Big tech firms need to stop reducing LGBT+ people to their sex lives | Hannah Jane Parkinson

From demonetising videos to porn-filled searches, internet platforms are on the wrong side of the issue

Here’s a question: how comfortable would you feel typing the word “lesbian” into a search engine in the office? Or maybe while a parent pottered about behind you? Or even, perhaps, not in incognito browsing mode?

If your answer is “not very”, then you’re probably aware that it’s a term that has more often than not returned salacious results. It’s the online reflection of the far-too-frequently sexualised, real-life reaction to female sex-same relationships.

Now that has changed. After a long-standing campaign by a Twitter account dedicated to the issue, @SEO_lesbienne, and the French news site Numerama – which found that typing in “lesbian” returned a wall of porn, which was not the case for “gay”, “trans” or other LGBT+-related terms – Google has announced a tweak to its algorithm. Users are now met with a Wikipedia page, BBC News stories and newspaper comment pieces. Although, after testing this, I’d argue there’s still not the wealth of information and range of results that are returned when typing in “gay” or “gay men”, for example, but it’s still a definite improvement. (There is, however, still a paid ad for lesbian porn on page one of the results.)

Google made the change not long after it displayed a rainbow flag on its logo during Pride. Perhaps the company realised that explicit search results such as this appearing underneath the symbol of LGBT+ rights was not a great look and undermines its allyship, given that gay women are so often treated as entertainment for men (the attack on two women on a London bus, for refusing to kiss, happened just two months ago). Google’s vice-president of search engine quality, Pandu Nayak, said the search results were “terrible, there’s no doubt about it. We are aware there are problems like this, in many languages. We’ve developed algorithms to improve this [and] taken measures in cases where, when there is a reason for the word to be interpreted in a non-pornographic way, that interpretation is put forward.”

But this isn’t the only example of concern for Google when it comes to its algorithms reducing LGBT+ people to their sex lives. Gay YouTubers have found that their videos are being demonetised, made inaccessible via search and age-restricted (requiring users to sign in to prove they are over 18). This, despite the fact many of these videos consist merely of interviews, advice and comedy sketches, and often are specifically targeted at young people who may be struggling with their sexuality and turn to the Google-owned YouTube as a source of support.

Two content creators, Bria Kam and her wife, Chrissy Chambers, along with six others, are now suing YouTube for “discrimination, fraud, unfair and deceptive business practices” and “unlawful restraint of speech”. This has a real-world impact, as Chambers says: “Age restriction means we can’t reach the young women who look up to us, who need us as a sense of community and support … When I think about YouTube shutting down our content, it gets me all fired up because they are literally having an impact on someone living another day.”

Remarkably, Kam and Chambers (who have more than a million subscribers between them) found that a video that YouTube had asked them to make, as part of a campaign called #ProudToLove, had quietly been demonetised since. Meanwhile, though, these LGBT creators are not being allowed to earn money from advertising, YouTube is permitting homophobic adverts to run alongside them or as pre-rolls, including anti-gay marriage missives. There’s also a lack of action on homophobic comments. Kam and Chambers aren’t the first to complain about this state of affairs – other hugely popular British YouTubers have also raised the issue.

In an interview with UK YouTuber Alfie Deyes, the YouTube CEO, Susan Wojcicki, said that “the [LGBT+] community has been an incredibly important part of YouTube” and denied that related content was automatically demonetised. But in 2017 the company admitted that it “sometimes makes mistakes”, including putting age restrictions on videos with titles such as Coming Out to Grandma. “The bottom line is that this feature isn’t working the way it should.”

And Google is far from the only culprit. Twitter, notoriously, is slow and in many instances useless at cracking down on online hate speech and harassment (in whatever form it comes in). Dick Costolo, the former Twitter CEO, even once told staff in a leaked memo that the company “suck[s] at dealing with abuse”.

Prejudice against LGBT+ people is on the rise: leaders who have used homophobic language are being elected across the globe – from Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, who once said he would prefer a dead son to a gay one to Boris Johnson in the UK, who referred to “tank-topped bumboys” in an old column. That makes it more important than ever for the internet platforms that so monopolise our attention, opinions and politics to get on the right side of these issues.

• Hannah Jane Parkinson is a Guardian columnist

Contributor

Hannah Jane Parkinson

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
Facebook and Twitter told us they would tackle ‘fake news’. They failed | Julian King and Mariya Gabriel
Tech giants signed up to our EU code to counter disinformation – but with key elections looming, they are falling short, write Julian King and Mariya Gabriel

Julian King and Mariya Gabriel

28, Feb, 2019 @1:57 PM

Article image
The desperate people of Ukraine need help, not self-satisfied social media posts | Moya Lothian-McLean
Twitter, Instagram and TikTok posts offer quick catharsis, but it’s the unshowy work of collective organising that makes a real difference, says writer Moya Lothian-McLean

Moya Lothian-McLean

08, Mar, 2022 @7:00 AM

Article image
Why is populism booming? Today’s tech is partly to blame | Jamie Bartlett
Social media platforms are the perfect places to deny nuance in favour of extreme opinions – and we are hooked on them, says author Jamie Bartlett

Jamie Bartlett

29, Nov, 2018 @6:00 AM

Article image
Now we know for sure that big tech peddles despair, we must protect ourselves | Zoe Williams
After the Molly Russell case, there can be no doubt: our anger must be put to good use, says Guardian columnist Zoe Williams

Zoe Williams

07, Oct, 2022 @5:00 AM

Article image
The tech giants dominated the decade. But there’s still time to rein them in | Jay Owens
Google, Amazon and Facebook moved at a scale and speed governments couldn’t match. Now regulators are trying to catch up, says writer and researcher Jay Owens

Jay Owens

25, Dec, 2019 @1:00 PM

Article image
I saw first-hand how US tech giants seduced the EU – and undermined democracy
Silicon Valley used opaque lobbying to weaken crucial new regulations. Firms like Google and Meta must be held to account

Georg Riekeles

28, Jun, 2022 @10:01 AM

Article image
Katie Price is right. Disabled people shouldn’t be forced off the internet by abuse | Gaby Hinsliff
If the social media giants can’t prevent abuse, then parliament should protect minority groups, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff

Gaby Hinsliff

22, Jan, 2019 @11:05 AM

Article image
Social media spying is turning us into a stalking society | Keza MacDonald
Facebook, Twitter and others must act on misuse and abuse or face the ongoing “techlash”, says the Guardian’s games editor, Kez MacDonald

Keza MacDonald

13, Feb, 2018 @3:58 PM

Article image
Online abuse of disabled people is getting worse – when will it be taken seriously? | Frances Ryan
New research shows the extent of this depressing trend. Social media platforms and MPs have to get a grip of it, says Guardian columnist Frances Ryan

Frances Ryan

10, May, 2019 @6:00 AM

Article image
Could this EU crackdown on fake news be a gamechanger? | Paul Chadwick
The new EU code of practice on disinformation indicates progress has been made, says Paul Chadwick, the Guardian’s readers’ editor

Paul Chadwick

30, Sep, 2018 @6:00 PM