Google refuses to remove police-brutality videos

[Randypiper]

Source: bangor daily news

In its most recent Transparency Report, Google states that it has received multiple requests from law-enforcement officials to remove videos.

“We received a request from a local law enforcement agency to remove YouTube videos of police brutality, which we did not remove. Separately, we received requests from a different local law enforcement agency for removal of videos allegedly defaming law enforcement officials. We did not comply with those requests, which we have categorized in this Report as defamation requests.”

The report covers January to June of this year, and catalogs removal requests from a variety of sources. The report states that Google complied with 63 percent of the 92 requests for content removal and a 93 percent of the 5,950 requests for user data. Writing in The Atlantic, Rebecca J. Rosen says that the lack of detail in the report “does more for making government transparent than it does more making Google itself transparent.”

Read more: http://bangordailynews.com/2011/10/31/news/nation/google-refuses-to-remove-police-brutality-videos/

[SoapBox]

1. Ah yes..."Law Enforcement" / Police Militia, don't want you to see the Goon Squads at work.

Heavens! Don't show the 99% how the Tax Dollars that come out of YOUR pocket work, to
beat YOU, the tax payer.

Damn that Free Speech.

[avaistheone1]

2. Message to police: "Don't do the crime and you don't have to worry about your

police brutality video doing the time on google."

k&r

[EvilAL]

5. What is it they always say

when they want to violate people's rights??



"If you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about"

[dotymed]

38. Yes, and that has always been a weak statement until now.

When the shoe is on the other foot, it fits.

[tawadi]

3. Good. Last time I checked, we weren't China..yet. eom

[Butch350]

7. Check again in about 10 years !

[lbrtbell]

25. More like 10 months

I get the feeling they're going to try to stomp down OWS harder and harder, as time goes on. :scared:

[Enthusiast]

21. Yet

[GodlessBiker]

4. If they stood up to China, they better stand up to some bad cops.

[DesertFlower]

6. good. nt

[TxVietVet]

8. Tell the rat bastards to GF themselves.

If they break the law by abusing protesters, then the whole world needs to see them. F*ck 'em. Rat bastard criminal cops.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. Thank GOD! nt

[The Wizard]

10. The whole world is watching

American principles bludgeoned by fascist goons protecting the oligarchs. Devoltion

[DeSwiss]

11. K&R

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkUKW8NtJdE&feature=player_embedded">RT: US Cops Tried To Erase Online Evidence Of Brutality

[Randypiper]

12. Interesting poll results

Poll Question:
Should Google comply with requests to remove videos of police brutality?
Yes 1.22%
No 98.78%

[No Elephants]

28. How many of that 1.22% do you suppose were cops in the videos?

[SwampG8r]

35. the .22% is the cops who

protect the 1%
equals 1.22%

[icnorth]

32. Everybody knows where the 1% came from....

I want to know how they came up with that other .22%

[RedCloud]

13. The best way to remove police brutality videos

is A) don't get brutal
or B) tell us who is pulling your strings to be brutal

[fascisthunter]

14. Another Mark against Law Enforcement for trying to ban the truth

[katty]

15. K&R (law enforcement fearing lawsuits)

[awoke_in_2003]

16. Your local police department...

"protecting and serving the shit out of you"

[valerief]

17. K&R

[Festivito]

18. Post the requests. Let them have their say. /nt

[2banon]

19. interesting article.. and stats

[caseymoz]

20. K&R: Aww, poor police. So dreadfully embarrassed . . .

. . . committing actions you'd put everyone else in prison for.

[Enthusiast]

The fact that law enforcement

made the request is disturbing enough.

[Enthusiast]

22. The fact that law enforcement

even made the request is disturbing enough.

[Little Tich]

23. This is why I like Google!

[tavalon]

24. Not that it would have mattered anyway, but good on 'em!

[orbitalman]

26. Yes, utter rat bastards....

They don't want us to see their guilt even as it spreads !!!

[No Elephants]

27. The Ministry of Truth is not amused.

Seriously, friends. Is it facism yet?

[66 dmhlt]

29. Remember the Google motto: "Don't Be Evil"

[Marazinia]

30. They've lost some ground over net neutrality

They've got some work yet to do before I can read their motto without rolling my eyes a little.

[Goblinmonger]

31. Let me know your thoughts on this

I haven't followed this as closely as you probably have, but here is my "giving Google the benefit of the doubt" thoughts. I have to believe that Google really wants every person on the Internet. That has been their push from the get go because someone on the internet means more money for them. That being the case, they would really like to offer free Wi-Fi for everyone (just a guess on my part, but seems in line with getting everyone on the Internet). Now, the biggest stumbling block to that would be the cable companies and other Internet providers that make their living by offering what Google would offer for free. And they have a lot of clout. So Google argues for some levels in providing and being able to charge more for high rates of bandwidth so that they can offer the lower levels for free to everyone.

Maybe?

[Marazinia]

33. No

That's not taking into account the way the end of net neutrality opens the door for every company to restrict access to anything they choose (including independent media sources) to whomever they choose.

The way I understood it is this: Fox News pays more money every month and its customers get fast access to its content. Joe Blogger pays very little to host his show and his customers have a hard time connecting as a result.

This creates yet another situation where getting your news, opinion, or what have you out there more efficiently requires more money. That's my issue with it.

Now, if something has changed recently and this is no longer possible for providers to do, then I have less beef over the entire issue. I haven't checked lately, my information is a few months old.

[Remmah2]

34. Good!

Even better now that people can upload events as they happen. WORLDWIDE!

[MadAsHellInAmerica]

36. Can't hide from the truth.

And we will never forget.

[blkmusclmachine]

37. If the police did nothing wrong, then they have nothing to fear.

n/t

[samsingh]

39. good

[donquijoterocket]

40. it's as

surprising as Google's refusal that no one got beaten, arrested or shot for making the videos in the first place.

[Zorra]

41. Yeah, that inspires my trust in cops for sure.

:sarcasm:

[lark]

42. K&R 4 Google

[Yavapai]

43. Is this the democracy that we are exporting to the world???

Probably looks (to the world) more like a 3rd world banana republic by now.

[Zambero]

44. In other words, evidence will NOT be suppressed.

Once the "cat" (brutal suppression of a peaceful assembly) is out of the bag, this type of activity is already a matter of public record. Law enforcement and prosecutors require concrete evidence to do their jobs, and by the same token, if law enforcement oversteps its bounds the perpetrators in question should be subject to whatever the evidence reveals.