Magforum censored by Google
26 March. All images at Magforum have been censored by Google.
For example, a search for 'Queen a women's glossy
magazine from 1967' as a Google web search
returns a
link to a Magforum page that shows a Queen cover.
However, the same search for images returns no
results. Both of the
equivalent searches on AltaVista return the
image.
This appears to have happened in December, judging by visitor
statistics. No notification or warning was given.
It seems that Google has decided
that Magforum contains ‘explicit images’. The
filtering is done through Google’s ‘SafeSearch
Filtering’ system: 'Google's SafeSearch screens
for sites that contain explicit sexual content and deletes
them from your search results.'
To see any Magforum images, users have to alter their Google
Preferences from
moderate filtering – the default
position - to no filtering. Moderate filtering is defined
as ‘Filter explicit images only - default [behaviour]’.
Why has the whole site been switched to having an ‘explicit’ label?
Possibly because it carries two case studies about the history
of men’s magazines. These pages account for a dozen
of the site’s 100+ pages. They are illustrated with
more than 100 magazine covers (each 110 pixels wide), though
this site aims to avoid overtly pornographic
images. The case studies have been online since at least 2003 (Wayback Machine) and two of them are among the site’s
10 most popular pages.
The dramatic effect of the censorship is demonstrated by
Magforum’s traffic statistics:
- Nov 2007: 9,477 visits through Google Images;
- Dec
2007: 1,167 visits;
- Jan 2008: 642 visits;
- Feb 2008: 677 visits.
So Magforum lost 93% of its visits from Google Images in
the space of two months.
Magforum is regularly contacted
by people – ranging from students to museum curators
to art editors at
Vanity Fair - requesting larger versions of images
on the website. It is now less likely that they will
be able to find these images in the first place.
Furthermore, like many websites, visits from search engines
are vital to maintaining income through advertising. So
the loss of traffic is a blow to Magforum.
What can be done to reverse this decision? Is it a result
of changes made in December or has Google's filtering changed?
I don’t
have a clue. Which are the problem images? The March 1999 GQ cover?
Pamela Anderson on Ice? Who knows? There is no guidance
on the Google website; there is nothing to indicate what triggered
the sudden change. I have left 2 message with Google but have
yet to receive a reply.
Tony Quinn
Magforum editor and publisher
|
