POLL: Should Google Have Blocked Access To Innocence of Muslims In Egypt And Libya?
The New York Times reported Friday morning that Google had made the controversial decision to block access to the inflammatory anti-Islam video, Innocence of Muslims, in Egypt and Libya, where the crude production had sparked anti-U.S. riots and violence that resulted in the deaths of four American diplomats, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stephens.
According to the Times, Google, which owns YouTube where the clip is posted, did not remove the video from its site because its policy is to remove content only if it is deemed "hate speech," or "if it is responding to valid court orders or government requests." Based on company guidelines, the Internet behemoth determined that Innocence of Muslims "was not hate speech," the paper reported, but Google still made the exceptional decision to block access to the video in Egypt and Libya in response to the violence and killings.
In the wake of this extraordinary decision by an American company to censor content, Movieline wants to hear from you. Take the poll after the jump and tell us if Google's actions were warranted, or if, in your opinion, even more decisive action is required.
Google’s immense power as one of the pillars of the Internet means that it can have huge influence over the boundaries of free speech on the web. As Peter Spiro, a constitutional and international law professor at Temple University, told the Times: "Google is the world’s gatekeeper for information so if Google wants to define the First Amendment to exclude this sort of material then there’s not a lot the rest of the world can do about it." [New York Times]
You can make your opinion heard. If your point of view doesn't fit neatly into one of the three choices below, please leave it in the comments box.
Follow Frank DiGiacomo on Twitter.
Follow Movieline on Twitter.