Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

Why only sex? I was shocked after google searching!


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Ninel2006aZ

Ninel2006aZ

    New To Community

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 01:36 AM

I was browsing goole and found this example.com!! This site is about dirty sex! Why people do this? Why my little pony content presents in Google search? What if children find this adult site?





<administrator's note - I removed the URL because there is no need to include it here to discuss this topic, and besides, children might follow it to that site.>

#2 SEOigloo

SEOigloo

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2100 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 02:11 AM

Hello Ninel -
Unfortunately, you will find that there is pornography on most search engines, unless there is a family-friendly one I don't know about. It is possible to set a filter in Google to block unwanted content, but unfortunately, it is not foolproof. You can also dowload plugins and software that are designed to filter unwanted content.

I agree with you that Internet porngraphy is dreadful, and have read several studies of the psychological effects of Internet pornography on men, women and children.

The fact of the matter is, our civilization's media shows as little concern for the safety of women and children as most civilizations have historically shown. Women know, in their private lives, how pornography has affected them directly both as girls and as adults, and I for one would welcome a search engine that does not have dealings with the people who contribute to this destructive legacy that will continue to be handed down to our sons, daughters, grandchildren and so forth. But, at present, the search engines do index pornographic website, just as they do other sites, and I am sorry for whatever it was that you saw that shocked and distressed you so.

The only way to truly keep children from being exposed to this is not to let them use the computer unsupervised. You might even consider, if you are a mother, making a list of nice, child-friendly fun and educational sites in your favorites menu for your kids to visit. Then you will know, sitting beside your child, that if the site is in your favorites, you have previewed it and found it to be appropriate. This would be my best advice to you to protect your kids.

As for protecting yourself from the insult of seeing your sex being treated in an objectifying manner, I have no answer. I find it really heartbreaking that if a victim of (Rhymes with tape) were to go on the Internet looking for help, she, or he, would very likely have the traumatic experience of seeing Google's top 10 delivering them results for sites glorifying the act of (Rhymes with tape). Totally unacceptable, in my opinion.

Best Wishes,
Miriam

#3 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 08:10 AM

Bill

I think it was wise of you to remove the link as it appears to me that the intent was to promote it rather than discuss it. Google has a very good filter on that ensures that sex websites are filtered out based on user preferences. It normally defaults to Safe Search ON. Unless you switch it on intentionally there is very little chance that one will find my little pony in the results. Now and then I am critical of Google but on this point I must comment that Google's filter is very good.

I agree with you that Internet porngraphy is dreadful, and have read several studies of the psychological effects of Internet pornography on men, women and children.



I agree with you Miriam on this point and do not condone it, however, personally I do not agree with censorship of any sorts except where the material infringes on somebody else's freedom. Children will get to this material one way or another if they put their mind onto them.

I grew up in a very conservative environment and during early adolescence kids tend to experiment and try and look at pictures etc. Any form of nudity was censored and for a while we boys wondered how girls can have stars on the chests! :) ... and then there was this Junta and this Colonel that decreed that all mini-skirts should be banned! Crazy world!


The only way to truly keep children from being exposed to this is not to let them use the computer unsupervised.


Not sure if this is a good idea! Rather use a filter!

Yannis

#4 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 10:08 AM

Excellent post and points, Miriam.

I think that you may be right about the initial post here, Yannis.

Regardless of the intent of that post, the topic is a pretty good one, and I thought it was something that we could discuss if I removed the URL.

How much filtering should a search engine do? Some things that some people may find objectionable, others find valuable. Does freedom of speech only apply to the things that we like?

We shouldn't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre, and we should be concerned over how easily accessible we make some material on the web to children.

Today's major search engines have "safe search" filters. How safe are they?

Supervision and discussion are important when it comes to children and the web. But there are other places where children are also exposed to adult themes and images, such as cable television. At some point children are going to access material that they probably should't be seeing, and it is almost impossible to monitor them 24 hours a day.

Is filtering software a good approach? Will kids find ways to circumvent it easily? I had a friend who inherited a computer from someone else, and it had a childsafe filter on it which she asked me if I would help her remove.

It took me about 15 minutes to do so. A web search held the answer, delivering me to a page written by a 14 year old with explicit instructions on how to remove the filter.

#5 dgeary9

dgeary9

    Mach 1 Member

  • Members
  • 334 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 12:26 PM

Google has a very good filter on that ensures that sex websites are filtered out based on user preferences. It normally defaults to Safe Search ON. Unless you switch it on intentionally there is very little chance that one will find my little pony in the results.

Maybe if all you search on is SEO ;-)

Not true on all topics. I do a lot of work for breast cancer research and advocacy, and pregnancy/parenting issues. A lot of searches on those topics will bring up porn sites in the top 10 results - try a search on "pregnant pics" for example. I ran that search recently with my 2.5 year old on my lap to try to show her what a big pregnant belly looked like. My safe search filters are on the default "moderate" setting - using the strict filters removes a lot of legitimate sites from my searches.

The problem I have with pornography so easily accessible online has very little to do with nudity or sex (or at least that kind doesn't bother me, LOL). What gives me nightmares is my 8 year old niece tripping across much nastier content - there is a LOT of stuff on the web that is FAR worse than what my child is likely to trip across almost anywhere else in this country (although I'm not fond of the violence on cable TV and the news either!).

I think parents have an enormous responsibility to create safe environments for their children, and to teach them how to have their own filters. That said, it would be nice if society felt a little more need to support the healthy growth of our children. I think the "kids will find this stuff eventually anyhow" rationalization doesn't excuse us from trying to make such exposure a lot more difficult.

<edit>Fixed BBCode</edit>

#6 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 12:28 PM

Ummm, what's wrong with smut on the internet (except that some of it is of very low quality indeed)? Where else to find it unless you're living in Holland :)

Of course, I wouldn't want my children to come across it before they're - say - 28 years old :blink: For now, I rely on education and guidance to accomplish that.... As soon as that fails, I may have to resort to parental filters and whathaveyou. But until now, I haven't had similar problems. Maybe we are searching for completely different things - in completely different places?

----edit: explained better by dgeary9 :)

Edited by Wit, 07 August 2006 - 12:30 PM.


#7 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 01:39 PM

That said, it would be nice if society felt a little more need to support the healthy growth of our children. I think the "kids will find this stuff eventually anyhow" rationalization doesn't excuse us from trying to make such exposure a lot more difficult.


I agree with you on making it a bit more difficult for kids. That I what Google is trying to do, but filtering as anyone knows is not an easy computer programming task. Society can only do so much - and please let's leave the politician's out of it - parents do not take parenting responsibilities seriously enough. this task should fall entirely on parents shoulders and to a lesser extent onto educators.

I agree that some topics are likely to bring pictures and pages that should not be there as the keywords used are similar to one's one could use for explicit material. However sometimes the criticism is unfounded. A search for pregnant women pics on Google brings results that include the BBc and Scientific American (see here).

I am really against net censorship other than user filtering. I now work in Dubai. Dubai's network is divided into two (why is another story). On the one hand there is censorship imposed by the main provider. If the filter algorithms determine that your query will return explicit material it blocks the page with a message. It's annoying in that these filters do not work well and many legitimate websites are blocked. Do the kids here visit sites with explicit materials. Yes they all do. They search in strange languages and know of all these sites that hide the pictures using harmless words. The net cannot be policed. Fullstop! What makes internet censorship even worse is the abusing by the politicians for their own purpose. (China is the main example but a lot of other countries are into it). I have lived under censorship in a lot of places and ten times out of ten it was misused politically. The entry point is normally the protection of kids but it ends up with the locking of people.

Yannis

PS Seems that the quotes and links are broken!

<edit>Fixed the BBCode Mike</edit>

Edited by projectphp, 07 August 2006 - 10:31 PM.


#8 dgeary9

dgeary9

    Mach 1 Member

  • Members
  • 334 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 03:50 PM

I think it's important to make a distinction between an 8 year old tripping across porn while conducting an entirely innocent search, and a 14 year old who knows how to bend/break all the rules to find what they want.  I'm not asking society to help me with my 14 year old   :P , but it is frightening what an 8 year old can find by accident.

I'm not a big fan of censorship for exactly the reasons you mention - it can be a very slippery slope.  However, I hope that an 8 year old viewing the really nasty side of porn falls onto the "not OK" part of everyone's slope.  Find other ways to protect freedom of expression.

#9 projectphp

projectphp

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3935 posts

Posted 07 August 2006 - 11:05 PM

The problem is the people who supossedly want to help, who promote measures destined to fail, that usually simply cost money.

The responsibility should be parents, and society should be helpiong to empower parents, not stopping stuff that would get through anyway.

The problem there is that many parents are not only techno-illiterate, but technophobic. This plays a terrible battle for many with the "education guilt" that is so ingrained. Kids need to learn how to use computers, yet many parents are scared of them, and this battle is one that many parents choose to try to force onto others.

Rather than learning how to protect their kids, many parents instead try to change the world, a truly ludicrous proposal when you think about it long enough. I mean, which is easier: catching every single criminal in the world or getting a lock for your door?

Almost every solution for blocking porn from kids access takes the wrong approach, and tries to halt it at the source (the internet) rather than at the most easily controlled point (one's own home). One simply can't stop kids stumbling into the wrong places if there are no restrictions on where they are able to stumble. Most every interent connection has unfettered access to everything and that is nuts. Can you imagine letting your kids go anywhere in the real world? That is essentially the way most people's home internet is set up.

What parents need are tools designed to help them both know where their kids go and what they see, and ways to restrict that. Parents should be able to get a log of every single domain name their kids look at, and should have tools to set their own DNS, designed to stop their kids going to the "wrong" places. Currently, most people don't have such software, and I doubt many know which domains their kids look at, and even fewer realise this sort of thing can (quite trivially) be done.

IMHO, that is where the debate should be: how to empower parents, through education and tools that are likely to have an affect, not how to change the internet, an impossible task all round.

#10 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 08 August 2006 - 09:41 AM

I think it's important to make a distinction between an 8 year old tripping across porn while conducting an entirely innocent search, and a 14 year old who knows how to bend/break all the rules to find what they want. I'm not asking society to help me with my 14 year old tongue.gif , but it is frightening what an 8 year old can find by accident.


Yes it is frightening! But should an 8 year old Google? There is an opportunity here for one of the main engines like Yahoo or google to develop a YahooKids or GoogleKids. I could also imagine something like the open directory listing sites just for kids. Similar attempts in the past though have failed. (Think kids.us and president Bush circa 2003 and some law he wanted to enact!).

IMHO, that is where the debate should be: how to empower parents, through education and tools that are likely to have an affect, not how to change the internet, an impossible task all round.


Michael, if I could write as well as you do, I would have said exactly the same. :D

Yannis

#11 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 08 August 2006 - 12:57 PM

The Open Directory does have a section especially for children, http://dmoz.org/Kids_and_Teens/ , which is separated as much as possible from the rest of the directory. It does not link into the main directory.

Yahoo has http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/ .

The problem here, as with the whole business of cataloguing the Web, is that it changes. Dedicated editors have to police the Kids and Teens section to make sure that sites which were totally safe for children when listed haven't turned into something else entirely.

Edited by Jean_Manco, 08 August 2006 - 12:57 PM.


#12 projectphp

projectphp

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3935 posts

Posted 08 August 2006 - 06:31 PM

Problem Jean in relying upon a free, editor run directory is that no one is ultimately responsible. It is, no doubt, a great start, but I am not sure it is really the ultimate solution.

#13 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 08 August 2006 - 08:38 PM

Jean

The Open Directory has the potential to develop a list of sites that are safe for kids. I understand your comments about the web changing though. Another problem is not limiting the sites to one category or two. For example I may want to find sites dealing in a topic for a kid. The actual topic may be listed in the normal categories.

How difficult would it be to actually provide a tick-box for the webmaster submitting a site to verify that his pages are safe for kids? The editors would then verify the listing as such if the website is listed in the Directory (perhaps a rating system like the movies). Once this information is captured in the database it will be fairly easy to develop a search limited to these websites.

Yannis

#14 Jean_Manco

Jean_Manco

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1035 posts

Posted 09 August 2006 - 04:42 AM

The Kids and Teens category covers many topics that are also in the main directory. A site/page can be submitted to/listed in both, if suitable.

Kids and Teens is an Internet directory created especially for children and teenagers. It includes both sites designed specifically for children and/or teens as well as sites designed for general audiences. It does not include sites that are designed primarily to sell merchandise, sites that use profanity or obscenity, or sites that contain sexually explicit content.

More here: http://dmoz.org/Kids...Teens/desc.html

There is a rating system to indicate suitability for different age groups. For example in the Philosophy category you see sites marked for kids, teens, and/or mature teens.

A search engine specifically for child-safe material could easily be created by spidering the sites catalogued in Kids and Teens. In fact Gigablast offers that option at http://dir.gigablast...Kids_and_Teens/ (radio buttons top and bottom right.)

Edited by Jean_Manco, 09 August 2006 - 04:47 AM.


#15 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 09 August 2006 - 01:22 PM

Jean

Thanks for the links. It is obvious that there many other search alternatives for kids. Micahel is right that parents should be educated first. Perhaps a parent should set one of these sites as the default home page for a child.

Yannis

#16 Britopian

Britopian

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 26 August 2006 - 03:07 AM

Yannis - I do agree with censorship in order to protect children; I also think that not everyone should be able to vote without passing a "basic world knowledge" quiz. Oh, and there should be a law that adults should have take basic parenting classes and be financially stable before having children.

But that's just me.

#17 yannis

yannis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1634 posts

Posted 26 August 2006 - 08:08 AM

Britopian thanks for the comments. I don't think I had a chance to welcome you to the forums. Welcome! :)

Yannis - I do agree with censorship in order to protect children;


As a father I agree with you that we need to protect our children and one of the best actions towards this would be to monitor what they are watching on tv. We can do the same for the internet. We can add filters onto their computers and we can also monitor the places they visit. Government censorship cannot achieve this.

I also think that not everyone should be able to vote without passing a "basic world knowledge" quiz.


I am in two minds about this. It is a good idea so far as it can be used to get rid of about 60% of all politicians and as they are mostly the cause of troubles it can be a very effective solution! :blink: . Having lived in South Africa though for over twenty years and having heard that argument before we will agree to disagree here. In the early days in the history of South Africa (during British rule in the 19th century) there were even laws promulgated that the only people that could vote were people that owned property. Needless to say that all these laws were catch-22 laws.

Oh, and there should be a law that adults should have take basic parenting classes and be financially stable before having children.


What do we do with teenage mothers? What do we do with people that could afford children and then their fortunes changed? This idea is another form of 'eugenics'. The poor cannot breed. The uneducated cannot have children! We should be careful not to create nightmarish orwellian utopias.

I personally believe that each one of us in our own way can provide enlightment by lighting our own small candles in the little corners that we occupy in this world and provide guidance to the little feet that run in our houses. If each and everyone does that this would be a better world.

Yannis

#18 Jozian

Jozian

    Light Speed Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 26 August 2006 - 09:59 AM

I was deeply involved in the Public Library interent access/filtering issues in the past.

After working with many public libraries across the country, it is my unforunate conclusion that there is no answer to this problem.

Black Lists do not work. White Lists do not work. Filtering does not work.

Even knowledge and education does not really work - I still pop them up accidentally sometimes.

Short of a police state that forces all adult conent under a .xxx domain, we are stuck... And I certainly do not like that solution.

-Jeff

#19 Britopian

Britopian

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 26 August 2006 - 10:21 AM

thanks for welcoming me to the forum and thanks for your enlightening comments.  I was half-way kidding about mine.

#20 DanielSmith

DanielSmith

    Unlurked Energy

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 01 December 2006 - 08:34 PM

it is a search algorithm result,i think google should add some filters to diminish such things.

#21 travis

travis

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1532 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 12:40 AM

what's wrong with smut on the internet


Especially if we add in a few fur coats and suede jackets, hey Wit.

That will class'en it up for us.

Edited by travis, 04 December 2006 - 02:52 AM.


#22 Wit

Wit

    Sonic Boom Member

  • 1000 Post Club
  • 1599 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 03:42 AM

Exactly.

PS: the web is just about as diverse (and accessible) as --say-- the collection of magazines in a corner shop. Educate your kids to know where to look and where not to. Oh yeah and instruct them not to undress in front of the webcam :(



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users