X hits on this document

PDF document

Pimps and Predators on the Internet - page 53 / 75

194 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

53 / 75

a list of sites that had information about her life and death, but also a list of pornography Web sites, often listed before the legitimate sites. I used one of the popular search engines to look-up “Princess Diana.” The first site listed was:

“PRINCESS DIANA NUDE EATING PUSSY!!! CHECK OUT THIS LINK FOR SOME HOT SEX! cocksucker the sex girls a sensual applegate. Celeberties the babe the nude mpegs and porno. Story, teen porn.”

When I followed this link I found violent, degrading pornography. The pornographers put sensational, exploitative and violent images out for this occasion. On the first page there were four images: 1) a breast torture picture with the woman’s breasts bound and many clothespins attached to the breast; 2) several pictures of women with ejaculate on their faces; 3) a picture of a woman with her entire hand inserted in another woman’s vagina; and 4) a transsexual-man with penis and breast implants.

Other pornographers were exploiting Diana’s name, but were not promising photos. This pornographer put her name on his page so that when someone searched for “Princess Diana,” his web site would be included in the results.

“BEST OF ADULT WEBSITES - (No Princess Diana here), Free adult images, live streaming adult video, sexy streaming chat. Daily free large pictures, 5 minutes free video. A selection of books without Princess Diana A Tribute to Diana”

Egregious examples like this bring bad publicity to the Internet industry, so one search engine, AltaVista, owned by Digital, tried to intervene by removing the pornographic sites from their index. The pornographers quickly renamed their sites and aggressively pushed their Web sites into the search engine, resulting in a battle between pornographers and the AltaVista. Digital said they were monitoring their index “on a half-hour basis,” to try to keep the pornography sites out of listings for Princess Diana. 239

In March 1998, a new Internet product designed to simplify URLs and searching on the Web was launched by centraal of Palo Alto, California, but somehow the sex industry intervened. Using centraal’s new system Web users could type topics into the address line without using the long, complex URLs. Walt Disney, one of centraal’s customers, was featured in the launch of the new product that was supposed to be so simple a child could use it. Unfortunately, something went wrong; when a user typed in a Disney character, such as “Bambi,” she landed on a pornography site with whips and chains. Keith Teare, president of the company, said he had no idea how the requests were misdirected. 240

CNET-SNAP

The case of CNET’s online service Snap demonstrates the reliance of search engines on the sex industry to stay in business.

In December 1997, coinciding with the Focus on Children Internet Summit in Washington, D.C., CNET announced Snap Online service, a Web directory safe for children (http://www.snap.com). The Snap search engine was advertised as having no pornographic Web sites in its directory. In the press release, CNET said, “Snap Online does not accept any pornographic advertising, nor does it contain pornographic listings in its directory of more than 100,000 hand-selected Web sites.” CNET chairman Halsey

Page 52

Document info
Document views194
Page views194
Page last viewedTue Dec 06 10:22:53 UTC 2016
Pages75
Paragraphs861
Words35582

Comments