First off, thank you very much for your comment. I greatly appreciate your thoughts.

I do want to clarify though, do not confuse my analysis for defense or endorsement. I’m not trying to endorse one side or another right now, that’s for a later piece. I was more interested in the history of the matter and the potential implications. I’m sorry if it seemed otherwise.

However, with that in mind, it is important to note that there is, and always will be, gatekeepers. There is far more content than any one can consume. Some one, or some thing, has to filter it out. The difference between Google and publishing houses or, worse yet, the government, is that Google uses a largely automated process. Computers take control and determine what is seen.

If a page is buried to the 100th page of the SERPs, it’s not censorship, but it is removed from public view. Google is a gatekeeper and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Finally, I don’t need to ask a writer about publishing houses. I am a published author, though under a pen name. I know how it is and I agree. One of the reasons I went the route I did was to get away from them.

I’m not saying Google is evil, just that it too is determining what we read and don’t read, even if we don’t realize it. It’s a gatekeeper and we need gatekeepers because of our physical limitations.

First off, thank you very much for your comment. I greatly appreciate your thoughts.

I do want to clarify though, do not confuse my analysis for defense or endorsement. I’m not trying to endorse one side or another right now, that’s for a later piece. I was more interested in the history of the matter and the potential implications. I’m sorry if it seemed otherwise.

However, with that in mind, it is important to note that there is, and always will be, gatekeepers. There is far more content than any one can consume. Some one, or some thing, has to filter it out. The difference between Google and publishing houses or, worse yet, the government, is that Google uses a largely automated process. Computers take control and determine what is seen.

If a page is buried to the 100th page of the SERPs, it’s not censorship, but it is removed from public view. Google is a gatekeeper and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Finally, I don’t need to ask a writer about publishing houses. I am a published author, though under a pen name. I know how it is and I agree. One of the reasons I went the route I did was to get away from them.

I’m not saying Google is evil, just that it too is determining what we read and don’t read, even if we don’t realize it. It’s a gatekeeper and we need gatekeepers because of our physical limitations.

You are absolutely right when you say that, historically, who controlled the information controls our culture. But what entities like youtube are doing is giving that control over information to individuals like you or me and AWAY from the traditional holders of information control-the powerful businesses and institutions like those large publishers you defend. Viacom may not need youtube but they are certainly terrified of what such models could do to their established control of information flow. And youtube does not need Viacom either…their user base is largely derived from legitimate content.

Oh and those publishers? Ask all those writers who created the content for those publishers what they had to go through to get the approval and blessing from them. Traditional publishers epitomize the command and control of information flow…all while actually creating none of it. But as intermediaries, they dictated what the rest of us could read. Google is doing the exact opposite of that.

You are absolutely right when you say that, historically, who controlled the information controls our culture. But what entities like youtube are doing is giving that control over information to individuals like you or me and AWAY from the traditional holders of information control-the powerful businesses and institutions like those large publishers you defend. Viacom may not need youtube but they are certainly terrified of what such models could do to their established control of information flow. And youtube does not need Viacom either…their user base is largely derived from legitimate content.

Oh and those publishers? Ask all those writers who created the content for those publishers what they had to go through to get the approval and blessing from them. Traditional publishers epitomize the command and control of information flow…all while actually creating none of it. But as intermediaries, they dictated what the rest of us could read. Google is doing the exact opposite of that.