Posted by John Romano in News and Analysis, Politics on November 24, 2009
LOS ANGELES (YBH.ME) – If you type in the word “Michelle Obama” on Google and choose “images” instead of web results, you get the following photo in position number one for Michelle Obama:
Offensive image used to attract web visitors.
Google is running an ad above the image that says “Sometimes our search results can be offensive. We agree. Read more.” The ad clicks through to a page where Google clarifies its image and search policy:
Search engines are a reflection of the content and information that is available on the Internet. A site’s ranking in Google’s search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page’s relevance to a given query.
We at YBH! think the image is ridiculous. However, we don’t call for its removal because it is offensive. The page that hosts it uses the photo to draw in visitors; it’s a sales gimmick and attention-getter, it’s working. There was an ad for Obama fave J. Crew on the page when we clicked through. It is not a right wing anti-Obama website, just a page full of ads looking for traffic.
We must commend Google for not banning the page simply because they disagree with its content.
Google themselves sums it up best:
We apologize if you’ve had an upsetting experience using Google. We hope you understand our position regarding offensive results.
Yes. It is called free speech, we get it and applaud you for it.
Similar offensive images were common throughout the Bush years. Mr. Bush was often portrayed as a chimp or a certain German leader of the 20th century. The bottom line is that with the advent of Photoshop, no one is immune to being modified.
The site itself may get banned from Google for other reasons. For example, Google may find out that the website somehow “spammed” or used black-hat techniques to get so prominent a position for the much-searched term “Michelle Obama.” Google hates spam, and the company has a reputation for being merciless toward those that attempt to manipulate its search results.
A search of Microsoft’s Bing search engine’s image section turns up no controversial images of Ms. Obama. In fact Bing’s results look like they were taken directly from a Vogue magazine shoot.
#1 by guest on November 24, 2009 - 5:32 pm
1. Bush's first image is his official portrait. Nothing as remotely offensive appears on the first page of Bush results. Why not afford Michelle Obama the same?
2. Bush does not come from a race of people with a history of being hatefully compared to monkeys by racists.
3. Google is not the soapbox of all free speech. They have rules against hate speech, child abuse images, national censorship, etc.
#2 by lizabeth on November 25, 2009 - 3:01 pm
All very good points
#3 by VRSpock on November 25, 2009 - 4:21 pm
It's not racists that compare blacks to monkeys. I don't use the term "African American" because not every black person is from Africa and to assume that they are is an offense in itself much like assuming every oriental person is Chinese.
It was Charles Darwin who brought on this imagery which I am deeply offended by because humans are NOT animals and never have been. Darwin was an idiot and people who find such imagery offensive and yet cling to the "scientific" notion that man evolved from apes are both idiots and hypocrites. Thank goodness we live in a country where people are free to be both. On a technical note, whoever did the Photoshop did a bad job too.
#4 by JJP on November 25, 2009 - 5:18 pm
From a biologic and 'SCIENTIFIC' standpoint humans are indeed animals and have always been. True, man did not evolve from Coco the chimp. But evidence tells us that Coco's ancestor was the same as your ancestor. I am hopelessly confused with the hypocrisy in my belief of that, and would feel confident in saying that your criticism of Darwin is filled with more hypocrisy. Darwin's observations and subsequent indicate that he was a very intelligent human. Not knowing much about you and strictly speaking in terms of probability, chances are that he was much of less of an idiot than you.
#5 by another guest on November 24, 2009 - 5:40 pm
if Google's image search is so poor that the first image pulled up is NOT a photo of the person searched for, then maybe instead of buying one of their own ads and offering up a lame excuse, they should work on FIXING their search function so that it will pull up accurate results.
Plus, Google can control how results are displayed and what gets top billing… don't believe for a minute that they can't…
#6 by guest on November 24, 2009 - 5:42 pm
You know what the irony of all this is? All these news sites are including the picture in their articles and it is only going to increase the number of hits for this image in the search results.
#7 by Tim Todd on November 24, 2009 - 7:39 pm
So you lefties are for getting rid of any images you find offensive?
#8 by Yet Another Guest on November 25, 2009 - 3:44 pm
Yep.
It would seem the self-proclaimed party of tolerance isn't very tolerant.
#9 by Dentist Hopper on November 25, 2009 - 4:08 pm
I hope not – It's important that the rest of the world should be warned what a racist backwater the US still is.
#10 by Johnny Walker on November 25, 2009 - 4:27 pm
I think it is fair to assume that Tim is a white, middle to upper middle class, conservative American. He likely lives in the middle of the country, believes others should stop being the problem, and enjoys all of the privileges of having never been a minority in any situation in his entire life. Protect freedom at all costs Tim, unless it is something you don't agree with – let me guess pro-choice? health care? adam lambert? marijuana? homosexuals? Those people don't deserve freedom, sinners. YAY white power.
#11 by urnvus on November 25, 2009 - 4:57 pm
Johnny Walker says he thinks it's fair to assume….. and then proceeds with all manner of unfair assumptions. I thnk it's fair to assume Johnny Walker is an idiot.
We're talking freedon of speech here, not freedom to use drugs, non-existent rights to health care, or abortion.
#12 by Dr. Norbert on November 24, 2009 - 8:40 pm
Well, most Americans don't want to look at the real Michelle Obama. They prefer to pretend that she is not there or to laugh at her. She's not their idea of a proper first lady. She's just a tool of the power elite, and the power elite knew very well real Americans didn't want her.
#13 by Guest on November 25, 2009 - 2:18 pm
+1
#14 by matt on November 24, 2009 - 9:52 pm
Again, if it were a Bush picture, nobody would object, but since it is the "beloved" Obama (The One) it has to be taken down — just pure censorship. This administration does not allow any sort of criticism just like in a communist society. We will awake one day in such an environment if America does not wake up from this socialistic nightmare!
#15 by Guest on November 25, 2009 - 12:20 am
Again, The issue is not simply allowing or not allowing the image, it is the fact that the image is the #1 result. Bush's #1 result is, reasonably, the official presidential portrait. The image in question is not of Obama, it is of the First Lady, who has an official portrait, herself. All we are asking is why can't that photo, or one like it, be image #1, instead of a horribly racist caricature?
#16 by Tim Todd on November 25, 2009 - 2:45 am
Google has a somewhat democratic way of determining results. You want them to pick and choose, presumably based on your comments, leftist approved images and websites.
#17 by Paul Revere on November 25, 2009 - 4:29 pm
The administration is in control of Google too? You are right we are probably going to end up eating in breadlines, walking in the snow with no boots, begging for medicine for the common cold. America is perfect, never ever try to improve.
#18 by Asda on November 25, 2009 - 6:40 pm
Jesus Christ, what a ridiculous post. The image is likely to be offensive to a significant number of African Americans and therefore needed to be removed. Period.
Your paranoia has led you to make some quite preposterous conclusions. You, sir, are a total moron.
#19 by Guest Commentor on November 26, 2009 - 12:01 am
You, Sir, are the idiot. Declaring that an image be removed because it might be "offensive to a significant number of African Americans" is an endorsement of censorship…plain and simple. Only unpopular speech NEEDS the protection of the first amendment. Hmmm…but judging from the reactions I am reading…the "offensive" image is not particularly offensive to most. Most people seem to like it. I think it's funny myself.
#20 by Cam on November 26, 2009 - 5:55 am
It's offensive, dude.
Michelle doesn't deserve that shit.
#21 by ReggieH on November 24, 2009 - 6:45 pm
I agree with the first commenter.
#22 by Olly on November 25, 2009 - 12:22 am
This is my first visit to this site, and I’m disappointed with the level of debate here. Most commenters don’t seem to have read the article!
Google will *not* be blocking the image or changing the results that bring up the image as #1 result. I can see their point – they don’t want to get into the area of censorship, or policing websites. If they give way on this (really offensive) example, then they will be flooded by special-pleading requests to take similar steps in other cases.
If you want to show your opposition to this racist nonsense, then help the image to sink lower in the results. Don’t click on it, don’t link to it, don’t publicise the link, or send the link to others. I guess if you have to, link the image on this page, as it won’t affect the original. I hear (BBC) the original is just an image on a link farm that nobody would want to visit anyhow. If enough people do this, the image will go down in the listing results for Michelle Obama’s image.
#23 by Robert on November 25, 2009 - 8:45 am
Simply put, this picture is completely unacceptable as the #1 search result. Shame on Google.
#24 by Fixed gear on November 25, 2009 - 7:29 pm
It's NOT google's fault. They INDEX the web, they don't own the content. It's all computer algorithms that determine what is #1, it's not like someone at Google decided that's the #1 picture. ….despite what you conpiracy theorist tards think. With all the hub-ub about this image and new webpages and blogs writing content about it, in all liklihood it will not be #1 for long.
If I were google, officially I would say "We do not Censor, we just index." Unofficially I'd take it down because it's the President's WIFE.
#25 by Guest Commentor on November 26, 2009 - 12:03 am
You think the president's wife is SPECIAL?
#26 by guest on November 25, 2009 - 6:22 pm
idiot
#27 by Non-racist on November 25, 2009 - 12:01 pm
next its free speech.Cartoons of muhammed were offensive to muslims.maybe barrack will chop off their heads or call jihad on them.Cant stand the heat? Get out of the kitchen.You chose the life and open to any interpretaion.Besides if you cant laugh about it your way too controlling and most like a pompous ass who wants it all their way and swayed by your own distorted view of morality.Personally Im sick of everyone trying to tell me I have no freedoms and have walk on eggs around you ,ScrewYou! are you offended yet ? well good ! Cartoons of famous people have been around for years, its just the people we hate right?
#28 by 1st Amendment on November 25, 2009 - 1:16 pm
Try searching "girls" and see if there are any offending images. This is the REAL world, deal with it.
#29 by joker on November 25, 2009 - 1:22 pm
I actually see a very old Michelle Obama…
#30 by Jon on November 25, 2009 - 1:48 pm
She still looks prettier than Bachmann or Palin!
#31 by Guest Commentor on November 26, 2009 - 12:04 am
You can't be serious. Sarah Palin puts Michelle Obama to shame.
#32 by annon on November 25, 2009 - 2:21 pm
as long as there are 2 or more humans on this planet, people will make fun of each other,people suck! get used to it!
#33 by KCC on November 25, 2009 - 2:45 pm
Well, actually, Dr. Norbert, a lot of us think Michelle Obama makes a perfectly appropriate First Lady who on top of the usual crap any First Lady has to deal with also has to deal with racial crap particular to her situation. The fact she does it so well and with such grace may well win her unexpected fans over the years. After all, even the most ardent Bush haters never turned their fury with his destructive legacy (both economically and the war in Iraq) against Laura, who was far more of a member of the Power Elite than Michelle Obama could ever be. Oh, and the GOP had better figure out that most folks are happy with a (at least) Two Party system, instead of this incessant pretense of theirs that they (GOP) is the only bunch who know how to do anything! The last administration has put the kibosh on that nonsense notion…
#34 by Tadg Soderstrom on November 25, 2009 - 3:16 pm
The original image was posted on a site that creates characatures of ALL sorts of celebrities by making their faces appear as "ape" images. The name of the site is celebrityapes.com and it has many many whites done this way too. Are those also somehow racist images?
Everyone who is offended is so because the image appears on other sites out of context. When you see what these guys have done on that page, the humor of it all becomes so apparent. But, people would rather jump to the conclusion that the picture was created by some racist.
The term racist is so over used, and only used to offend. People need to get a grip on what real racism is, and deal with that rather than one's freedom of speech. My applause to Google!
#35 by Jackson Parks on November 25, 2009 - 4:36 pm
Tadg, thanks for the only substantive contribution to the ranting. The website puts a new perspective on the context and intent. THANK YOU!
#36 by james on November 25, 2009 - 3:32 pm
To the first poster. Your full of it!
#37 by TheeMayor on November 25, 2009 - 3:37 pm
The resemblance is uncanny.
#38 by Joey the Retarded on November 25, 2009 - 3:37 pm
Roll with the punches lady. You wanted public life….well you got it!
#39 by Goober on November 25, 2009 - 3:56 pm
Boy people sure get in a big old huff over the STUPIDEST things… Really go to work … get a life … hey wait.. I am here commenting.. NEVER MIND! LOL.. I could really care less go ahead put my face in there.. Sheesh.. more inportant things to deal with like the fact that Navy Seals are being prosecuted for punching a Terrorist that Hung and Burned people… yeah Michelle is FAR more important!
#40 by Gone on November 25, 2009 - 5:20 pm
Makes you question the priorities of some of the people here. A lot of clowns seem to have a lot of time to spend on this lampoon, and not on the real issues. Who gives a rats ass about this pic anyway. We have men and woman off in a far away place defending our country, who won't be home to celebrate and give thanks with their families tomorrow. To give thanks for everything we have, including the freedom to create stupid pics like the one above. Get over it people! Thanks Goober
#41 by Goober on November 25, 2009 - 5:38 pm
Just another stupid distraction… let these Kool-Aid heads to get back to The Bachelor or The biggest Loser… or whatever other piece of tripe they are compelled to watch…
#42 by mahcookie on November 25, 2009 - 7:18 pm
As always Goober you hit it on the nail good going. well said
#43 by bikerchic on November 25, 2009 - 6:02 pm
Here, Here! Well stated Goober!
#44 by Goober on November 25, 2009 - 6:07 pm
Hah… Well what more could you say to such tripe.. who cares.. I actually think it looks just like what she is GOING to look like in a few years
#45 by Hun on November 25, 2009 - 3:59 pm
This is one example that America is not equal.
Everything these days are racist if blacks are involved but it is alright if whites are discriminated. Firemen are denied promotion just because of their race and this is not racist?
#46 by guest on November 26, 2009 - 6:10 am
I am neither black nor white,and I 100% agree with you.
#47 by Guest on November 27, 2009 - 9:49 pm
I also agree 100 %. If blacks are involved the race card WILL be played.
#48 by ex-kinkos dude on November 25, 2009 - 4:15 pm
Hun: America will never be equal if there is something called the "white guilt" around.
#49 by Artus on November 25, 2009 - 5:09 pm
Anyone who wants this image removed should petition the Chinese government to make the request. Google immediately obeys those Moaists, no matter how absurd the request.
#50 by Bing Bing on November 25, 2009 - 5:56 pm
Google already caved, removed and apologized. What "back bone"?
#51 by Guest on November 25, 2009 - 6:23 pm
I'd be more offended that they didn't even bother to do a GOOD Photoshop!!!
#52 by Phipps McCoy on November 25, 2009 - 7:00 pm
So they are now trying to block it. They are also trying to become a major phone carrier and fall through the cracks left by the FCC, and ATT is furious about it.
Do you suppose the White House contacted Google and reminded them of all the loopholes that could easily be filled that would squash their future business plans like a bug?
And now that this is a big news story, you would think the photo is surely #1, but since it became talked about EVERYWHERE it is nowhere on the list of top photos?
Google should have said, "What put it at number one last week could be any number of things, but now that you all are hyping this thing it remains number one due to your readers/viewers coming to get a look at it. We are not going to lie about search results. The population made it #1 we did not. This simply reflects the world you live in and you should thank us for showing you the truth about the world you live in."
#53 by dert on November 25, 2009 - 7:05 pm
Even more offensive is $899 for a Obama bust? —————————–>
#54 by james on November 25, 2009 - 3:31 pm
To the first poster. Your full of shit!
#55 by Jamal on November 25, 2009 - 3:41 pm
barrak looks like curious george… so whats the big deal?
#56 by obama-is-a-commie on November 25, 2009 - 7:54 pm
Wow. No free speech in the USA. What's next? Taking away the free market economy and replacing it with Socialism? Wait… Didn't they just do that?
#57 by Taylor on November 25, 2009 - 4:03 pm
"Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!"
#58 by Sherm on November 25, 2009 - 8:51 pm
Of course that picture shows that conservatives are always the victims. lol!
It is funny to hear conservatives cry and belly ache whenever anybody even points out real things that conservative politicians say or do.
Now the wife of a moderate and popular President is being ridiculed, and most moderates and liberals really have no comment.
Conservatives on the other hand are making up perceived attacks against themselves and are whining about their own condition when this picture should have absolutely nothing to do with them. "Oh, whoa is poor wretched little conservative me! The fact that anyone doesn't like this picture just proves that the world hates conservatives."
So no matter who is ridiculed we will hear the screeching and squealing of conservatives with their crocodile tears.
#59 by B.S. on November 25, 2009 - 5:28 pm
Whoo hoo! The number one hit for the offensive, click-baiting, Michelle Obama image is… yesbuthowever.com! I’m sure that’s exactly what you intended when you cached the image here.
#60 by jerry on November 25, 2009 - 11:18 pm
I don't think any search result should be censored, thats what they make filters for. If your easily offended, use a filter, we all know what the internet is about. Grow up and shut up.
#61 by Guest on November 26, 2009 - 2:58 am
The only reason anyone cares is because she's black. They need to SUCK IT UP. They don't want equality, they want the advantage.
#62 by Dubya on November 26, 2009 - 3:21 am
I found a photo that you lefty libs will like much better.
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/1500/Bush-Mo...
#63 by Anonymous on November 26, 2009 - 2:22 am
I think it should be Michelle Obama’s call about whether it should be deleted by Google or not since his image right is infringed. If she would like to leave it there, then there. If she wants to delete, then google have to delete it to repect a human’s image protection right.
#64 by serpius on November 26, 2009 - 5:43 am
I agree..whoever did the photoshop did a crappy job!..lol…could have done better than that!
#65 by Cam on November 26, 2009 - 6:00 am
It's a stupid image that would only appeal to gutless racists.
#66 by jimi on November 26, 2009 - 2:52 pm
Any notion that America is not still full of ignorant idiots who believe that their pink skins and their travesty of christianity make them superior to just about anybody else on this planet will quickly disappear on reading the majority of the comments on this page. White America=the antichrist!
#67 by gorilaz @ zoo on November 26, 2009 - 3:20 pm
i don't see why this is so offensive – she looks ok to me
#68 by MarJean on November 27, 2009 - 5:24 am
This is extremely disappointing…freedom of speech or not! And I am NOT an Obama fan. Shame on YOU whoever did this!
#69 by 50sBaby on November 28, 2009 - 11:37 am
I strongly disagree with Mark and Google. Our right to free speech ends where it harms another. This type of communication isn’t “free”. The cost is perpetuating racist ideas, promoting intolerance, and divisiveness. I believe this picture of Michelle Obama falls under libel. I hope the Obamas sue the pants off the creator of this picture.
#70 by Mark on November 25, 2009 - 9:48 pm
It is true that many people will be interested in this for reasons that pale in comparison to the importance of thousands of children dying of starvation. But this picture and Google's response do implicate issues that go to the heart of what this country is about. Many more than 14,000 people have died in the fight for freedoms, including free speech which can be offensive. I personally think it was mean to create and post the image, and I like and support Michelle and Barak Obama very much. But this country stands for the right to free expression, even if it is mean and offensive. There are legal boundaries to speech, but this image does not overstep them. I applaud Google for the position it has taken.