Google Alternative needed to challenge Fascism

Is Google becoming emblematic of "neo-fascism"? Is Google's corporate culture that is in sharp contrast with Wikipedia, subverting the democratic and "free market" ideals of the internet? Is a new kind of search engine needed to re-kindle the spirit of the internet?

Your comments are invited. Reference: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/google-alternative-search-engine-project-the-net101-com

 

I guess Google already "punished" your a***litan site for this initiative - I see that your PR is down to zero even though your DA is 53. While I am skeptical regarding net101 idea, I admire you for trying

 

Thanks for your comment. However, arguably, Matt Cutts though Google is getting webmasters to act somewhat analogous to "trained seals". He says "jump". Webmasters ask "how high". This apparent dynamic is making a mockery out of the internet as an "engine of democracy", and as a free marketplace of ideas.

 

No. The "free market" is an inseparable part of a capitalistic economy. Google has every right to compete for as large a share of that free market as they can get. So does Bing. Likewise for the smaller search engines. That's what corporations do (and must do to succeed) in free market economies. In order to increase their market share, corporations must offer to the consumer better products and/or services than their competitors do. You can take this to the bank: Google is not concerned with pleasing webmasters. They are concerned with pleasing the broad population of consumers to the point where those consumers choose to use Google over Bing and the other search engines.

 

It is apparent that Google is not seeking to "compete" in a free market. Rather, Google is seeking to "control" the market (and specifically the internet) and subvert democracy in the process. Any society which enables huge trans-national corporations like Google to have unaccountable power enables fascism. A fascist society does not server "consumers". Rather, a fascist society serves elites at the expense of the rights and freedoms of the broader population.

 

I'll have to respectfully disagree. I understand the business world quite well (MBA degree + past president of two corporations). Every company in the free market would love to have 100% of the consumers using their product. It's the competition by others in their niche that prevents that from happening. Case in point: I'm old enough (soon 71) to remember IBM's early dominance. Nowadays, how many people do you know using IBM personal computers? Most likely zero. Other companies have successfully challenged their former dominance through effective free-market competition. Believe me, Google is not invulnerable, even though right now they are the major (but not only) player in search.

 

I think the big problem with Google at the moment is that they are making web site owners too afraid to add links. Without the links the world wide web falls apart. A new kind of search engine is needed which doe not rely on links to measure the value of sites. Unfortunately at the moment nobody has come up with a better solution so we are stuck with Google, the spammers and the self appointed "SEO experts"

 

Hello Jim4767,

I too understand the business world. I received a degree from Canada's top business school. I have also taught business law at the college / university-level. If the business world in relation to competition was as simple as you have stipulated, there would not be Anti-Trust Laws in the United States, and a variety of other laws designed to restrain large corporations subverting democracy. These include anti-discrimination laws.

Indeed, U.S. Anti-Trust Laws has been invoked a variety of times to prevent the kind of dominance and control that Google is pursuing on the internet.

Furthermore, Google has sought to claim itself to be a defender of "internet freedoms" and "democracy" through the internet as this corporation uses this freedom to manipulate the internet for its own exploitation without basic accountability large corporations from Walmart to Exxon demonstrate.

How many corporations do you know like Google that does not have a customer service telephone number to take down and investigate complaints?

 

Yes. I agree with you. Matt Cutts through Google is becoming the Big Brother of the internet. He is subverting the internet by creating a climate of fear at the unilateral decisions that is being taken to create an internet in Google's self-image.

 

That is very true statement. Just notice how few people participate in the last 2 threads on Google's dominance. There are hundreds of people here at DP.com who were affected by recent actions by Google, yet most of them are mute... May be we should start using private proxies when posting anti-Google threads here

 

I am not sure how to interpret that. The only time you're their customer it's when you use their paid advertising. Other than that they have no obligation to anyone for anything...

 

That is not a true statement. Google has been linked to all kinds of client relations areas. These include complaints ranging from punitive actions concerning the search rankings of online businesses to unauthorized use of intellectual property that include the copying of whole books to a variety of authors activities associated with diverse Google-owned platforms that affect the rights of individuals and businesses.

Indeed, most individuals and businesses would have much more of a reason to contact a Google customer service telephone number than Exxon that most people just get their gas from. Yet, anyone can easily contact Exxon by telephone, and most, if not all, other large private corporations that have a public profile.

It is unfortunate that so many webmasters have been apparently indoctrinated by "Big Brother" Google when it comes to the alleged righteousness of Google as a so-called defender of internet freedoms.

 

The funny thing is you're attacking me for no reason. I don't have any righteous obligations to Google. None.

You're inadvertently calling Google, WalMart, etc. evil. Whatever. No offense, but you come across as a person who wouldn't mind to have some totalitarian regime that would dictate big businesses what they can do or whether or not they can exist.

Dude, I grew up in a socialist Russia. I'd rather have WalMart or Google monopolizing some parts of the private sector (as large as they may seem) than the government telling you what you can or cannot do. Screw that! And just because you keep screaming "Big Brother!" doesn't make WalMart or Google that or evil. When the real Big Brother comes, you will be longing for the days when you could search Google and find whatever the heck you wanted to.

By the way, you can contact them here: http://www.google.com/contact/ or if you want to contact them in every country they are in, you can try this page: http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/company/facts/locations/

 

You seem to be under the impression that the only products/services offered by Google are paid search. I can think of many ways that one can be their customer without ever participating in a single search query. In all actuality they should have an anti-trust suit filed against them, but they have deep enough pockets to prevent that from happening.

 

Firstly, I wasn't attacking you. What part of my statement constitutes the "attack" you allege? Secondly, if you carefully read my statement, I indicated that Google doesn't have a basic client services telephone number in which users can discuss concerns with a client services rep, and if necessary, various levels of managemet.

You sent a link to email forms: : re: http://www.google.com/contact/ Show me the part that lists Google's client services telephone number. I never indicated Google could not be contacted by email, and then in turn totally ignore that email. Have you ever thought of how many people may contact Google that then ignores them? Google's current emailed based methods of contacting lack accountability in comparison to large corporations that include Walmart.

Your statement about "who I come across as" is reactionary, and an apparent attempt to deflect the "totalitarian" mentality of Google with an outrageous comment. Perhaps you work for Google?

And Sweden is arguably the closest society that has achieved the ideals of socialism. Russia has been an authoritarian society operating under state capitalism and was never really "socialist".

 

What specific SEO manipulations are you referring to? This is a 'Google forum', so my comments are 'on topic'. And what about Google's apparent broader manipulations concerning 'page rank'; punitive actions to penalize websites with innocent links in which there was no intent engage in "SEO manipulations", and the the ability of individuals in Google to affect democratic elections, and oppress social movements through calculated search engine manipulations? Who do you complain to in Google on any drop in page ranking against your website?

 

Google has been called "fascist" in this thread. That's not possible. Google is a corporation. By definition, fascism is a type of totalitarian government. If we had fascism in America, the government would own Google. Google would not "own" or control anything under fascism.

Secondly, Google does not own or "control" the internet. They simply provide a search engine for whoever wishes to surf the internet using them. If you don't like Google, fine. Use Bing. Google owes nothing, zip, nada, to webmasters — many of whose daily lives are dedicated to gaming the search engines.