a voice for social justice in technology

It seems that Google AdSense has started to show readers of this blog Chinese ads for "The Fertility Institute", specifically the file "fertility-docs dot com slash fertility_gender_china.phtml".

Before I think and write about the issues of safe space that implicitly come up when ads are used to monetize web content, let's take a look at the AdSense Terms and Conditions to see if we are allowed to even question the system in this way.

- Google ads must be authorized, and you may not show other "non-Google content-targeted advertisement(s)"

- Do not "in any non-transitory manner store or cache information obtained from any Ads" -- does this mean a blog with AdSense may not talk about the kinds of Ads it gets, and cite specific examples?

- You may not "engage in any action or practice that reflects poorly on Google or otherwise disparages or devalues Google’s reputation or goodwill" -- this seems intended to keep bad people away, but what if the good guys want to ensure Google's reputation but accidentally devalue it along the way?

I took a look at the "Yahoo! Publisher Network" Beta (publisher.yahoo.com), which seems to be a Google AdSense competitor plus integration with Yahoo tools and services.

Unfortunately, "Yahoo! Publisher Network does not wish to be associated with certain types of content, behavior and/or product."

If you look at the current content guidelines, you'll see, besides the typical talk of Adult-oriented content and Violence, the sale of various items from various places, Gambling and Illegal Drugs, that to participate in the publisher network beta, you must not be tied to "Political, religious or charitable organizations, issues or causes".

Gee, no porn, no drug trafficking... and no non-profits that rely on donations to keep them afloat? No charitable "issues" or "causes"? How shall we use GoogleAmaYahoo technologies to work towards social justice on a GoogleAmaYahoo scale if they don't buy into this larger cause?

I was going to say something about Jerry Yang and how incorporation tends to leaves the soul behind, but I haven't met Jerry yet, and don't know much about him. Besides, it's silly to tie Jerry to this particular program, as I've worked for several large tech corporations, and know it's a fallacy to blame only people at the top. Things just happen. And, outside of work, it seems that Jerry and Akiko contribute hella money to good things.

I've been thinking that we need a place to "call" the top tech companies on how their policies subtly affect their users, and on how implicitly or explicitly Evil they can seem to be.

Of the GoogleAmaYahoo triad I mentioned before, Amazon has its 1-click history and my perception is that philanthropy is not a big deal within the company, even though a small number of people did help millions of citizens donate millions of dollars to disaster relief. I don't know as much about Yahoo's policies and corporate culture, but I am pleased that Google now has a philanthropy arm at google.org and that Google's corporate charter says "Don't Be Evil" rather than "Be Frugal."

Frugality and fear come from the world of scarcity. I know this world by association, through mirror neurons and through my proper ancestors. I know these values have a place. But I also know, on a personal level, about what it means to be the American-born child of Chinese frugality and fear, and on an abstract level, about the difference between Wrangham's proposed differential between most Bonobos and Chimpanzees.

And just as the relative genetic deltas between Bonobos, Chimpanzees, and humans are not that large, the relative deltas, the relative diffs between source code and policy that leads to socially-just technologies rather than socially-unjust technologies should also be quite small. The source is usually almost there, it's just a question then of environment and attitude.

I don't know about the world at large, but I'd rather build a metaphorical Bonobo.org than support a Wrangham-style Chimpanzee domain.