What dark secrets of little-known Yorkshiremen might have leaked out into cyberspace? I am dying to know!
catgate wrote:Could it be to keep hidden the murky secrets of lechery?
nelz wrote:Sex crine convictions don't fit the criteria of oudated or irrelevant. Now, imagine you were arrested for a crime but subsequently released without charge. The arrest is newsworthy and would be in the news organisations' archives, and found by search spiders. The release without charge would not be newsworthy unless you were well known and probably wouldn't appear anywhere. So a web search on your name would only show that you were arrested for the crime, not that you were innocent.
to the top of the page? Changing Google's results is just killing the messenger and the beginnings of censorship.EDIT: Mr. foobar turned out to be innocent in the end
nelz wrote:... but the results of a simple web search, as provided by Google, only implied the man's guilt.
I'm not saying censorship is the answer, it isn't, but it is the search engines providing unbalance information and it is only right that ordinary people should have some means of redress.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest