September 10, 2009 9:09 AM PDT

Is Microsoft's Bing cementing its porn credentials?

by Chris Matyszczyk
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 24 comments

I tend to believe that life's pleasures should be experienced with real human beings, relatively sober, and free of excessive chemical content.

However, I understand there are those who make use of search engines to fuel their various needs, including those of pornographic succour.

Which brings me to Bing.

There seems to be some agreement among the cognoscenti that Microsoft's fine search engine offers optimal results for those who are seeking the filmic freshness of the flesh. Blocking such freshness can also be a difficult maneuver.

You see, Bing has excellent video search properties. And you might be astonished to hear that one of the major types of video for which humanity's needy search is video of a pornographic bent.

However, TechCrunch claims to have encountered evidence that Bing has entered an entirely new realm of raunch.

An enterprising TechCrunch employee decided to google the term "pornography" and was perhaps simultaneously astonished and elated to discover a sponsored link from Bing.

No, there is no suggestion that Bing is the better search engine for drug paraphernalia.

(Credit: CC James Wheare/Flickr)

The artful ad was headlined "Free Video." It then extolled Bing's remarkable access to "thousands of videos."

Somehow, I feel there may be more than thousands.

I know those of a technical leaning might suggest that sometimes when you do quite a few searches in succession the ads don't seem to keep up, so the ads that you see for your second search might have been generated by your first search.

I was still dissatisfied. I could not understand why anyone would search "pornography" when the very simple "porn" would have clearly sufficed. Is the suggestion that only those of a elevated snootiness, those who refer to pornography by its full name, get the Bing ad?

Then I stumbled into a blog post by Aaron Goldman, who seems to be quite au fait with the digital marketing world.

Goldman claims that he googled "Google porn searches" and immediately encountered an ad for Bing. Now the minds of those of a suspicious disposition must truly be wandering and wondering.

I would never be the one to suggest that Microsoft deliberately seeks out porn business.

However, business is, indeed, business. So one wonders just how much awareness there is among bingers of this alleged arousing serendipity?

Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing. He brings an irreverent, sarcastic, and sometimes ironic voice to the tech world. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.
Recent posts from Technically Incorrect
When policemen are caught looking at Web porn
AT&T, Luke Wilson try smaller coverage number
Facebook, Twitter: How we chose to live in public
AT&T cuts Tiger Woods
Kid gets Xbox 360, loses mind
Aha! It's the iGuide, not iSlate--maybe
Microsoft, Yahoo help keep India away from porn?
GPS gets couple stuck for three days
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (24 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by Goodbye Helicopter September 10, 2009 9:32 AM PDT
What else do you do with big, throbbing, sweating Balmer when you're all alone with it?
Reply to this comment
by Random_Walk September 10, 2009 10:30 AM PDT
Dude - Icky.
by captain_numerica September 10, 2009 9:38 PM PDT
If only I could poke my mind's eye!!! Make it stop!!
by Dalkorian September 14, 2009 9:45 AM PDT
Thanks for that. Now to go find the brain bleach.
by ducttape36 September 10, 2009 9:37 AM PDT
im guessing goldman's search had more to do with the keywork "searches" than "porn" for generating a bing result.
Reply to this comment
by eadeguzman September 10, 2009 9:42 AM PDT
Yeah, Chris Matyszczyk, you're cementing your own reputation for sleezy news articles...
Reply to this comment
by dowell100 September 10, 2009 9:59 AM PDT
"Cognoscenti ?" "au fait?" You can't bolster silly topics and questionable writing with fancy words.
by calciphus September 15, 2009 4:51 PM PDT
Here, I can sum up this entire article for you:
-----
OMG PORN!!!! A search engine returns PORN! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Microsoft sucks.
------

See? That's what you sound like when you're not preaching to the choir. Seriously, a search engine returns porn video? That's your gripe? What is this, 1950's Ohio?

The internet has porn. People watch porn. It doesn't affect you, if you don't like it don't search for it. The end.
by MadLyb September 10, 2009 9:44 AM PDT
What is the media's obsession with Bing and Porn? Turn off SafeSearch on Google and even the most innocuous search terms will return hits to adult material. The reality is at leat 5 of the 6 lanes on the Internet highway are paved with porn and any search engine properly indexing said content will have this information.

If MS has indeed paid for ads off of keywords involving porn, then they are just as dumb as we all make them out to be, but make no mistake if you think other search providers has chaste in this arena.
Reply to this comment
by Super2online September 10, 2009 10:05 AM PDT
I think it's pretty easy to figure this out. Microsoft plays video in the search results. It's really easy for Chris and others to twist this into a Microsoft porn conspiracy and in their view, a sure fire way to get high click rates, loads of comments, and job security. We also play into it by clicking, reading, and commenting. Other than that, Microsoft is no different than any of the other search engines.
by pentest September 10, 2009 10:14 AM PDT
Bung is different because it can be used to hide porn surfing(or any other kind of video watching) and there is little IT departments can do to block it because they can't tell that. That is by design.

Here is a simple explanation:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-10256171-238.html

Other search engines do not do this.

Bung is different, not only is it a substandard search engine, it is a security flaw and detriment to productivity.
by darkridedp September 10, 2009 10:29 AM PDT
True, but the issue is that Bing plays the video IN the search engine page, so it never appears in History and can't easily be blocked by parental controls. It's not an issue what the search returns, it what happen next. Little Johnny could be watching porn all day and it would appear he only went to BING! How do you block a website you never went to? I'm not a fan of censorship, but this is a HUGE issue for parents. At least with Google when you click a link it leaves tracks.

As for the AD tieup, I doubt Microsoft explicitly bought sponsored space linked with porn, they probably just screwed up and bought a link for VIDEO, and were too dumb to realize that most of the video on the web is porn.

On another note, I found the photo choice for this article hilarious. It is not a photo of a head shop, but a carnival game.
by pentest September 10, 2009 10:15 AM PDT
For those that don't understand why bung is different: http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-10256171-238.html
Reply to this comment
by canthv0 September 10, 2009 1:09 PM PDT
That issue has been addressed.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-10264128-238.html?tag=mncol

This was an issue when bing came out ... but as soon as it was realized what an issue it was measures were taken to correct the problem.
by Dalkorian September 14, 2009 9:56 AM PDT
Canthv0, that is a typical M$ "fix" and is barely worth discussion. Bung is garbage, as it was when it was Live Search and as it was when it was MSN Search. The reason it will always be associated with porn, besides it's lame design, is the fact that only M$ prostitutes will defend or use it.
by Lennron September 15, 2009 2:54 PM PDT
@ Dalkorian

"the fact that only M$ prostitutes will defend or use it."
Except that I talked my Mac-using friends into trying Bing and they've all switched to it from Google. The only fact you proved is that anti-Microsoft people like yourself, which are easy to point out because they say "M$", will never be happy with any product by Microsoft no matter how good it is. They very rarely even try them and somehow just "know" they are awful products. Therefore, there is no reason for them to fill up blog discussions with their crap opinions. Thanks.
by 4score20 September 10, 2009 10:36 AM PDT
"An enterprising TechCrunch employee decided to google the term "pornography""

teehee. For research, I'm sure.

As for porn and Bing, I must admit the first time I heard about Bing at all was through a TC article about its easy porn results which outraged me enough to try it. Several hours later I made Bing my default search engine but only because it's such a good search engine with its finding things on the internet and such.
Reply to this comment
by Mergatroid Mania September 10, 2009 10:49 AM PDT
Yawn, and this is news right? Slow day? Nothing better to write about?
Reply to this comment
by Pete Bardo September 10, 2009 10:59 AM PDT
Hey Chris,
It looks like this article has used up Bing's porn advertising budget. The ad doesn't show any more!
Reply to this comment
by DrtyDogg September 10, 2009 1:31 PM PDT
I was thinking the same, when I search that same term the only ad I get is Google Image Search.
by bhas_purk September 10, 2009 2:03 PM PDT
" I tend to believe that life's pleasures should be experienced with real human beings, relatively sober, and free of excessive chemical content.
However, I understand there are those who make use of search engines to fuel their various needs, including those of pornographic succour."

" And you might be astonished to hear that one of the major types of video for which humanity's needy search is video of a pornographic bent."

so Mr.Chris , you have never looked at porn on the internet??

i mean internet porn is a well known fact, it should not come as a surprise to anyone
Reply to this comment
by t8 September 10, 2009 2:19 PM PDT
An illegal, and abusive monopoly using porn to try and grow market share?
I wouldn't be surprised to be honest.
Reply to this comment
by calciphus September 15, 2009 4:36 PM PDT
What illegal abusive monopoly are you referring to?

I'd be surprised if you were being honest.
by therealgeeves September 11, 2009 1:09 AM PDT
developers developers developers. oh and - a big thank you to the developers with software that can download porn at least a million time faster than when you were on XP!
Reply to this comment
(24 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Technically Incorrect

Chris Matyszczyk brings a fresh and irreverent perspective to the tech world in his CNET blog, Technically Incorrect. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Technically Incorrect topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right