Google tweeted about ending online harassment. But it was the next tweet that shut the haters down.

Recently the Google Ideas twitter account tweeted this photo:


Google Ideas is a think tank specifically dedicated to supporting free expression while fighting harassment.


From their website:

"Google Ideas is a team of engineers, researchers, and geopolitical experts who build products to support free expression and access to information, especially in repressive societies. We focus on the problems faced by people who live in unstable, isolated, or oppressive environments, including the billions of people who are coming online for the first time.

With the right tools, we can make the internet more free and open. Many of us take the internet for granted, but for human rights activists, journalists, and artists living under censorship, a free and open internet can be a matter of life and death.

We believe that technology can profoundly expand access to information for people who need it most."



Among those present were video game developer Zoe Quinn, activist and writer Feminista Jones, and Feminist Frequency's Anita Sarkeesian — all of whom have been the subjects of incredibly scary, targeted harassment by mobs of strangers on the Internet. It was kind of a who's who of anti-harassment advocates.

And at the end of the day, Google Ideas did something completely normal: They tweeted a picture of the group.

Less than an hour later ... Google Ideas tweeted this:


So, wait. What happened? Well...

Sadly, the tweets Google Ideas is referencing are kind of standard fare as far as the Internet is concerned.

There was some racism, some sexist insults, some fat-shaming, and a whole bunch of people telling Google and/or the group to kill themselves.

Online harassment is a real concern.

While it might seem all "sticks and stones," the reality is much more complicated than that.

Last August, Sarkeesian, one of the women in the photo, was driven out of her home after she received received a series of threats, one of which included her home address.



In October, a speech Sarkeesian was supposed to give at Utah State University was cancelled after the school received threats of a school shooting if the event went on as scheduled.

Journalist Laurie Penny dedicated a 2011 column in The Independent to the issue of online harassment:

"You come to expect it, as a woman writer, particularly if you're political. You come to expect the vitriol, the insults, the death threats. After a while, the emails and tweets and comments containing graphic fantasies of how and where and with what kitchen implements certain pseudonymous people would like to rape you cease to be shocking and become merely a daily or weekly annoyance, something to phone your girlfriends about, seeking safety in hollow laughter."

And in June, Google (and Bing) announced that they would be working to remove "revenge porn" from search results.

"Revenge porn" is a type of harassment in which someone posts someone's private photos online to embarrass or extort the target. Google had the following to say:

"Our philosophy has always been that Search should reflect the whole web. But revenge porn images are intensely personal and emotionally damaging and serve only to degrade the victims — predominantly women. So going forward, we'll honor requests from people to remove nude or sexually explicit images shared without their consent from Google Search results. This is a narrow and limited policy, similar to how we treat removal requests for other highly sensitive personal information, such as bank account numbers and signatures, that may surface in our search results."

The following month, Google shared a form where people can report explicit images of themselves that have been posted without their consent. Between this and what the Google Ideas team is working on, it feels like the company is trying to make good on its "Don't be evil" mission statement.


Good for Google for taking on online abuse. Hopefully, the Internet can become a place where all feel welcome.

Image by 5540867 from Pixabay

Figuring out what to do for a mom on Mother's Day can be a tricky thing. There's the standard flowers or candy, of course, and taking her out to a nice brunch is a fairly universal winner. But what do moms really want?

Speaking from experience—my kids range from age 12 to 20—a lot depends on the stage of motherhood. What I wanted when my kids were little is different than what I want now, and I'm sure when my kids are grown and gone I'll want something different again.

We asked our readers to share what they want for Mother's Day, and while the answers were varied, there were some common themes that emerged.

Moms of young kids want a break.

When your kids are little, motherhood is relentless. Precious and adorable, yes. Wonderful and rewarding, absolutely. But it's a LOT. And it's a lot all the fricking time.

Most moms I know would love the gift of alone time, either away at a hotel or Airbnb or in their own home with no one else around. Time alone is a priceless commodity at this stage, especially if it comes with someone else taking care of cleaning, making sure the kids are fed and safe and occupied, doing the laundry, etc.

This is especially true after more than a year of pandemic living, where we moms have spent more time than usual at home with our offspring. While in some ways that's been great, again, it's a lot.

Keep Reading Show less
Photo by Daniel Schludi on Unsplash
True

The global eradication of smallpox in 1980 is one of international public health's greatest successes. But in 1966, seven years after the World Health Organization announced a plan to rid the world of the disease, smallpox was still widespread. The culprits? A lack of funds, personnel and vaccine supply.

Meanwhile, outbreaks across South America, Africa, and Asia continued, as the highly contagious virus continued to kill three out of every 10 people who caught it, while leaving many survivors disfigured. It took a renewed commitment of resources from wealthy nations to fulfill the promise made in 1959.

Forty-one years later, although we face a different virus, the potential for vast destruction is just as great, and the challenges of funding, personnel and supply are still with us, along with last-mile distribution. Today, while 30% of the U.S. population is fully vaccinated, with numbers rising every day, there is an overwhelming gap between wealthy countries and the rest of the world. It's becoming evident that the impact on the countries getting left behind will eventually boomerang back to affect us all.

Photo by ismail mohamed - SoviLe on Unsplash

The international nonprofit CARE recently released a policy paper that lays out the case for U.S. investment in a worldwide vaccination campaign. Founded 75 years ago, CARE works in over 100 countries and reaches more than 90 million people around the world through multiple humanitarian aid programs. Of note is the organization's worldwide reputation for its unshakeable commitment to the dignity of people; they're known for working hand-in-hand with communities and hold themselves to a high standard of accountability.

"As we enter into our second year of living with COVID-19, it has become painfully clear that the safety of any person depends on the global community's ability to protect every person," says Michelle Nunn, CARE USA's president and CEO. "While wealthy nations have begun inoculating their populations, new devastatingly lethal variants of the virus continue to emerge in countries like India, South Africa and Brazil. If vaccinations don't effectively reach lower-income countries now, the long-term impact of COVID-19 will be catastrophic."

Keep Reading Show less