Hi. Welcome to the blog for my IB English B class at Jur Hronec High School in Bratislava, Slovakia. Below you will find links to other websites and discussion questions. My students are required to comment on one of these postings every month and also respond to each other's comments. Feel free to add your two bits, but be aware that all comments are monitored before being posted.
When googling an image people expect to see the representation of the expression they type, but often they are disappointed by the results. They want to be able to imagine what the term means, how it looks in reality. And that reality is disappointing. The question that stands in this blog is, whether should google show images that represent the reality - the reality in the world - or the internet reality - the images that are on the internet. The fact is, that even though the images of female construction worker are dishonouring, and unreal, that is the internet reality. Google gives us the real representation of the internet world which we create, the world of our posts, shares and activities on the internet. Moreover, most of the times this is not only the internet, but partly reality. Truly, we do not have many female construction workers, nor many female CEOs. And now I ask: is this wrong? Is it wrong that google shows us the reality? No, I do not think so. If we google an image, it is fair to show us the results that are most common to be associated with the typed term on the internet. That is what people believe is the reality and thereby it becomes reality. We create the internet, and it is only the reflection of the real world. I believe that google should not influence the results because it is supposed to show us the reality, even if it is bad.
Altering the results of our search means manipulating people´s opinion that is absolutely not helpful. Even though it would be nice to believe that we have more female CEOs, or that the female construction workers are dressed in normal clothes and not in short skirts, it would not represent the majority´s image of the term. Yes, those are caricatures, but that is a creation of society. By changing the search results, we would close eyes before the reality. Without knowing the reality, the truth that shows us that this is what people imagine when someone says "female CEO" we can never change the reality. These results only pinpoint the wrong opinions of society, which are unluckily there and by deleting images from the results of our search we do not delete this opinion from the world. Pretending that women are in the leading position does not make it real. Therefore I believe it would be counterproductive to modify google results, we should see even the dark side of our society, of us, and realize that we should change the reality, and not the reflection of it. I do not think it would solve any problem (inequality between men and women for example) but we would only close eyes and pretend the problem is not there.
In the main point I have to disagree with Veronika. I think that the enourmous power that Google has, should be used effectively to help and change the sad reality. In this article, we were shown that Google search engine can influence person's opinion up to 7%. This mean that if we put more female CEO's in results of Google, people will start accepting them equally capable of performing this job position as men. It can also erase uncorrect prejudice that female workers are unreal or shown just as a object of sexualization. Veronika has said in her comment a sentence: "that it is what people believe is the reality and thereby it becomes reality." On this sentence it can be nicely demonstrated the fact that if we increase number of female CEO's in Google results we can change the reality and we can help to get things better in terms of social issues and gender inequality.
Google is one of the biggest companies in the world, which influences many people by the information it has on its servers. If they wanted they could change the results of search their search. They could do it in such a way that they would achieve changes of users' minds or opinions. Though they have this access to the information, I hope it is not happening in this way and that it is rather similar to what Veronika said. I hope that the search engine reflects what really is on the internet, or even better what is real in the world. Is it, however, that simple? Can Google at all show us the reality? It is not totally possible, because what one does not send on the Internet will not be there. On the other hand, Google can show things which are false, just because they are popular. The results in the search simply depend on the humans and on what they update on the Net. So is it, at least, possible for Google to show us what is on the Internet? It is not. There is so much data that nobody could look at all of it in a life. That is why they have to filter it somehow. They want to show us the things which fit our search phrases the most. And what they show us probably depends even on the popularity of the pages. If there is many people who like one page, they can put many hyperlinks to it on other pages and Google algorithms may then consider the original page more interesting and more popular. So what you see in the results, is quite much influenced by the other users. On the other hand, the truth-revealing things may be sent down in the ranks if they are not so popular. It will, however, have to be enough, because if something is popular it is probable that even we will like it, that many people will. And so it is logic that the search engines try to choose the popular pages for the top places in the results to make the most of their users satisfied. So finally, is the “sexy construction worker problem” a problem? As for what is popular on the Internet it is probably not. The search engines show us what people generally want to see. On the other hand, morally, it could be a problem. But again it is a problem of what the users updated, liked and chose.
I appreciate this comment as it looks in depth on the way Google works and using this knowledge discusses the issue.
So how does Google actually look up the information? As far as I know they have a database in which there are sorted the results of search according to what is typed in. I imagine it as something similar to content of a book where there are listed names of chapters in alphabetical order. So if we want to read a chapter we first find the page number in the content of the book and then we start reading from that page. Thus, when we insert the expression that represents what we look for Google may correct it and then it looks up the place where it has in its database and in the end it lists the results.
Moreover, as Alex has mentioned it is not possible to include all data in search and therefore it is filtered. These filters pick up the most popular pages in order to satisfy the highest possible number of people who look up the information. This means that what Google shows is majority' attitude on the issue. In addition, I agree on that alteration of search results would be counterproductive as it would only hide inconvenient state. Furthermore, as Alex has later mentioned manipulation of search results could be misused and this would pose much worse consequences.
Besides, there was discussed “sexy construction worker” problem which was mentioned in majority of comments, too. They compared search results for “construction worker” and “female construction worker”. The conclusion was that “even when women show up in search results often enough, representations of them are very often, well, ridiculous“. Nevertheless, if we type in “male construction worker” we obtain similar results, of course, with men. Therefore, I do not think that “sexy construction worker” problem is an issue that involves only women. However, it appears when we type in phrase where we distinguish gender.
What is more, in the original article they claimed that women are underrepresented in results and in all comments it was taken as a fact. So let’s review their proof. In article they state: “two dozen Fortune 500 companies have women as top bosses—that's less than 5 percent of overall Fortune 500 CEOs ...in a Google image search for CEO, 11 percent of the people depicted were women, compared with 27 percent of U.S. CEOs who are women.“ I see here a huge inconsistency because if we compare the first two data we may consider women overrepresented on the contrary with the last two data where they are underrepresented. The result of search is somewhere in the middle, hence it can be considered as correlating with reality.
All in all, I agree with Alex opinion that Google only reflects the reality of the Internet and therefore results might show also flaws in our attitude on some topics. Moreover, I do not consider altering the results as a proper way to fix these flaws, however, I would be afraid of it as it is a step towards censorship which was typical for dictatorships, as Alex has mentioned. Additionally, I found out that “sexy construction worker” problem should not be interpreted as sexualized depictions of women when typed in “female construction worker” but sexualized depiction in general as we obtain similar results when we exchange “female” for “male”. And finally, I have clarified that according to the statistics found in the original article we cannot say that women are underrepresented or overrepresented in Google images in comparison with reality.
Google has become a global phenomenon. When you say the phrase “just google it” you do not need to be afraid that someone will not understands. Everyone knows what google is. And everyone uses it. It is the fact that Google is so popular and widely used that makes it so powerful. Because its greatest power does not lie in the ability to reflect people’s thoughts. It can influence our thinking and change it.
I think that all of us can agree that women are as capable as men. But their job positions often do not represent this fact. Quite the opposite. We can see that women do not get as much as men for the same amount of work due to the prejudices against them. Our democracies often tend to talk about the equality of opportunities. People should be judged according to their capabilities in their job not by their gender, race or anything else. Achieving this equality of opportunities is something that we must do. The question is how.
Is manipulating the search results the right way? I think it is. As the article says manipulating of these results can shift people’s opinions by seven percent. It may not seem like a big number but we must acknowledge that breaking prejudices is a slow process where every single percentage counts. The dilemma is that some argue that Google should not manipulate the process and let the results reflect the internet in its true form. But even the article says that women are underrepresented in the results. And even if they weren’t I propose that we should manipulate the results to show more women when we search for the jobs like CEO which are not represented by women at this time not because they do not want to but because the prejudices do not allow them to. It is worth to manipulate the results because there is no real benefit to show the reality in this case. It does not help us to see first woman CEO which is a Barbie after hours of scrolling. On the other hand by the manipulating the results Google can help to get to the point where there is no need to change the results to fight discrimination because it will not exist anymore.
Firstly, I absolutely agree with Roman that Google is one of the most influential things in the whole world. We all depend on it, we all use it, and even the author names it „a modern oracle“ and, consequently, it basically has created a monopoly on online searching.
That is why I think it should stay as objective as possible. Exactly what Roman mentioned – 7 per cent sway in people´s opinion – that truly is a huge number. Seeing Google as such an important tool, I think we ought to let it be and let it go in its own stream.
I would like to reflect on the comment right above the Roman´s – Alex´s. He made a really nice point of explaining that we actually create the content we want and by all the various algorithms we truly form the Internet ourselves. If we altered the result of search, we would lie to these algorithms (or rather do not take them into consideration) and thus present false results which is, I think, on the complete contrary of a freedom of information.
Lastly, yes, I do agree that discrimination is a problem and an issue that is to be solved and that, quite burningly. However, I do not think that manipulating people´s opinion is the right way to do it. The key to eradicate the discriminatiing attitude in people is not to show them it does not exist anymore, and believe they change accordingly, but to try to raze it out of them.
Unfortunately, I cannot agree with Roman’s opinion about the search results manipulation. He refers to the fact, which was mentioned in the article, that manipulation of the search results can shift people’s opinions by seven per cent. And he said that by manipulating the results we could lower the amount of prejudice. However, I can see two problems about his strategy.
Firstly, will you achieve a total or at least partial disappearance of prejudice by manipulation of the search results? In the case of female CEOs, I do not think so. According to my opinion, changing the ratio of women and men shown as CEOs in the search results would cause the people looking through them to think that there is no problem about women discrimination rather than making people not to discriminate. It is the closing of eyes which even Veronika mentioned. And not only the people manipulating the data would close their eyes, it would be much worse. Even the others could be forced to do so. Then the fighters who would normally try to solve this discrimination problem, would not see it and they could be rather being brought to a passive state.
Secondly, it would bring even more lies into the society, as if there had not been enough of them by now. The manipulation of search results is a way of manipulation of data and information. I think that if we allow it in this way, it can after several steps end up as something much more dangerous. While it does not seem a big deal when talking about female CEO shown on images in search results, it definitely does if we talk about manipulating information about politics, money or wars. Moreover, the manipulation of data is too close to the censorship as it was, for example, during dictatorships in the history or even in nowadays’ dictatorships.
As Roman mentioned - "Google has become a global phenomenon". And a really powerful one, more than most think. He also suggested "that we should manipulate the results". But can we allow Google to play with the data, and to alter it? Definitely no.
When we talk about search engines, we must understand how Google works. When Google was founded in 1998, many search services like Bing or Yahoo already existed. However, Google's main goal was to offer an effective and reliable search result. Something that would be deeply violated by Roman's idea. Secondly, the Google search algorithm is very difficult. As a web page developer, I understand how the proper words used on web pages can elevate you to the first page of the Google search (let's be honest, how often do you look at the results behind the fist page). Google also remembers how often you open websites connected with the searched term. This way it tries to give you the information you want.
Even if Google would violate the search and add female CEOs, do you think it would help them? If so, how many sexy construction workers have you seen? I have seen only nasty old men. But by giving them a free hand we would allow companies like Google to manipulate our mentality.
Most often people do not realize the capabilities of Google. So how big is Google? Of course there is the search engine, the mail service Gmail and YouTube. In all of these three services Google thoroughly stores your search patterns and your every click. But then there is Google Chrome, which most of us use daily(and which again stores information about you). Have you got a smartphone? If it is not a iPhone, it probably runs Android - again something from Google. Google also owns some of the most advanced robotic technologies by owning Boston robotics(those really cool cow-like robots you probably already saw on the internet). And also the first commercial quantum computer. And Google Glasses. Do not forget about how they navigate you in Google Maps, or that this year their autonomous cars are officially legal to "drive" in the US. And countless other seaming weird projects, like autonomous drones, artificial intelligence, Google/Android calendars, Google+, WiFi balloons flying over Africa... This can affect far more people than the 7% mentioned in the article. So, now how often do you rely on Google?
Now that I have shown you what Google really is, consider they have one of the most powerful workforce in the industry. People often hate NSA, but do not realize Google's potential is quite as big in the online spy industry.
And now, you would openly allow Google to alter the searches. To decide and manipulate the data. To change our opinions about certain matters (not only female CEOs). I personally would never allow this to any company or organisation.
I have to agree with Marek and Roman that Google has a huge power which is dangerous and may be manipulative, but I have to disagree with the fact that if he has the space to he would certainly manipulate us. People always have their own minds and they should always use it. I admit, not every single person always does and some people would be manipulated, but I think that this is genuinely visible manipulation that we can fight against by understanding it as our fictional reality on the internet. I have to agree with the Marek’s point with the Google capabilities. I find it absolutely odd that almost every technology nowadays is somehow connected with Google. If we do not control it, Google can reach a huge power among the world, which is no more about manipulative pictures but more and more about the strength and connections everywhere. Marek has shown that Google can be a very great threat if its technologies remain uncontrolled. In conclusion, if we only look at the Google manipulation, we do not see that big problem and it can be solved easily. On the other hand, the Google technologies are so developed and spread throughout the whole world and into every type of science or job. In the worst scenario, if remained unchecked, the Google gets the power to rule the world which I find tremendously dangerous.
When you think of the internet, you immediately think of google too. It goes hand in hand. Google is a search engine used by millions of people every single day. And this is what google gives a monstrous power. By google you can control enormous number of people and it is scientifically proved by researchers from the University of Washington that by changing the results of google you can change and influence person’s opinion up to 7%. This gives google incredible power to change things for the better.
Less than 5% of all CEOs are women. 10 best paid CEOs in the USA are white skin coloured men. It is nothing new that women all over the world are getting paid less for the same work and they are often not hired to positions which are blindly considered as typically male ones. By manipulating results of google, this can be stopped and changed. As I have already mentioned, google can influence our minds by 7%. It means that if we type in to google CEO and instead of hundreds of men there will be equal number of men and women, we can change thinking of people and we can help them to get rid of typical gender stereotypes. They will see the fact that females are as capable of performing this job as any other male, what more, if they get enough chances they can be even better as some men. Same can be applied for, what was described as a sexy construction worker problem in the article. If we can reset the algorithm to show real female construction workers instead of sexualized images, we can be one step closer to erase this prejudice of women not being able to become a construction worker.
But not to see everything just through the pink glasses, there is one thing I am concerned about. As far as google has a tremendous power to control people’s mind, it can be easily misused. It may cause as much good as harm and it may cause gender stereotype problem even worse. We must never forget the true power of this search engine and we have to handle it always with care.
First of all, as far as I can see, both Alexander and Veronika agreed on two fundamental truths and these are: society is biased and full of sometimes unflattering yet very common stereotypes and second of all, internet, as a huge system of information is not creating them but only reflecting the sad status quo nowadays.
Yes, we see, that stereotypes are and always have been playing an essential role in forming the minds and opinions of our society and internet , since its appearance , might not have influenced it at all. Based on these premises, yes we can really say, google has nothing to do with such stereotypes, it only shows us our most popular searches and most clicked and viewed images. Thus, we can do nothing to change the mindset of our twisted perceptions.
However, even though, we all know, stereotypes were and are here with us, should we stay passive and therefore reinforce them? Let me explain. If those stereotypes have an actual platform, like the biggest information and share platform they can possibly get, the stereotypes flourish, their impact rises. Although google didn´t create these stereotypes, and this is a thing I can agree on with both of the previous comments, it provides them a pretty good soil to thrive. So the answer for the question if we should do something about it, to make a change is with posing another historical question. Should have been the right to vote given to women? If all of us previously thought women were incapable of making such important decisions and were inferior to men, because that was an actual historical stereotype, why did we make such step? Was it a step forward? If we based our opinions on our experiences and false assumptions and stereotypes put in our heads by the society, lot of us would never escape some stereotype cages. Like women with voting. See, I am not saying, these stereotypes are the same thing as the superior men standart in centuries before, but what I am trying to say is, it is bad enough for us to make a change because it is built on the same premises. Some things connect to the other. Woman are inferior. Men are stronger. Men can lead. Women are sexy. They belong in the kitchen. The list goes on.
And last of all, why is it bad that google reinforces these stereotypes and what, in my opinion, should we do about it. As the author mentioned some figures about how google depicted false numbers of woman who represented american authors, I realized, how much is this a bad thing and why we need to change it. First of all, google is the international super-quick and practical engine for searching through internet. Agreeing with the author, sometimes, it is the only way people get to learn about stuff. It is either because they are lazy to go and buy a book or because they need the information quickly. But if they end up researching with google, these empowered stereotypes might give them a distorted insight on the subject of matter. This can result in confirming their lingering and unstable fragile tendencies to believe these stereotypes even though they were not sure in the first place. Secondly, as we, as a democratic society always brag about equality, seeking it, we should really reconsider how our main platforms of communication work and how do they actually go against what we are trying to say, creating a negative backlash. Last of all, I want to sum it up, as far as I can see, stereotype-fulfilled google is a problem we should care about and should be changed. If the number of women CEOs is low, then OK, let it be low, but at least give actual representations of women CEOs. If we are scrolling down the search results we do not want to see just white, middle-aged men and a barbie. A barbie? Seriously? Isn´t this enough for you to think about a change?
The best option would be if the image search results presented actual percentage. If there are 27 percent of women CEOs, put there on almost every third/fourth picture a woman, and do not make me scroll two pages to find a doll carrying a briefcase.
First of all I think that Google is one of the most complicated things on the internet. It is the world’s most famous search engine so it basically needs to compile of as much information as possible. However, it only can reach to the information that are on the internet or are related to the internet (in applications). A lot of things on the web is particularly funny pictures, articles, memes which has nothing to do with the reality. Of course it is peculiar when I write in the engine female construction worker and I see all the pseudo-models who only earn money by showing parts of the body that should have remained hidden, but it is internet, it is cybernetic reality which is only a humans reflection of life they want to make easier and funnier. Furthermore, offended people should realize that it is natural that men want to see a wonderful woman if he does not have one. It is normal that the in the selected pictures of CEOs there was no woman because there is small percentage of women bosses worldwide which means that there is higher probability that a man boss will have his own website from where the Google can reach the photos than woman boss. I think that we should step back from this problem because Google only shows what people put on the web. If there is someone who does not like that, this person must realize that there is a problem with the people and not with the algorithm the searching engine is based on. On the other hand, I would say that it may have a tiny impact of youngsters who cannot differ between reality and web. This means that if I have shown a ten-year old girl the results for the CEOs she would think that only a man can be a CEO. The same works vice versa and with many other different cases. Nevertheless, this not something Google can do something about and it is only up to the parents to watch their children what are they doing on the internet. In conclusion, I think that people are overestimating this problem and do not step back from it. People have to realize that it is not the reality we live in. This is the reality between internet wires and our Facebook, Instagram or Twitter accounts. The only real problem that reveals is the affection on children which is already provided with the question if the person is already eighteen and then the browser wants the password. But again, this is only the think that parents can set on the computer and only they can control what their children are watching on the web sites.
This comment is from Veronika Zrubakova:
ReplyDeleteWhen googling an image people expect to see the representation of the expression they type, but often they are disappointed by the results. They want to be able to imagine what the term means, how it looks in reality. And that reality is disappointing. The question that stands in this blog is, whether should google show images that represent the reality - the reality in the world - or the internet reality - the images that are on the internet. The fact is, that even though the images of female construction worker are dishonouring, and unreal, that is the internet reality. Google gives us the real representation of the internet world which we create, the world of our posts, shares and activities on the internet. Moreover, most of the times this is not only the internet, but partly reality. Truly, we do not have many female construction workers, nor many female CEOs. And now I ask: is this wrong? Is it wrong that google shows us the reality? No, I do not think so. If we google an image, it is fair to show us the results that are most common to be associated with the typed term on the internet. That is what people believe is the reality and thereby it becomes reality. We create the internet, and it is only the reflection of the real world. I believe that google should not influence the results because it is supposed to show us the reality, even if it is bad.
Altering the results of our search means manipulating people´s opinion that is absolutely not helpful. Even though it would be nice to believe that we have more female CEOs, or that the female construction workers are dressed in normal clothes and not in short skirts, it would not represent the majority´s image of the term. Yes, those are caricatures, but that is a creation of society. By changing the search results, we would close eyes before the reality. Without knowing the reality, the truth that shows us that this is what people imagine when someone says "female CEO" we can never change the reality. These results only pinpoint the wrong opinions of society, which are unluckily there and by deleting images from the results of our search we do not delete this opinion from the world. Pretending that women are in the leading position does not make it real. Therefore I believe it would be counterproductive to modify google results, we should see even the dark side of our society, of us, and realize that we should change the reality, and not the reflection of it. I do not think it would solve any problem (inequality between men and women for example) but we would only close eyes and pretend the problem is not there.
In the main point I have to disagree with Veronika. I think that the enourmous power that Google has, should be used effectively to help and change the sad reality. In this article, we were shown that Google search engine can influence person's opinion up to 7%. This mean that if we put more female CEO's in results of Google, people will start accepting them equally capable of performing this job position as men. It can also erase uncorrect prejudice that female workers are unreal or shown just as a object of sexualization. Veronika has said in her comment a sentence: "that it is what people believe is the reality and thereby it becomes reality." On this sentence it can be nicely demonstrated the fact that if we increase number of female CEO's in Google results we can change the reality and we can help to get things better in terms of social issues and gender inequality.
DeleteGoogle is one of the biggest companies in the world, which influences many people by the information it has on its servers. If they wanted they could change the results of search their search. They could do it in such a way that they would achieve changes of users' minds or opinions. Though they have this access to the information, I hope it is not happening in this way and that it is rather similar to what Veronika said. I hope that the search engine reflects what really is on the internet, or even better what is real in the world.
ReplyDeleteIs it, however, that simple? Can Google at all show us the reality? It is not totally possible, because what one does not send on the Internet will not be there. On the other hand, Google can show things which are false, just because they are popular. The results in the search simply depend on the humans and on what they update on the Net.
So is it, at least, possible for Google to show us what is on the Internet? It is not. There is so much data that nobody could look at all of it in a life. That is why they have to filter it somehow. They want to show us the things which fit our search phrases the most. And what they show us probably depends even on the popularity of the pages. If there is many people who like one page, they can put many hyperlinks to it on other pages and Google algorithms may then consider the original page more interesting and more popular. So what you see in the results, is quite much influenced by the other users. On the other hand, the truth-revealing things may be sent down in the ranks if they are not so popular. It will, however, have to be enough, because if something is popular it is probable that even we will like it, that many people will. And so it is logic that the search engines try to choose the popular pages for the top places in the results to make the most of their users satisfied.
So finally, is the “sexy construction worker problem” a problem? As for what is popular on the Internet it is probably not. The search engines show us what people generally want to see. On the other hand, morally, it could be a problem. But again it is a problem of what the users updated, liked and chose.
I appreciate this comment as it looks in depth on the way Google works and using this knowledge discusses the issue.
DeleteSo how does Google actually look up the information? As far as I know they have a database in which there are sorted the results of search according to what is typed in. I imagine it as something similar to content of a book where there are listed names of chapters in alphabetical order. So if we want to read a chapter we first find the page number in the content of the book and then we start reading from that page. Thus, when we insert the expression that represents what we look for Google may correct it and then it looks up the place where it has in its database and in the end it lists the results.
Moreover, as Alex has mentioned it is not possible to include all data in search and therefore it is filtered. These filters pick up the most popular pages in order to satisfy the highest possible number of people who look up the information. This means that what Google shows is majority' attitude on the issue. In addition, I agree on that alteration of search results would be counterproductive as it would only hide inconvenient state. Furthermore, as Alex has later mentioned manipulation of search results could be misused and this would pose much worse consequences.
Besides, there was discussed “sexy construction worker” problem which was mentioned in majority of comments, too. They compared search results for “construction worker” and “female construction worker”. The conclusion was that “even when women show up in search results often enough, representations of them are very often, well, ridiculous“. Nevertheless, if we type in “male construction worker” we obtain similar results, of course, with men. Therefore, I do not think that “sexy construction worker” problem is an issue that involves only women. However, it appears when we type in phrase where we distinguish gender.
What is more, in the original article they claimed that women are underrepresented in results and in all comments it was taken as a fact. So let’s review their proof. In article they state: “two dozen Fortune 500 companies have women as top bosses—that's less than 5 percent of overall Fortune 500 CEOs ...in a Google image search for CEO, 11 percent of the people depicted were women, compared with 27 percent of U.S. CEOs who are women.“ I see here a huge inconsistency because if we compare the first two data we may consider women overrepresented on the contrary with the last two data where they are underrepresented. The result of search is somewhere in the middle, hence it can be considered as correlating with reality.
All in all, I agree with Alex opinion that Google only reflects the reality of the Internet and therefore results might show also flaws in our attitude on some topics. Moreover, I do not consider altering the results as a proper way to fix these flaws, however, I would be afraid of it as it is a step towards censorship which was typical for dictatorships, as Alex has mentioned. Additionally, I found out that “sexy construction worker” problem should not be interpreted as sexualized depictions of women when typed in “female construction worker” but sexualized depiction in general as we obtain similar results when we exchange “female” for “male”. And finally, I have clarified that according to the statistics found in the original article we cannot say that women are underrepresented or overrepresented in Google images in comparison with reality.
Google has become a global phenomenon. When you say the phrase “just google it” you do not need to be afraid that someone will not understands. Everyone knows what google is. And everyone uses it. It is the fact that Google is so popular and widely used that makes it so powerful. Because its greatest power does not lie in the ability to reflect people’s thoughts. It can influence our thinking and change it.
ReplyDeleteI think that all of us can agree that women are as capable as men. But their job positions often do not represent this fact. Quite the opposite. We can see that women do not get as much as men for the same amount of work due to the prejudices against them. Our democracies often tend to talk about the equality of opportunities. People should be judged according to their capabilities in their job not by their gender, race or anything else. Achieving this equality of opportunities is something that we must do. The question is how.
Is manipulating the search results the right way? I think it is. As the article says manipulating of these results can shift people’s opinions by seven percent. It may not seem like a big number but we must acknowledge that breaking prejudices is a slow process where every single percentage counts. The dilemma is that some argue that Google should not manipulate the process and let the results reflect the internet in its true form. But even the article says that women are underrepresented in the results. And even if they weren’t I propose that we should manipulate the results to show more women when we search for the jobs like CEO which are not represented by women at this time not because they do not want to but because the prejudices do not allow them to. It is worth to manipulate the results because there is no real benefit to show the reality in this case. It does not help us to see first woman CEO which is a Barbie after hours of scrolling. On the other hand by the manipulating the results Google can help to get to the point where there is no need to change the results to fight discrimination because it will not exist anymore.
Firstly, I absolutely agree with Roman that Google is one of the most influential things in the whole world. We all depend on it, we all use it, and even the author names it „a modern oracle“ and, consequently, it basically has created a monopoly on online searching.
DeleteThat is why I think it should stay as objective as possible. Exactly what Roman mentioned – 7 per cent sway in people´s opinion – that truly is a huge number. Seeing Google as such an important tool, I think we ought to let it be and let it go in its own stream.
I would like to reflect on the comment right above the Roman´s – Alex´s. He made a really nice point of explaining that we actually create the content we want and by all the various algorithms we truly form the Internet ourselves. If we altered the result of search, we would lie to these algorithms (or rather do not take them into consideration) and thus present false results which is, I think, on the complete contrary of a freedom of information.
Lastly, yes, I do agree that discrimination is a problem and an issue that is to be solved and that, quite burningly. However, I do not think that manipulating people´s opinion is the right way to do it. The key to eradicate the discriminatiing attitude in people is not to show them it does not exist anymore, and believe they change accordingly, but to try to raze it out of them.
Unfortunately, I cannot agree with Roman’s opinion about the search results manipulation. He refers to the fact, which was mentioned in the article, that manipulation of the search results can shift people’s opinions by seven per cent. And he said that by manipulating the results we could lower the amount of prejudice. However, I can see two problems about his strategy.
DeleteFirstly, will you achieve a total or at least partial disappearance of prejudice by manipulation of the search results? In the case of female CEOs, I do not think so. According to my opinion, changing the ratio of women and men shown as CEOs in the search results would cause the people looking through them to think that there is no problem about women discrimination rather than making people not to discriminate. It is the closing of eyes which even Veronika mentioned. And not only the people manipulating the data would close their eyes, it would be much worse. Even the others could be forced to do so. Then the fighters who would normally try to solve this discrimination problem, would not see it and they could be rather being brought to a passive state.
Secondly, it would bring even more lies into the society, as if there had not been enough of them by now. The manipulation of search results is a way of manipulation of data and information. I think that if we allow it in this way, it can after several steps end up as something much more dangerous. While it does not seem a big deal when talking about female CEO shown on images in search results, it definitely does if we talk about manipulating information about politics, money or wars. Moreover, the manipulation of data is too close to the censorship as it was, for example, during dictatorships in the history or even in nowadays’ dictatorships.
As Roman mentioned - "Google has become a global phenomenon". And a really powerful one, more than most think. He also suggested "that we should manipulate the results". But can we allow Google to play with the data, and to alter it? Definitely no.
DeleteWhen we talk about search engines, we must understand how Google works. When Google was founded in 1998, many search services like Bing or Yahoo already existed. However, Google's main goal was to offer an effective and reliable search result. Something that would be deeply violated by Roman's idea. Secondly, the Google search algorithm is very difficult. As a web page developer, I understand how the proper words used on web pages can elevate you to the first page of the Google search (let's be honest, how often do you look at the results behind the fist page). Google also remembers how often you open websites connected with the searched term. This way it tries to give you the information you want.
Even if Google would violate the search and add female CEOs, do you think it would help them? If so, how many sexy construction workers have you seen? I have seen only nasty old men. But by giving them a free hand we would allow companies like Google to manipulate our mentality.
Most often people do not realize the capabilities of Google. So how big is Google? Of course there is the search engine, the mail service Gmail and YouTube. In all of these three services Google thoroughly stores your search patterns and your every click. But then there is Google Chrome, which most of us use daily(and which again stores information about you). Have you got a smartphone? If it is not a iPhone, it probably runs Android - again something from Google. Google also owns some of the most advanced robotic technologies by owning Boston robotics(those really cool cow-like robots you probably already saw on the internet). And also the first commercial quantum computer. And Google Glasses. Do not forget about how they navigate you in Google Maps, or that this year their autonomous cars are officially legal to "drive" in the US. And countless other seaming weird projects, like autonomous drones, artificial intelligence, Google/Android calendars, Google+, WiFi balloons flying over Africa... This can affect far more people than the 7% mentioned in the article. So, now how often do you rely on Google?
Now that I have shown you what Google really is, consider they have one of the most powerful workforce in the industry. People often hate NSA, but do not realize Google's potential is quite as big in the online spy industry.
And now, you would openly allow Google to alter the searches. To decide and manipulate the data. To change our opinions about certain matters (not only female CEOs). I personally would never allow this to any company or organisation.
Reply from Diana Luptakova:
DeleteI have to agree with Marek and Roman that Google has a huge power which is dangerous and may be manipulative, but I have to disagree with the fact that if he has the space to he would certainly manipulate us. People always have their own minds and they should always use it. I admit, not every single person always does and some people would be manipulated, but I think that this is genuinely visible manipulation that we can fight against by understanding it as our fictional reality on the internet.
I have to agree with the Marek’s point with the Google capabilities. I find it absolutely odd that almost every technology nowadays is somehow connected with Google. If we do not control it, Google can reach a huge power among the world, which is no more about manipulative pictures but more and more about the strength and connections everywhere. Marek has shown that Google can be a very great threat if its technologies remain uncontrolled.
In conclusion, if we only look at the Google manipulation, we do not see that big problem and it can be solved easily. On the other hand, the Google technologies are so developed and spread throughout the whole world and into every type of science or job. In the worst scenario, if remained unchecked, the Google gets the power to rule the world which I find tremendously dangerous.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWhen you think of the internet, you immediately think of google too. It goes hand in hand. Google is a search engine used by millions of people every single day. And this is what google gives a monstrous power. By google you can control enormous number of people and it is scientifically proved by researchers from the University of Washington that by changing the results of google you can change and influence person’s opinion up to 7%. This gives google incredible power to change things for the better.
ReplyDeleteLess than 5% of all CEOs are women. 10 best paid CEOs in the USA are white skin coloured men. It is nothing new that women all over the world are getting paid less for the same work and they are often not hired to positions which are blindly considered as typically male ones.
By manipulating results of google, this can be stopped and changed. As I have already mentioned, google can influence our minds by 7%. It means that if we type in to google CEO and instead of hundreds of men there will be equal number of men and women, we can change thinking of people and we can help them to get rid of typical gender stereotypes. They will see the fact that females are as capable of performing this job as any other male, what more, if they get enough chances they can be even better as some men. Same can be applied for, what was described as a sexy construction worker problem in the article. If we can reset the algorithm to show real female construction workers instead of sexualized images, we can be one step closer to erase this prejudice of women not being able to become a construction worker.
But not to see everything just through the pink glasses, there is one thing I am concerned about. As far as google has a tremendous power to control people’s mind, it can be easily misused. It may cause as much good as harm and it may cause gender stereotype problem even worse. We must never forget the true power of this search engine and we have to handle it always with care.
from Martina Sabova:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, as far as I can see, both Alexander and Veronika agreed on two fundamental truths and these are: society is biased and full of sometimes unflattering yet very common stereotypes and second of all, internet, as a huge system of information is not creating them but only reflecting the sad status quo nowadays.
Yes, we see, that stereotypes are and always have been playing an essential role in forming the minds and opinions of our society and internet , since its appearance , might not have influenced it at all. Based on these premises, yes we can really say, google has nothing to do with such stereotypes, it only shows us our most popular searches and most clicked and viewed images. Thus, we can do nothing to change the mindset of our twisted perceptions.
However, even though, we all know, stereotypes were and are here with us, should we stay passive and therefore reinforce them? Let me explain. If those stereotypes have an actual platform, like the biggest information and share platform they can possibly get, the stereotypes flourish, their impact rises. Although google didn´t create these stereotypes, and this is a thing I can agree on with both of the previous comments, it provides them a pretty good soil to thrive. So the answer for the question if we should do something about it, to make a change is with posing another historical question. Should have been the right to vote given to women? If all of us previously thought women were incapable of making such important decisions and were inferior to men, because that was an actual historical stereotype, why did we make such step? Was it a step forward? If we based our opinions on our experiences and false assumptions and stereotypes put in our heads by the society, lot of us would never escape some stereotype cages. Like women with voting. See, I am not saying, these stereotypes are the same thing as the superior men standart in centuries before, but what I am trying to say is, it is bad enough for us to make a change because it is built on the same premises. Some things connect to the other. Woman are inferior. Men are stronger. Men can lead. Women are sexy. They belong in the kitchen. The list goes on.
And last of all, why is it bad that google reinforces these stereotypes and what, in my opinion, should we do about it. As the author mentioned some figures about how google depicted false numbers of woman who represented american authors, I realized, how much is this a bad thing and why we need to change it. First of all, google is the international super-quick and practical engine for searching through internet. Agreeing with the author, sometimes, it is the only way people get to learn about stuff. It is either because they are lazy to go and buy a book or because they need the information quickly. But if they end up researching with google, these empowered stereotypes might give them a distorted insight on the subject of matter. This can result in confirming their lingering and unstable fragile tendencies to believe these stereotypes even though they were not sure in the first place. Secondly, as we, as a democratic society always brag about equality, seeking it, we should really reconsider how our main platforms of communication work and how do they actually go against what we are trying to say, creating a negative backlash. Last of all, I want to sum it up, as far as I can see, stereotype-fulfilled google is a problem we should care about and should be changed. If the number of women CEOs is low, then OK, let it be low, but at least give actual representations of women CEOs. If we are scrolling down the search results we do not want to see just white, middle-aged men and a barbie. A barbie? Seriously? Isn´t this enough for you to think about a change?
The best option would be if the image search results presented actual percentage. If there are 27 percent of women CEOs, put there on almost every third/fourth picture a woman, and do not make me scroll two pages to find a doll carrying a briefcase.
From Diana Luptakova:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I think that Google is one of the most complicated things on the internet. It is the world’s most famous search engine so it basically needs to compile of as much information as possible. However, it only can reach to the information that are on the internet or are related to the internet (in applications). A lot of things on the web is particularly funny pictures, articles, memes which has nothing to do with the reality.
Of course it is peculiar when I write in the engine female construction worker and I see all the pseudo-models who only earn money by showing parts of the body that should have remained hidden, but it is internet, it is cybernetic reality which is only a humans reflection of life they want to make easier and funnier. Furthermore, offended people should realize that it is natural that men want to see a wonderful woman if he does not have one. It is normal that the in the selected pictures of CEOs there was no woman because there is small percentage of women bosses worldwide which means that there is higher probability that a man boss will have his own website from where the Google can reach the photos than woman boss.
I think that we should step back from this problem because Google only shows what people put on the web. If there is someone who does not like that, this person must realize that there is a problem with the people and not with the algorithm the searching engine is based on.
On the other hand, I would say that it may have a tiny impact of youngsters who cannot differ between reality and web. This means that if I have shown a ten-year old girl the results for the CEOs she would think that only a man can be a CEO. The same works vice versa and with many other different cases. Nevertheless, this not something Google can do something about and it is only up to the parents to watch their children what are they doing on the internet.
In conclusion, I think that people are overestimating this problem and do not step back from it. People have to realize that it is not the reality we live in. This is the reality between internet wires and our Facebook, Instagram or Twitter accounts. The only real problem that reveals is the affection on children which is already provided with the question if the person is already eighteen and then the browser wants the password. But again, this is only the think that parents can set on the computer and only they can control what their children are watching on the web sites.