Google's Strict Image Search Less Strict Than Moderate Option

Dec 30, 2008 • 8:10 am | comments (4) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Other Google Topics

We have complained time and time again about Google showing inappropriate images , including explicit porn and other nudity in the Google search results. But it has been getting better overall, that is until I spotted a thread at DigitalPoint Forums.

The thread showed a Google Image search for fat beauty returned nude images. But what shocked me is that the stricter I set the image search filter the worse the images got. Let me show you.

With Moderate Search filter on, the first three images are okay. The fifth image gets inappropriate, as do others, after it. Here is a screen capture:

Google Safe Image Search, Not Safe

But when I set the image filter to "Strict," the first three images include two nude images! Here is a screen capture:

Google Safe Image Search, Not Safe

That is pretty surprising being that the more I don't want nude images, the more likely Google is going to give it to me.

Forum discussion at DigitalPoint Forums.

Previous story: Daily Search Forum Recap: December 29, 2008



12/30/2008 01:48 pm

I still have a lot of queries in my mind regarding this porn issues pertaining to search engines as why they show these kind of inaccurate results this the problem with their algorithm or something else...perplexed here


12/30/2008 01:52 pm

We discussed something similar last week with regards to the inconsistencies in how the Google Indexes treat porn when it comes to simple keywords. Basically we didn't find a problem with the strict search but rather regular web search versus images, groups and blogs.

Jesse Friedman

12/30/2008 03:14 pm

Had to try this for myself. You're dead on, the strict filter is providing even more explicit material. I wonder how a bot determines if there is nudity in a photograph. Is it based on the content around them? I doubt sites that are posting random nude photos are writing good semantic code.

Michael Martinez

12/30/2008 09:27 pm

krishna: This is a direct consequence of relying on the inefficient link-based algorithms that Google favors. They are easily spammed.

blog comments powered by Disqus