Advocacy Groups Demand Google No Longer Allow Users to Search for Abusive Pornography, Sites Such As PornHub, XVideos

Advocacy Groups Demand Google No Long Allow Users to Search for Abusive Pornography
Over a hundred sexual exploitation survivors and victims’ advocates, spanning from 13 countries, recently sent a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, asking him to change how his company’s search engine functions. File photo:, licensed.

MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA – Groups that advocate for victims of sexual exploitation are issuing a plea to Google to no longer allow the popular search engine to return results of what they are calling “abusive pornography” that includes such activity as sexual violence and incest, claiming that these sites often contribute to sex trafficking and child sexual abuse.

The groups refer to a New York Times article published earlier this month entitled “Why Do We Let Corporations Profit from Rape Videos” which alleges that popular online porn sites – such as PornHub and XVideos – have become place where videos featuring the rape and sexual abuse of children are often published, and that Google’s search function is the prime method that consumers of this material are finding it.

Often, the article claims, these children are the victims of sex traffickers, and that sites such as PornHub and their ilk are giving these people a prime location to ply their dire trade and to make a profit off of it.


Big Tech is using a content filtering system for online censorship. Watch our short video about NewsGuard to learn how they control the narrative for the Lamestream Media and help keep you in the dark. NewsGuard works with Big-Tech to make it harder for you to find certain content they feel is 'missing context' or stories their editors deem "not in your best interest" - regardless of whether they are true and/or factually accurate. They also work with payment processors and ad-networks to cut off revenue streams to publications they rate poorly by their same bias standards. This should be criminal in America. You can bypass this third-world nonsense by signing up for featured stories by email and get the good stuff delivered right to your inbox.

104 sexual exploitation survivors and victims’ advocates, spanning from 13 countries, recently sent a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, asking him to change how his company’s search engine functions so that it no longer returns results to websites that contain “sexual violence, incest, racist or other abusive pornography.”

Haley McNamara, vice president at National Center on Sexual Exploitation and director of the International Center on Sexual Exploitation, said that in its current form, Google’s search engine makes finding illegal and exploitative sexual content all too easy.

“The reality is Google helps people find and watch rape videos, sex trafficking, and even child sexual abuse,” she said. “Google rightly doesn’t produce ‘how-to’ articles in top searches on suicide, yet it allows searches for non-consensual materials to go straight to the source: pornography websites that are infested with illegal and non-consensual content.”

Both MindGeek, the parent company of Pornhub, and XVideos have been the subject of lawsuits recently from attorneys representing survivors of child sexual abuse whose images have allegedly appeared on their respective websites.

Google recently released a statement on this issue, saying that child sexual abuse is an “abhorrent crime” that “has no place in our search results.”

“We proactively detect, remove and filter this content, and have additional protections in place to filter and demote content that sexualizes minors,” they said. “We also have policies and systemic protections for non-consensual explicit content. Our approach aims to protect children and victims while also ensuring we do not broadly limit access to legal content in our results.”

Comment via Facebook

Corrections: If you are aware of an inaccuracy or would like to report a correction, we would like to know about it. Please consider sending an email to and cite any sources if available. Thank you. (Policy)