Did Google Really Do "Wrong"?

News Report: Google is deeply embroiled in the “Porn Gate” scandal [link]. They are being accused of not manually intervening or filtering search results, allegedly causing a highly negative impact on society.

Baidu had a similar history before, but thanks to their adept PR, they weren’t exposed by the media this time. Should search engines really be held responsible for their search results? Let’s first make one thing clear: a search engine itself does not produce any content. All of its content is crawled from the wider Internet. Therefore, can we understand it this way? Searching for a sensitive keyword simply reveals the general distribution of Internet content in that region. If those results contain a lot of pornography or violence, doesn’t that point to the failure of the regulatory authorities? If a person is ugly, do they blame the mirror? Will destroying every mirror in the world suddenly make them beautiful?

We have to admit that search results without manual intervention are the most authentic. As for the media claiming that Google is “sexually enticing” web users, I am even more baffled. Although I’m not a search engine professional, I understand a thing or two. Google’s products are renowned for being user-centric. Its search engine analyzes statistical data for keywords to auto-suggest popular search queries to users. This saves users the trouble of typing out the full phrase and, to some extent, guides them toward pre-assembled keywords to get better search results. By this logic, shouldn’t those “sexually enticing” auto-suggestions simply be the queries that internet users are searching for most frequently? From this perspective, it actually exposes what the general public is genuinely focused on. Again, the mirror is not at fault; it merely reflects objective reality.

On the other hand, the annual “anti-pornography and non-governmental publication cleanup” campaigns are a routine government exercise—yet year after year, it is cleaned up, and year after year, it returns. I have to say this points to a failure in methodology. Why can’t we introduce an age-rating system for movies, literature, and video games to guide the public? They claim to protect teenagers and shield their minds from harm, yet they mandate things like “Green Dam”—a politicized software that was even caught stealing code from foreign software. Doing some real, practical work would be infinitely better. Any sensible person knows that Emperor Yu successfully controlled the great floods because he utilized diversion rather than damming. Relying solely on blocking information to create a “wholesome environment” for youth is not a long-term solution. Remember: you can never wrap fire in paper.