allsux and google and liveleak and wikipedia and youtube11 Apr 2007 02:29 am

LiveLeak.com is a sometimes-controversial video-based site which receives over a half-million visitors a day and was, until just now, completely unindexed in Google - because they accidentally told Google not to index their site! The funniest part is that, as of 4 AM PST, their own front page still has a ‘try it for yourself’ link that encourages users to see that they aren’t indexed by Google.

In a rather tragic personal video a depressed-sounding LiveLeak administrator describes how he has been trying to contact Google about this potential act of censorship. Meanwhile, this video has received comments ranging from ranging from “google has stepped out of bounds” to “google is with the government in censoring the internet and they must be stopped!!!” Meanwhile, of course, they were informed (by a friend of mine) of the problem and, as you can see below, have fixed it:

Live Leak Appears to be Leaking Own Brain out of Own Web Page

Even the Wikipedia article on Google censorship contains an (albeit now contested) sub-section pointing out this issue.  How can a site with a half a million visitors a day and numerous web professionals looking into the problem NOT figure this out sooner? Go(d)ogle only knows, but now that they have removed the bot they are sure to get a flood of links from Google. Maybe it was just reverse psychology to begin with :P


23 Responses to “LiveLeak = 500,000+ Visitors/Day -> Not Indexed by Google?”

  1. on 11 Apr 2007 at 4:11 am RobotGod

    Whoops, I’m a dumbass - I misread this article the first time - my bad! Didn’t realize you were posting a later screenshot LOL!

    If you wanted to block all robots then you’d do this:

    User-agent: *
    Disallow: /

  2. on 11 Apr 2007 at 4:36 am Trojan

    Erm…You do know that isn’t how it works right? Google were indexing another URL for the site just not the .com. Funny post though, nice one :)

  3. on 11 Apr 2007 at 4:38 am Trojan

    Just to help you out

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robots_exclusion_file

  4. on 11 Apr 2007 at 9:12 am Trojan

    Seriously bro, you’re going to look pretty dumb soon. That robot.txt is right and allows all robots. Look it up or look foolish :)


  5. […] 11th, 2007 Il pericolo censura non c’è. E’ il file robots.txt del sito che lo ha spinto fuori dai.. robot di Google ;) Posted by pipda Filed in altri […]

  6. on 11 Apr 2007 at 8:26 pm kroq

    Hrm … yes, dumb. Actually, it seems pretty dumb to me that you couldn’t figure out I took that screenshot AFTER they fixed the problem :S But I digress - thanks for pointing out that I needed to make my article crystal clear on that point!

  7. on 11 Apr 2007 at 8:27 pm Trojan

    Kroq

    The screenshot is the same as it was when this whole thing started cause it was the first thing I went to look at. Someone on Digg came to the same conclusion as you and then made a retraction. Sorry.

  8. on 11 Apr 2007 at 10:53 pm Qualsiasi.NET

    500.000 unici al giorno, e non indicizzato….

    […] Parlo di LiveLeak, un portale di video che non stanno sempre comodi a tutti, secondo quello che leggo in giro sui vari blog. Personalmente non l’ho visitato a fondo.
    La questione è un altra, sembrerebbe che questo sito non sia indicizzato da G…

  9. on 12 Apr 2007 at 4:53 am kroq

    No apologies necessary … after all, you’re wrong. It was on there originally - I just didn’t get a screenshot of it because I didn’t realize they were about to remove it. Thanks for playing tho :D

  10. on 12 Apr 2007 at 5:22 am Trojan

    The robots.txt file didn’t change though. This is the point I’m getting at. On the day the video came out a Digg member posted the same .txt saying that was blocking it then retracted his statement after he realised. However, your story does make for more interesting copy :)

  11. on 12 Apr 2007 at 9:53 am Anonymous

    The robots.txt indicated “Disallow: /”. Yahoo and MSN/Live.com dont check the robots.txt file as much as google and rather reference a cached version which could have been out of date. That would explain how those two engines had liveleak content in their index and google did not.

    Unless you really want to think Google cock-blocked LiveLeak’s poorly-run and slow video service from taking their own traffic away. Seeing as though YouTube removes 99% of the material that makes up LiveLeak’s index on sight, that a very stupid conclusion to come to.

  12. on 12 Apr 2007 at 11:30 pm kroq

    you know … all i REALlY ask is that people READ the post before they respond. that screnshot was taken later

  13. on 13 Apr 2007 at 3:15 am Anonymous

    My last response was directed to Trojan and the hordes of idiots who came up with weird-ass conspiracy theories instead of any sort of logical, real-world conclusion.

  14. on 16 Apr 2007 at 12:48 am kroq

    lol whoops

  15. on 16 Apr 2007 at 5:14 am Trojan

    Did I say I thought Google blocked it? I doubt Google would care about a website so far under their product. I was just talking about the .txt file which was the same when I checked it when this first came out as it was when this entry was written. Also appears they had other url’s indexed, I was just interested if you all want to get defensive and put words in my mouth about conspiracies it says more about you than me.

  16. on 20 May 2007 at 2:04 pm kroq

    Yes, ummm, it’s a little hard NOT to put words in your mouth, since the ones you use in the first place are confusing at best. Sorry!

  17. on 10 Jun 2007 at 2:25 pm Fred Purseleather

    @Trojan:

    Are you fucking kidding me? You’re actually hiding behind that ingorant, half-assed response?

    Please explain yourself or get laughed at.

  18. on 18 Jun 2007 at 3:28 am Trojan

    @Fred

    Whut? Laugh away big man, it’s all good :)


  19. […] This site, for new readers tuning in, has taken a lot of big-name internet companies to task, from LiveLeak to Digg and many others along the way. Possibly the only site I have posted only positive praise […]

  20. on 08 Aug 2007 at 3:05 am Majestic

    @kroq aka Anonymous/Fred

    Don’t be an idiot! We all know Anonymous, Fred and kroq are the same person.

  21. on 08 Aug 2007 at 3:22 am kroq

    LOLZ ummm … back that up with some semantic analysis or IP work or, well, anything. Otherwise … congrads! I have approved your comment for everyone else to see how much of an idiot you are :D

  22. on 07 Jan 2009 at 11:34 am payday in laons

    payday in laons laons payday in

  23. on 15 Feb 2009 at 9:02 pm Dol Johanna

    Generally I do not post on blogs, but I would like to say that this post really forced me to do so! Good post.

Trackback this Post | Feed on comments to this Post

Leave a Reply