CENSORSHIP IN GOOGLE KNOL

[elle]

HERE IS A SERIOUS QUESTION! IS THERE CENSORSHIP IN GOOGLE KNOL? Are
the censors obligated to inform us to withdraw the knol or can they
arbitrarily remove it? Can we recover it for our own archives? What
are the procedures here? Do we have any recourse? This is serious
because one of my Knols has vanished.

[elle]

I would like to recover the whole knol and place it in the
"unpublished category." I put a lot of work into my knols.

[elle]

You know, it will defeat the purpose of Google Knol if I place all my
articles as "unpublished" to play safe.

[elle]

BAD/UNFAIR/IGNORANT MODERATION OF GOOGLE KNOL WILL KILL IT OFF

I have been mulling over this all afternoon. I do not know how to get
the message to the right authorities. Maybe they pop in here to have a
look.

If the moderators in Google Knol, and Docs do not lean over backwards
to protect the Freedom of Expression rights (baring libel and
plagiarism), they will kill off Google Knols. No one is going to do
research and post it if Google Knol moderators allow some bigot that
does not like what is posted to complain and have that work removed.
Unless they can verify that the facts are erroneous, malicious, or
untrue, Google should protect the Knol authors as the Press/Media
protects the freedom of their journalists and reporters.

I have "unpublished" most of my major articles as I have suddenly LOST
CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF GOOGLE KNOL. As time goes on I will
transfer all my articles elsewhere or leave them unpublished. This
will defeat the purpose of Google Knol.

Someone must get this message to those who are administering Google
Knol and Doc.

[elle]

Why no response from real Google Knol Authors?

[elle]

I have just posted this on Knol Content Policy and copy it here:

CENSORSHIP IN GOOGLE KNOL or FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
This, to me, is a "deadly serious subject" and needs to be "aired"
fully. If Knols are units of knowledge, then, if it abides by your
guidelines above, any facts or statements should be freely published
as "freedom of expression," and "SHOULD NOT be CENSORED" by "POLITICAL
CORRECTNESS" nor by any well intentioned, but bigoted Censor/
Moderator. Nor should "bigoted complaints" cause the Knol to be
removed if they are facts and not malicious and unsubstantiated
statements. Hence, the Censor/Moderator must be sufficiently
specialised in that topic but hold an open mind on that topic, i.e. he
should be a King Solomon, in wisdom. (I know such people are rare to
find.)

I realise that this is a subjective matter, and the decisions of the
moderator are final, but at least have the decency to inform the
author the section of his Knol that is objectionable, or offer him the
option of withdrawing the Knol himself instead of send it to nether
land and cause all his research and compilation is lost for ever, as
though it was a piece of turd. Will you consider returning the
"deleted Knol" to the author for him to deal with himself or will
Google Knol play god in such an instance? Is that Knol retrievable?
There are many sensitive issues these days, and what is seen as
"political correctness" by one person is seen as biased "censorship"
by another. So Google Knol must declare whether they fully support
"The Freedom of Expression" and "positively" work to support and
protect that right, as Press Agencies do, or Google Knol becomes
"irrelevant and biased."

In order to be specific so Censors know what I mean, the most
discussed topic anywhere in the world is "Jihadist Islam." Warning
lights come on when this topic is discussed. But do your Censors have
sufficient knowledge to judge what are religious facts and what are
"provocative" or "hateful content?" Because, I ask, are quotes from
the Bible or the Torah or the Koran or the Hadiths considered hateful
content? To be specific I will quote from the Quran verses some may
consider hateful, but it is from the Quran and been there for 1400
years, is it not allowed to quote from such Holy sources? Must it be
"BANNED for PC?" i.e.

Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them,
take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using
every stratagem of war."

Qur'an:2:216 "Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for
you (Muslims), though you dislike it. But it is possible that you
dislike a thing which is good for you, and like a thing which is bad
for you. But Allah knows, and you know not." [Another translation
reads:] "Warfare is ordained for you."

Yes, the verses from the Quran are very disturbing, but it is also
read and accepted by 1.3 billion Muslims. Must such verses be banned
from "kafir" usage? We have to be realistic in our judgements.

I hope you see clearly what I am attempting to clarify here. Do
authors on Google Knol have the same protection from Google for the
"Freedom of Expression" as Journalists receive, or will they be
subject to today's "political correctness?" One decision will
encourage authors and the other will certainly stop me from further
contribution. And I hope others too will so their protest by
withdrawing their support. So please state your POLICIES CLEARLY AND
IRREVOCABLY. I have been a real supporter for Google Knol, but will
not support biased Censorship. WHAT IS KNOL TO BE?

[elle]

Errata:
"cause all his research and compilation (to be) lost for ever, as

though it was a piece of turd. "

"And I hope others too will (show) their protest by
withdrawing their support or discuss it with Google."

[P V Ariel]

elle raised a serious question here and the knol admin should
administer some kind of supervision.

[elle]

As I suspect, Google Knol probably has hired some "specialists
(Muslims)" to help them "moderate" knols. But if the "specialist" is
found to be biased or prejudiced, this person should be IMMEDIATELY
REMOVED (BANNED) AND AN APOLOGY ISSUED. It would be impossible to
regulate a site that believes in "Freedom of Expression" if the
moderators are either biased or ignorant of the philosophy of that
concept. When an opinion is interpreted as "hate mongering" by one
party but seen as the truth and fact by the other party who is to
judge? It would require a scholar to decide, and not some amateur
immature bigot. And when the right of decision is granted a moderator
as the default position, injustice will be the result. Surely this
cannot be tolerated in a Knowledge based centre like Google Knol.

The management has to have a very serious look at this aspect of their
monitoring. It is the crux of the success or failure of Google Knol.
There is no room for political correctness in a knowledge based web
encyclopaedia. All facts should be authenticated or substantiated with
references or bibliography. The moderators must read the references or
bibliography before they jump to any conclusions. Freelance authors
must be supported and protected by Google Groups if Google wants to
gain the freely donated articles of authors. Also arbitrary deletions
are not necessary and is very offensive. The Censors should discuss
possible amendments or mutually agreements for the withdrawal of such
articles. Without such adjustments, who would want to contribute to
Google Knol?

[P V Ariel]

Yes, I fully agree with you, such biased or prejudiced mind should be removed at once, it should be a platform for expressing the freedom of mind or writing.
Thanks for this mail

[msr...@juno.com]

It's a tricky line we walk. On the one hand, if we allow anybody to
pull down a Knol for unsubstantiated reasons, there's no point in
putting the information up there. On the other hand, if there is no
moderation of any kind, many Knols may be published with inaccurate
information and/or opinions that are offensive to others. I don't
know the answer to this one, but I think it is something we should
continue to discuss.

[elle]

Here is the dilemma. Google Knol professes that they want authors to
be able to express their views within the codes of "The Freedom of
Expression." To me that means, discussing or examining facts or
ideologies without malice. The problem is, the definition of "malice."

I had the impression that one such person who had the wisdom to decide
what malice meant was some guy call "King Solomon." But in today's
context, these King Solomons are rarer than 20 carat diamonds. But
there are scholars in each field except that their services will most
likely be unavailable. So it boils down to this, "The calibre of an on-
line web encyclopaedia is only as good as their moderators/censors."

The most controversial topic today is Islam. There are a few
knowledgeable scholars in this field, and naming just a few like
Daniel Pipes, Andrew G Bostom, Robert Spencer, Ibn Warraq and others
who may be able to make unbiased judgements. To expect a devout Muslim
to make unbiased judgement of others about Islam is like asking Satan
to judge what is right or what is wrong. Nor can an orthodox Christian
make a fair judgement on Buddhism and vice versa. But each will have
valid reason for their perceptions that my not necessarily be
unbiased.

So this is a crucial aspect that Google Knol have to sort out in their
management of Google Knol.

[Narayana Rao]

Sorry, I could not reply earlier. Once I tried but my comp gave
problems.

Sites like knol and blogger do not have editors. So they cannot take
decisions on what content to accept or what content not to accept.
They cannot go to courts and fight cases. I think at any indication of
trouble, they will remove the objected content. While I do not know at
this stage how to resolve the dilemma, we need to look at both sides
of the situation.

"Freedom of any individual cannot be protected when there is social
unrest. No individual can create social unrest and ask the society to
protect him. Where is society when there is social unrest." So what is
the balance between freedom of expression and serious social trouble?"
We need to discuss and come with some ideas. But first important thing
is that content should not be dumped. The content has to be returned
to the author with an intimation of objections raised and then allow a
discussion. There are many online publishing platforms and the author
will publish on some other platform that allows. Especially when an
author has done impartial research on a topic, he will be appreciated
by his peers today or tomorrow.

I am calling on knol for more visible content administration so that
we can discuss things better. But so far only in the area of
technology knol management is transparent. In the area of content as
well as marketing, transparency is not there.

> > > > > > > because one of my Knols has vanished.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[elle]

Narayana if you go to the link below, you will see that someone has
been going around flagging and deleting Knols as though there was no
tomorrow. If such indiscriminate CENSORSHIP continues, no one will
bother to do work to produce Knols to post. It must stop, and only
libellous knols flagged or removed if the author does not do it
himself after being told about it.

http://knol.google.com/k/knol-help/content-policy/si57lahl1w25/13#

[elle]

I believe that whether Google Knol lives or dies will depend on the
decisions made by the management of Google Knol. It is a Highly
Important Issue and Google must inform her authors where she stands.

[Narayana Rao]

I support you totally. I wrote my comment earlier also. I am also
going to write now. Content policy is to be administered. But
administered in the right way. Even if it is automatic, the knol has
to be unpublished and returned to the author. Then there can be
discussions and if content administration approves, it can be
republished.

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[elle]

Narayana, authors must have their integrity honoured and protected. We
cannot allow, bigoted or ignorant moderators make judgement on matters
they are not experts on. Most authors spend hours of research and
composing to produce articles for Knol i.e. authors contribute to
Google Knol and their contributions must be fully respected. We do not
do it for any financial gain, at least I do not.

[elle]

To All Following this Thread: I owe it to you to give you this
information as soon as possible: Here is my reply to Content-Policy:

"To Google Knol Administrators:

As I have not received any kind of correspondence, I feel it is my
duty to inform all those who may be following this episode.

I happened to look in here a few minutes ago to see if there was an
answer. There was non. But I happened to go to My Knols, and I found
that my "deleted Knol was restored." There is no explanation as yet
but I feel I owe all readers this information. My Knol of "Jihad" has
been restored. Does that mean that the "Freedom of Expression" is
honoured by Google Knol?

Thank you for restoring my Knol, one of my better Knols.

[elle]

I also want to thank all those who supported me on the topic of "The
Freedom of Expression."