[lostmsu]

Still no. First case I would not even consider censorship. The third one was temporary until Google stopped operating in Russia altogether.

A quote from the second one: "cumulative 45 percent decrease in traffic from Google searches"

[gambler]

There is a difference between "Google does not censor anti-war content" and "Google does censor anti-war content, but usually has an excuse I find acceptable".

When a company puts Jon Lennon's Merry Xmas (War is Over) behind age restriction banner[1], the question stops being "Is there censorship?" and becomes about the logic of such censorship.

>The third one was temporary until Google stopped operating in Russia altogether.

They've censored other things on behest of the Russian government for years[2]. Again, I cannot fathom how people on a tech website like HN can be unaware of such things. This is common knowledge broadly covered on mainstream websites.

---

[1] https://reclaimthenet.org/youtube-john-lennon-war-is-over-wa...

[2] https://www.rferl.org/a/google-censors-search-results-after-...

[lostmsu]

Precisely zero of what you mentioned so far is censoring anti-war content.

Even in the translation case (which I assume you mean by your "excuse" remark) the original source is still available as is. I am not even sure from the description what translation team it was talking about and what does it have to do with Google exactly. "translate company text for the Russian market" this passage sounds like it talks about translating Google's own interfaces, help pages, press releases, or support articles to Russian. E.g. no external voice is being censored.