Google adds Black-owned business label to product results(searchengineland.com)
searchengineland.com
Google adds Black-owned business label to product results
https://searchengineland.com/google-adds-black-owned-business-label-to-product-results-345780
44 comments
you're right, and James Baldwin and Martin Luther King Jr. would be fighting this.
it's deeply disturbing that we are seeing the reintroduction of segregation.
even in schools: https://www.bwscampus.com/our-community/commitment-to-divers...
it's deeply disturbing that we are seeing the reintroduction of segregation.
even in schools: https://www.bwscampus.com/our-community/commitment-to-divers...
Ah, a category vs tag problem. Nice.
Shooting from the hip here, but my guess is that the “African-American section” started further upstream than the physical bookshelf, in attempts to remedy discrimination. Agree with the tag vs category challenge in discovering books.
For example, if OP wanted to understand prevailing social and political attitudes in 1960s Black America, instead of specifically Baldwin, then it’s easier to have an African-American section than search for needles in the haystack of anthropology sub-categories.
On a separate note, wondering how the OP experience might be different on Amazon.com instead of inside a physical Borders Books. You search for Baldwin and get your own echo chamber of the “African-American section” algorithmically produced through a combination of related titles and your own personal preferences.
For example, if OP wanted to understand prevailing social and political attitudes in 1960s Black America, instead of specifically Baldwin, then it’s easier to have an African-American section than search for needles in the haystack of anthropology sub-categories.
On a separate note, wondering how the OP experience might be different on Amazon.com instead of inside a physical Borders Books. You search for Baldwin and get your own echo chamber of the “African-American section” algorithmically produced through a combination of related titles and your own personal preferences.
>Here was James Baldwin, who had been a huge proponent for civil rights and a major critic of segregation, having his own books segregated away from what the bookstore categorized as “literature”, into a racially defined category instead.
horseshoe theory strikes again!
horseshoe theory strikes again!
I feel that. Doesn’t seem right
Bookstores will work around this confusion by placing a card saying "[Author] can be found in Sci-Fi" appropriately.. but that takes more care and feeding and is more typical in an indie shop.
this seems different though. That makes things less discoverable because you are in the wrong section. This just marks things you've already discovered in case the marking is important to you.
> In the past 12 months, Google search interest for “black owned businesses” has skyrocketed 600% based on Google Trends data comparing January-December 2019 to January-December 2020. Across the country, people have been looking for “black owned restaurants,” “black owned bookstores,” “black owned beauty supply” and more, which speaks to the diversity within the Black business community.
What does "diversity within the Black business community" even mean?
> Across the country, people have been looking for "black owned ${business_type}"
> comparing ... 2019 to ... 2020
Why might someone want to search for "black owned" businesses in that time period? Did Google bother investigating which demographics those searches came from?
This is presented as if having such a label is beneficial. Given the rise in white supremacist activity over the last year, maybe building an index of Black businesses isn't a great idea?
What does "diversity within the Black business community" even mean?
> Across the country, people have been looking for "black owned ${business_type}"
> comparing ... 2019 to ... 2020
Why might someone want to search for "black owned" businesses in that time period? Did Google bother investigating which demographics those searches came from?
This is presented as if having such a label is beneficial. Given the rise in white supremacist activity over the last year, maybe building an index of Black businesses isn't a great idea?
It’s pretty pessimistic to think that maybe an index of BoBs is more of a boon for white supremacists than Black business owners. There are so many regional-scale efforts among Black business owners to “get the word out” on where to support BoBs. I don’t think we are trying to serve ourselves up. We are trying to get on the field (and I suspect a lot of other minority businesses would welcome a similar spotlight).
Perhaps it’s a bad analogy, but I don’t think seed and pre-seed startups avoid Angelist and Crunchbase because maybe the vulture VCs and patent trolls are looking for new targets. Most businesses welcome an edge or advantage, perceived or real. Throttling in the face of potential threats probably means you shouldn’t be a founder or small biz owner.
Perhaps it’s a bad analogy, but I don’t think seed and pre-seed startups avoid Angelist and Crunchbase because maybe the vulture VCs and patent trolls are looking for new targets. Most businesses welcome an edge or advantage, perceived or real. Throttling in the face of potential threats probably means you shouldn’t be a founder or small biz owner.
Exactly. The last time people showed disproportionate interest in shops owned by Jews didn't result in anything worth repeating.
Diversity within the Black owned business community is referring to the diversity of types of businesses that Black people own. I.e., not just barber shops.
Literally. Double edge sword if I’ve ever seen one.
Are you suggesting there are really that many people out there that would seek to harm or otherwise not patronize a business because it is Black owned? I choose to believe there are many more people that would like to support minority owned businesses or at the very least, not care either way.
I'm looking forward to the first Twitter controversies about who does or doesn't qualify as black, when someone judged too white (or Indian or Syrian or South-American) manages to get the "black-identifying" label and gets caught.
There is some precedent that is related. A certain percentage of DOD contracts are required to go to Native American owned business. To qualify as native the business must be 51% owned by member(s) of a federally recognized tribe. Each tribe gets to decide who is or is not a member, most do it by voting or birthright systems.
Interestingly, for some other set asides they use "Historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs)" as the qualifier. Membership is regulated by who gets in to those colleges. Thus they use college admissions boards instead of birthright or popular vote.
https://business.defense.gov/Portals/57/Documents/DFAR%20252...
Interestingly, for some other set asides they use "Historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs)" as the qualifier. Membership is regulated by who gets in to those colleges. Thus they use college admissions boards instead of birthright or popular vote.
https://business.defense.gov/Portals/57/Documents/DFAR%20252...
Yeah, this and international differences about what "black" actually means. By standards of some cultures Barack Obama was not the first black president of the US but the first mulatto president of the US, as he is neither "properly" black nor white.
If we used that standard, then almost no African American in existence would be considered Black. Since effectively all Black people with enslaved ancestors in America have some white ancestry.
Already happened last year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Krug
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Krug
Another example of positive discrimination. I find it absurd that skin color has anything to do with businesses’ quality. Could be that I’m just living in a Finnish bubble where I haven’t seen racism in ages.
jjeaff(1)
I’m a photographer, and weddings make up the largest percentage of my income. I advertise on The Knot/Wedding Wire, which are wedding planning sites and vendor directories. I pay something like $300 a month to be on the first page of results for photographers.
Some time last year they added a filter option to their vendor search results. Black owned, Hispanic owned, LGBT owned, woman owned, etc. There are a lot of options, only one of which can possibly apply to white men - veteran owned.
I don’t really mind the race related ones, as black people can be hard to photograph for (poor) photographers used to white people. Some cultures have different wedding traditions too.
But the woman owned option? Photography is absolutely dominated by women. I’m part of a photographer group on Facebook for my region and a lot of posts start out “hey ladies.” There are entire websites dedicated to “momtographers.” I would say for every 10 female professions photographers there’s one male or less.
That disparity evens out a bit when you’re talking about decently high-end photographers, but I’d still say we’re in the minority. Yet every time I log in they ask me which of those groups I belong to, and there is no “none” option. Every time someone uses those search filters it means I’m effectively paying more than everyone else for the same amount of advertising, just because I’m a white man.
It’s gross.
Some time last year they added a filter option to their vendor search results. Black owned, Hispanic owned, LGBT owned, woman owned, etc. There are a lot of options, only one of which can possibly apply to white men - veteran owned.
I don’t really mind the race related ones, as black people can be hard to photograph for (poor) photographers used to white people. Some cultures have different wedding traditions too.
But the woman owned option? Photography is absolutely dominated by women. I’m part of a photographer group on Facebook for my region and a lot of posts start out “hey ladies.” There are entire websites dedicated to “momtographers.” I would say for every 10 female professions photographers there’s one male or less.
That disparity evens out a bit when you’re talking about decently high-end photographers, but I’d still say we’re in the minority. Yet every time I log in they ask me which of those groups I belong to, and there is no “none” option. Every time someone uses those search filters it means I’m effectively paying more than everyone else for the same amount of advertising, just because I’m a white man.
It’s gross.
I get your meaning since it does seem to be a profession already dominated by women. But judging by some wedding photos I've seen, I can see why a bride might actually feel more comfortable with a female photographer. Considering sometimes, brides want photos in the dressing room of the bridal party getting ready. But I also don't see any problem adding a tag for male photographers.
Sure, some people could have a preference. People rarely hire me do portraits of their children, and I straight up don’t do newborns as there are plenty of women that basically specialize in it.
But that’s just the point. People can hide men with their search parameters, but not women. Some people might actually prefer a man to shoot their wedding. Like you said, adding the ability to mark search for male owned businesses would make it all completely ok, in my opinion.
As an aside I’m often in the room when the bride is getting dressed, and of course it’s completely up to them. It’s just like any other profession that might see people naked - you handle it professionally, and you’re too busy doing your job to “enjoy” it. I’ve also done boudoir but don’t actively advertise it as that’s an uphill battle, but there are great male boudoir photographers.
The bridesmaids themselves (almost) always dress in private whether the photographer is a guy or girl.
But that’s just the point. People can hide men with their search parameters, but not women. Some people might actually prefer a man to shoot their wedding. Like you said, adding the ability to mark search for male owned businesses would make it all completely ok, in my opinion.
As an aside I’m often in the room when the bride is getting dressed, and of course it’s completely up to them. It’s just like any other profession that might see people naked - you handle it professionally, and you’re too busy doing your job to “enjoy” it. I’ve also done boudoir but don’t actively advertise it as that’s an uphill battle, but there are great male boudoir photographers.
The bridesmaids themselves (almost) always dress in private whether the photographer is a guy or girl.
I thought discrimination based on sex and gender is illegal. You are now condoning an illegal practice?
notananthem(1)
I can see all kinds of tags being helpful for people who are contemplating purchasing decisions.
Black, Female, Veteran, Local, Small, LGBTQ, or other ownership/categorical tags are all information that people might use to guide their purchases.
If Google thinks Google’s customers (the advertisers) want these tags, Google will provide them.
Black, Female, Veteran, Local, Small, LGBTQ, or other ownership/categorical tags are all information that people might use to guide their purchases.
If Google thinks Google’s customers (the advertisers) want these tags, Google will provide them.
It's terrible but I wonder how many people will avoid those items.
[deleted]
This is disgusting.
No, being against a little benefit that is trying even the playing field after literally hundreds of years of systemic oppression against a group of people is what is disgusting.
This futile quest for cosmic justice is making people believe that discrimination is, somehow, equality.
Many blacks have slaves as their ancestors. Some immigrated more recently. Jews have had it uphill for most of the past two millennia. Poor whites in rural South would be right to chase you away with their guns if you tried to tell them about their alleged privileges.
Why stop at race? Short men are disadvantaged in the dating market. Beautiful people have an enormous advantage in life.
The past is full of discrimination, persecution, and prejudice. But we cannot right the old wrongs by creating new ones. Let’s treat everyone equally instead.
Many blacks have slaves as their ancestors. Some immigrated more recently. Jews have had it uphill for most of the past two millennia. Poor whites in rural South would be right to chase you away with their guns if you tried to tell them about their alleged privileges.
Why stop at race? Short men are disadvantaged in the dating market. Beautiful people have an enormous advantage in life.
The past is full of discrimination, persecution, and prejudice. But we cannot right the old wrongs by creating new ones. Let’s treat everyone equally instead.
notananthem(1)
Now this is interesting. I look forward to seeing the data as to how this pans out. The label is useful for those who want to support Black-owned businesses, for whatever reason, but would be equally useful for those who do not, for whatever reason.
A huge amount of political/social attitude data points available for Google - and I hope that such data are released (anonymised etc) for academic research.
A huge amount of political/social attitude data points available for Google - and I hope that such data are released (anonymised etc) for academic research.
I'm not much of a social critic so it's difficult to formulate the right words to explain my position, but racial profiling just doesn't seem right, regardless of its intent.