The NY Times Magazine just ran an interesting piece (nicely illustrated by Siggi Eggertsson) about the various ways in which Google’s braintrust attempts to keep the Internet safe for free speech while also keeping it, well, safe.

To love Google, you have to be a little bit of a monarchist
- Tim Wu, Columbia Law, quoted in NYT

It focuses mainly on YouTube and the decision-making process behind what controversial user-generated content stays up on the site or is pulled down. The question, of course, is ‘What’s controversial?’ And the answer—apart from the sexually explicit or hate-mongering stuff—is far from clear.

For the most part, Google’s worked effectively with foreign governments to remove illegal content while allowing broad freedom of expression. But as Stanford’s Lawrence Lessig points out, that could change if the company that controls 63% of the world’s Internet searches decides to one day value market share over not being evil.

What do you think? Is there a real danger that Google, Yahoo! or another organization will one day run roughshod over our privacy? Or is the presence of the a body like the Global Network Initiative sufficient to keep everything in check? Are you concerned about users violating TOS? Or should the Web just be able to self regulate?

Express yourself (while you still can )