allsux and censored and google and liveleak20 May 2007 01:52 pm

Many weeks after the initial LiveLeak-not-indexed-by-Google scandal, the site still has a video up where an administrator complains to Google about not being indexed. As it turned out, the situation appeared to be LiveLeak’s fault. One would think they’d stop showing the video, unless it was a ploy all along to bring in more viewers, right? If they insist on showing an out-of-date video that makes them look like martyrs, LiveLeak should at least post a prominent link to an updated video that explains what really happened, right?

Meanwhile, the site (according to a semi-anonymous commenter) apparently contends this was never LiveLeak’s fault in the first place. So why can’t I find a follow-up video on LiveLeak showing how the situation was resolved? If they were really ‘censored’ by Google, wouldn’t they have that up by now? Heck, even if they were right and it was Google’s fault, having a video that suggests LiveLeak isn’t indexed by Google currently (you have to scroll to the comments to figure out this isn’t true anymore) is still misleading!

The top search result for Google Censors Liveleak is still this misleading out-of-date video. Why don’t they remove it? Update it? Write a follow-up and link to it prominently near that video? LiveLeak is, in my opinion, still cashing in on the residual PR value of being unlisted by Google, to the point of misleading people who seek the full story.

14 Responses to “LiveLeak Still Showing False Google Complaint Video?”

  1. on 20 May 2007 at 2:26 pm Trojan

    LOL, still trying to generate some hits peddling lies? Nice. I almost wish the site would respond to you, but you wouldn’t accept it anyway. I gotta say I used to love reading your stuff but you’ve kinda lost the plot. Good luck.

  2. on 20 May 2007 at 2:31 pm kroq

    Wouldn’t accept it? I’ve accepted all of your false criticisms, and responded to them no less - why wouldn’t I accept criticism from the site itself? Think before you write my friend. I welcome feedback and criticism, obviously.

  3. on 20 May 2007 at 7:14 pm Trojan

    what false criticisms? All I poinbted out was that the robots.txt never changed. You told me I was talking out my ass and I accepted you didn’t want to hear anything apart from your version of the truth. Now you have a hard on for the subject and it’s kind of embarassing.

    But hey, it’s your blog man. Have a blast!

  4. on 20 May 2007 at 7:36 pm kroq

    You clearly didn’t see it change … but that means it didn’t? I’ll admit, neither of us can prove it either way … meanwhile, did you bother to read the rest of the post? Why do they keep up that video - which ranks #1 for Google searches of ‘Google censors LiveLeak - without an explanation that it has been wrong for five weeks?

  5. on 21 May 2007 at 9:25 am Trojan

    I dunno why they do what they do. But there is also a vid saying it’s all fixed (I checked last night) and they explain some stuff in there too. The point of why other URL’s using the same .txt file were indexed whilst the .com wasn’t is interesting. They still make no claims of censorship, in fact the video kind of refutes it. And from what I can tell all vids stay up, maybe so people can watch them if they want, cause it’s in a section of the site with other peoples vids.

    When I first saw the “scandal” I checked the .txt cause I’m nosey like that. It was the same as the one you posted and the same as on their .org which was indexed.

  6. on 21 May 2007 at 5:18 pm kroq

    I’m not even saying they should remove the video per se, just that they should make a very obvious link to an update (especially since that video comes up so prominently on searches). Otherwise, people who are interested in the issue will be misled - as many likely have been already.

  7. on 21 May 2007 at 5:28 pm Trojan

    Send em a mail, maybe they will pop a link in there? I think most interested people will look about for vids, although maybe not.

  8. on 21 May 2007 at 6:29 pm kroq

    Yup, I already posted a comment and sent a short e-mail. Though honestly, I still think they are leaving it up and without obvious updates for PR purposes. If I’m right, well, it was a clever trick - I just like exposing people who use clever tricks ;)

  9. on 22 May 2007 at 4:44 am Trojan

    If you were doing that I guess I wouldn’t have taken issue. I just wasn’t sure about your blanket statement that it was their fault when there were some odd things going on you seemed to ignore just to push your point. But hey, sometimes you need to leave things out for a good story.

    As for the rest, they have another vid up and I guess their members know about it apart from that…Who knows?

  10. on 22 May 2007 at 3:49 pm kroq

    Right, that’s why I was trying to ask it as a question rather than make it a direct accusation. I also added more such ‘questions’ after your response - the last thing I want is to mislead my readers, but on the other hand: if I feel the evidence tends strongly to suggest a conclusion I won’t hesitate to state that as my opinion of course!

  11. on 23 May 2007 at 3:44 am Trojan

    Heh, sorry about the semi anonymity. I’ll be posting more around here. You know how it is, something catches your eye, e.t.c. As for things being tricks, not my place to even speculate I mostly comment on what I know or see with my own eyes. Hence me not being much for writing stories.

    Here’s the follow up vid, it was in the same section:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=98b_1176426197

    I do think it’s worth pointing out the site never claimed it was being censored at any point though. In the interests of fairness and all. Anyway, keep fighting the fight bro.

  12. on 24 May 2007 at 3:01 pm kroq

    Yes, it’s a matter of tone … I may have ‘overstated’ it, but they may have also ‘understated’ their belief that they weren’t censored. I try to be as clear as I can about what I state as fact or opinion. I think they could have been more clear, though, in this case as well. *shrug*

    Anyway, no worries about the anonymous posting - I accept any post if it is on-topic, legal and not just ridiculous harassment. So, feel free to keep posting anonymously, or reveal yourself and I’ll check out *your* site and bust *your* chops when you step out of line, hehe.

    Hrmmm, I just rescanned my articles. Maybe I missed it but: I don’t think I (back in the original or in the current post) ever said they claimed it was censorship. The closest I could find was my description of a “… LiveLeak administrator describes how he has been trying to contact Google about this potential act of censorship.” As I said: I try to keep fact from opinion from speculation, etc… if I missed something, please point it out to me though, thanks!

  13. on 07 Jun 2007 at 7:38 am Trojan

    Check out my sites? You stay the hell AWAY from my robots.txt files, man!

    Actually I just build sites, I don’t run any of my own. But if I ever do, I’ll be sure and let you know.

  14. on 21 Jan 2008 at 6:21 pm Bannister46

    Liveleak should be Delisted from all search engines until it reverses its Political censorship policy.

    They are actively shaping the news ..

    The Idea of a facist site like liveleak compl;aining about censorship is hilarious.

Trackback this Post | Feed on comments to this Post

Leave a Reply