Yahoo! is liberal and Anti Christian....read the Details.?

Question

This is a small experiment that I have been doing for the past month (8/1/07 - 9/1/07) on Yahoo! Answers.

I have reported a total of 100 questions that were against Yahoo! standards/guidelines. All questions were obviously against the guidelines, by using either hate speech, or simply making fun and mocking the subject group.
Of those 100:
25 were pro-gay(PG), 25 were anti-gay(AG), 25 were pro Christianity(PC), 25 were anti Christianity(AC).

I kept track of how long it took Yahoo! to respond to these reported abusues. Of the 25 Pro Gay, only 5 were even responded to and removed (4 day avg). Of the 25 Anti Gay, ALL 25 were removed (1 day avg). Of the 25 Pro Chris. , 15 were removed (2 day avg), and of the AC only 1 was removed (4 days).

Do you believe that Yahoo! is fair with its treatment to all people (liberal, conservative, Christian, atheist, etc? Or are you like me, and see the facts, that Yahoo! has become liberal and anti Christian?

What do you guys think?

Its not really up to anyone to believe or not, its the truth. It has been a social experiment for my college sociology class. Get over yourselves.

And to the guy that says liberalism and Christianity have nothing to do with each other....Ok...so you believe that God created people to be homosexuals? You think the descruction of the family system is okay with God? Sure we are to love their souls, but never EVER their ways.

KYLE H:

Sure, the internet is open to anyone, pedophiles, perverts, pornographers, communists, terrorists, politicians....anyone. BUT, Yahoo! supposedly has guidelines to protect ALL of its users from persecution because of their beliefs. The open internet is one thing, but a place such as this has guidelines for a reason, and my point is to show that they are not being enforced equally.

EDIT:

ALL ANSWERS that were included had hate speech toward the subject, as well as at least one slanderous/curse word, such as "fags(AG), homos(AG), Worthless wastes of space and intelligence (AC), etc. ALL HAD EQUAL BASIS FOR REMOVAL.

Answer 1

Ummm, you hardly have a controlled study. You should have also complained about 25 that were pro-honda, or some such non-offensive subject as a test group. Is it perhaps the level of offensiveness in the posts? Could some have been more offensive than others.?
Or did you post the same exact questions, only changing the words as needed?
For example:

Do you hate Christians?
Do you hate non-Christians?
Do you hate gays?
Do you hate straight people?
Do you hate Hondas?
Do you hate cars that aren't Hondas?

Post those, and record the results. Then you have something!

Answer 2

You have an interesting conclusion but you are far from posting your results. The smaller the sample size in each experiment, the more likely it is that you will obtain such erroneous results. Do the Independent variable causes some kind of change in the other variables, or dependent variables?

I really dont understand all the negativity, I think the asker was simply polling a reasonable question/comparison. Isnt that what forums like this are for, to share questions and answers?

Answer 3

I know they let this Indian Guru let his question run for forever. Maybe I am missing a feature of Yahoo that I know nothing about or maybe it's tied in with having a blog, because Bruce Willis has a long string of answers running also. Antil Gay comments would be considered more derogatory than pro gay I think. And I have had some problems putting in a religious website in my comments in the past. It may be that we are at the mercy of the staff. You have to find out who is the CEO and contact that person if you feel something is amiss.

Answer 4

It is interesting that you found some apparent discrepancies, but I would guess there are way too many factors (degree of hate speech in the comment, the amount of overall questions/answers relating to each issue, etc.) to make an apples-to-apples comparison.

It's also likely that your bias as the conductor of this "experiment" may have played into your choices of questions and answers that you included. All "scientific" experiments are supposed to have controls to remove or eliminate any bias by those controlling the experiment and/or research.

Answer 5

I think it all depends on the content of what was posted. If all 100 of these questions were completely outrageous, then you have a legitimate point. But if some varied, then you can't really be sure.

I don't understand why Yahoo would be against Christianity. That seems silly to me. But this was very interesting and I think you should continue investigating.

Answer 6

Its very hard to say without seeing the actual 100 messages. It would appear that perhaps since you had already decided what the outcome would be you chose examples that supported your prejudice. I also don't know exactly how you tracked these as you can report a violation and the violation could be sent to the user but the message might not be removed. The other obvious flaw is your sample is based on only 2 criteria homosexualilty and christianity. since it is clear that christians are overtly obsessed with homosexuals I don't think your sample provided a rationale base for your accusations

Answer 7

Perhaps you should get a job in the Yahoo! Answers statistical department...

In all honesty though, how many e-mails do you think that they get a day? How many do you really think that they get to in record time?

I personally haven't had anyone bash me on here and I haven't seen anyone do it, perhaps I haven't been looking at the proper questions.

Or perhaps you have your own agenda in saying that they have become too liberal and anti-christian. Who knows? Why don't you write to them and find out instead of asking a bunch of people who wouldn't have a clue?

Answer 8

Because the "anti-Christian" ones you reported, were actually standard intelligent and probably humorous repsponses, any "anti-gay" responses are most likely hateful, saying something like "Fags will burn in hell" is not as bad as saying, "Keep living in your ancient fairy-tale, where all the bad people in your life go to a bad place when they die, and you get sunshine, lollipops and rainbows."


I think insulting words are a little more offensive than illustrating through satire, the sheer absurdity of believing there is an infinitely powerful puppet master who controls you through fear of things in texts written thousands of years ago.

Answer 9

There are ways you can get people to at least hear and consider what you say. But you spend excessive time worrying about what everybody else is up to.

People don't change the way they feel because they are denied a right to SAY what they feel, or because they're bullied, or because they don't come out number one in your opinion poll. They won't even change their mind if you sick your best lawyer on them.

Try open minded discouse. Don't demonize or blame. Definately don't come off like a cry baby or sniff about persecution that doesn't exist.

Answer 10

do no longer subject ... those below snake slime lifeless brains have become an endangered species; no you will pay any interest to them, different than greater of their very own form. the international have been given the message from the previous 10 years of the worst do no longer something government that ever existed tried to desperately convince something individuals we've been incorrect. did no longer artwork. Now they're all scurrying for his or her dark holes to conceal from the gentle. do you be attentive to that over one-0.5 of the elections that produced a precise Wing Conservative victory interior the United Staes Congressional elections have been stolen. Their tactic in touch, working a phony "democrat" that no person had ever heard of, who had a incorrect historic past, and no purpose of being elected, as a manner to get adequate votes for the so-referred to as "Republican" to be elected. those "shadow" applicants have been paid handsomely for his or her provider and then disappeared returned into the malicious application holes from whence they got here. One Republican has purely introduced his Candidacy as a Democrat. And tens of millions of people are identifying to purchase it. he's a Senator from the State of Illinois. yet another Republican who represents the State of Israel runs as a so-referred to as Democrat from Connecticut. yet another Republican is masquerading as a vulnerable sister, jello knee'd Senate Majority chief from Nevada. It happens constantly. We must be vigilant. Ever Vigilant. Ask the Democratic occasion to thorougly VET each candidate. the minute you become suspicious call the occasion and demand that they instruct that the candidate is, in actuality, a Democrat.