree that AOL's "innovation" wouldn't have been a great one, I'm not going to argue with their right to try something different.

Adding, briefly: There's an analogy with "free speech" rights. Accepting free speech rights means accepting that some people will say things you don't like, because it protects your right to say things they don't like. Google accepting licensees innovating in "bad" ways is important because it also allows licensees to innovate in "good" ways. Google shouldn't be in the business of reviewing or pre-approving everything licensees do with the index, because it might prevent somebody from inventing something even cooler than Google's current implementation.

[danny]

Also interestingly, the Netscape search has "Sponsored results" (from Google) and "Matching Results", but on some searches Netscape pages have been inserted into the latter with no marking at all! I thought the FTC had said something about that... (Try e.g. "book reviews")

[mivox]

Personally, I just get tired of hearing the word "censorship" thrown around whenever someone doesn't care for a search engine's filtering/ranking algorithms & decisions.

Free speech/freedom from censorship means you can say what you like... you can build a website with your own chosen content & opinions, as long as you aren't breaking any other laws by doing so. It doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to advertise or index your website, televise your demonstration, listen to your street corner speech or support your efforts in any way.

The local newspaper isn't under any obligation to publish every single essay or letter submitted by their readers, the local library is not required to keep a copy of every book ever published on its shelves, and Google, AOL and all the other search engines are under no obligation to index every single site on the internet.

[Marcia]

rfgdxm1, it's your privilege to use whichever browser you choose and whichever search engine you choose. That's the beauty of the free enterprise system, the law of supply and demand in operation. Apparently public demand is such that use of Google is increasing in response to it, but that doesn't mean the others don't have value to other people.

It's Google's database and it's their choice what arrangements they make with their partner portals; however, we're not having another thread like the first. As it turns out, the first 9 search results at Google/AOL for Buckingham Palace are UK sites.

If Google is "doing something" with their database and results ordering, we're not their watchdogs to be badgering. Why don't we all relax and wait to see what happens after the update, when they're finished what they're currently doing.