Censorship across the globe: Google releases new report

Once again, Google is taking strides previously unseen in the technological world. The company released a "transparency report" to detail government use of Google, giving world citizens the opportunity to learn more about their leaders' place in the online universe.

The report summarizes the number of times a given government has either requested user content or asked that content be removed. Countries range from China to Brazil to Germany, and of course, the United States. Most of the information is based on data from January 2011 to June 2011, but select data is available from all the way back to July 2009.

Brazil and Germany were the top countries in content removal requests, with Germany requesting the removal of the greatest number of items (one request can include several items). Some of that content included Nazi propaganda, according to the report.

The United States requested the most user data. Google complied with 93 percent of these requests. However, there were instances of broadcasted police brutality the company refused to remove.

According to Ed Yohnka, a representative for ACLU Illinois, Google's actions are revolutionary in today's society.

"The government is asking for information and data for people in the U.S…largely innocent citizens…at an alarming rate," he said. "It [the report] really reveals a lot of activity we just don't talk about."

"The governments are clearly concerned about what information is on the Internet," he said. "None of that should surprise us."

Richard Warner, a law professor at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, also noted that the Internet has become "a medium of free expression and economic growth" and has "the lack of ability to discriminate against types of data." With this in mind, U.S. citizens, who tend to be vehemently against censorship, desire to control the government's limits on free expression unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.

Additionally, behavior on the Internet is much harder to track, which can be difficult for governments to handle.

Warner also noted that in this context, Google is more focused on government data collection than anything else.

"The transparency report is not about private data collection," he said.

When it comes to what information is acceptable, new media and technology Professor Paul Booth claims it is completely subjective.

"Everyone is going to have a different answer," he said. "We all have different cultural values."

However, he added that perspectives regarding privacy are less versatile, particularly in the United States.

"People feel more comfortable when there are some sort of restrictions," he said. "Finding the line between censorship and protection is very difficult."

Eventually, Booth believes the amount of information available will increase, inevitably changing society's view on privacy and censorship. And while he supports Google's transparency, he questions the power of such information in the hands of a large corporation.

"It worries me when a corporation controls information," he said. "What if Google turns evil? All of a sudden they have control of all of this information we've put out there."

According to Yohnka, nothing will be definite until the government revisits and updates legislation to consider new technology like this."We need an updated system for dealing with these updated technologies," he said.

Additionally, he believes the ultimate goal of this debate should be to create "laws that put in place real protection for citizens."