Days after the Trump administration instituted a controversial travel ban in January 2017, Google employees discussed ways they might be able to tweak the company's search-related functions to show users how to contribute to pro-immigration organizations and contact lawmakers and government agencies, according to internal company emails.
The email traffic, reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, shows that employees proposed ways to "leverage" search functions and take steps to counter what they considered to be "islamophobic, algorithmically biased results from search terms 'Islam', 'Muslim', 'Iran', etc." and "prejudiced, algorithmically biased search results from search terms 'Mexico', 'Hispanic', 'Latino', etc."
The email chain, while sprinkled with cautionary notes about engaging in political activity, suggests employees considered ways to harness the company's vast influence on the internet in response to the travel ban. Google said none of the ideas discussed were implemented.
"These emails were just a brainstorm of ideas, none of which were ever implemented," a company spokeswoman said in a statement. "Google has never manipulated its search results or modified any of its products to promote a particular political ideology—not in the current campaign season, not during the 2016 election, and not in the aftermath of President Trump's executive order on immigration. Our processes and policies would not have allowed for any manipulation of search results to promote political ideologies."
wsj.com/articles/google-workers-discussed-tweaking-search-function-to-counter-travel-ban-1537488472
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:13PM (37 children)
People react to news that went around the world. Check whether they could contribute. Decide not to take action.
How is that news ?
(Score: 5, Touché) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:40PM (20 children)
Because it's very important for conservatives to feel constantly oppressed even as they control all the levers of power.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:55PM (7 children)
Darn those capitalists
https://www.infowars.com/the-list-platforms-that-have-banned-infowars-and-alex-jones/ [infowars.com]
(Score: 5, Informative) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:18PM (5 children)
Bowing to organized pressure by leftists isn't exactly captialism at work; those sites have been happy to let Jones continue to wildly violate their ToS for years, until an organized campaign brought attention to his specific misbehaviors.
That's definitely the spin left-leaning people put on it, though: "oh its your own free market values in action", and I think they're full of shit when they say that.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:38PM (1 child)
They are not fullof of shit. The "market" is made up people. Market forces are putting pressure on companies, said companies modify their behavior to maximize market value.
Previous bad behavior has always been excused by saying companies can do what they want and it is their job to maximize profits. Same thing here, just now instead of hurting employees or the environment "the market" is hurting the conservative nutjobs.
I am not surprised that conservatives are now crying, i guess with them it is Freedom of Speech for me but not for thee.
I am totally fine with anti monopoly actions for tech, the future will soon have search engines of all sorts, like the various business directories, real estate magazines, etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:32AM
Yeah so that makes the lefties actually from the right-wing, right? It is like right-wing lunatics are now claiming to be leftists. Is it not??
Pick a fucking side of an argument. But it is simply better to jump on the side of power, isn't it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @10:07PM (1 child)
> leftists isn't exactly captialism at work;
Could it be the work of a true scotsman?
Capitalism is an economic theory, just exactly how sterile do you need the world before the invisible unimpeded hand of god suddenly starts acting in the best interests of humanity?
So I'll start the list
1. Criminalize activism against corporate interests
2. Eliminate all welfare
3. End public education
I'll let you continue here and I'll convert it to a YAML settings file for reality and have a priest deliver it to god by the end of sprint ok?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @10:47PM
Naah bro, we just need anarcho-capitalism, a series of contracts, and the infinite contract-enforcing turtles.
Mr. Vim has assured me that if those 3 things instantly result, it will be for the best.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:15AM
What is that makes you think that capitalism and freedom of speech are the same thing?
If the company sees the potential to greater losses if they continue to platform for a minority, there's nothing in the "principles of capitalism" to stop the company jettisoning the minority.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:55PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHgUN_95UAw
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:56PM (10 children)
Which conservatives? The ones who call themselves Republicans or the ones who call themselves Democrats?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:03PM (1 child)
Yes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:34AM
reddit's leaking
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RandomFactor on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:42PM (6 children)
While many Republicans and occassionally Democrats may call themselves conservatives, reality is that the number of conservatives in either party is significantly lower.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:20AM
You bloody progressive you!
Putting a positive spin on the things, pushing your own agenda and spreading a bias?
(VERY LARGE GRIN)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Disagree) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:11AM (4 children)
The parties are basically indistinguishable -- both are war like, both are spendthrifts, neither really cares about civil liberties or average people, etc. etc. The venn diagram of Republicans vs. Democrats is so close to being a circle, you need lab quality instruments to see where they diverge.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:33AM (3 children)
I used to let those slide, but I'm pretty sure paying attention for the last 4 years would show some significant differences in many places which matter, starting with Net Neutrality and business-worship stance, on top of the expected social issues.
Or maybe you need your lab instruments to find your evidently shrunk capacity to observe to drift of both parties to the right, especially the one that started pretty far right.
(Score: 3, Informative) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:54AM (2 children)
Nobody seemed to be able to compare the GWB to Obama terms, you know where Obama expanded all the wars, catfood commission (thank goodness the GOP wouldn't work with him), making 82% of the Bush tax cuts permanent, opposing a ban on cluster bombs, due process free execution based on secret legal memos to one-up Bush's Gitmo, cutting safety requirements for offshore rigs in the Gulf of Mexico just before one blew up, bailing out banksters .... yeah, Democrats rock. /sarc
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:12PM (1 child)
It's called *politics* and *compromise* and why *ELECTIONS FUCKING MATTER*.
Since for most of the time Democrats were arguing how to best have Obamacare implemented, they really did fuck-all next, assuming that Republicans are going to remain sane. That assumption was incorrect. What happens is an example of why compromise with Republicans is a one way street these days.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:21PM
The fact that Democrats' major sense of pride comes from implementing Nixon's healthcare plan says a lot.
(Score: 2) by mobydisk on Wednesday September 26 2018, @03:12PM
They must be referring to the conservatives who voted for a billionaire playboy with no religious faith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:00PM
Eich would not agree with you. Is there an Eich equivalent for the left? A Kavanaugh equivalent? Oh yes Clinton framed by Lewinsky. Well, 2-1.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by khallow on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:50PM (2 children)
Not everyone can "contribute" in the way that Google can. And maybe someone decided to take action after all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @10:24PM (1 child)
Yeah they decided not to do "this", we should see what they actually did.
Of course their bias was already known when you compared search hints for Hillary Clinton from Google to EVERY OTHER SEARCH ENGINE.
Also Bill Clinton is a Rapist, Infowars.com
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @11:00PM
Google:
#1 official website
#2 official twitter
#3 wikipedia article
#4 biography.com bio
#5 ABC news section for her
#6 official facebook
#7 Guardian news section for her
#8 NYT news section
#9 Hillary Clinton: American Democracy Is in Crisis - The Atlantic [theatlantic.com]
#10 What Is Hillary Clinton Afraid Of? - POLITICO Magazine [politico.com]
Duck:
#1 official website
#2 wikipedia article
#3 official twitter
#4 Politico news section for her
#5 biography.com bio
#6 official facebook
#7 official instagram
#8 NYT news section
#9 HuffPo news section
*clicks Load More*
#10 official website's issues section
--
3 news results displayed on the search page (ellipses preserved):
Google:
#1 Hillary Clinton’s Upcoming TV Project Provokes More Negative Reaction Th... [deadline.com]
#2 Democratic Pollster: Hillary Clinton's Support Is Too Weak To Win A Presidential Election [townhall.com]
#3 Kavanaugh takes a crisis-management cue from the Clintons [cnn.com]
Duck:
#1 Hillary Clinton’s attack on the Electoral College is only her latest act of desper... [foxnews.com]
#2 Hillary Clinton says Trump will 'wholesale fire people' after midterm elections [foxnews.com]
#3 Hillary Clinton calls out Republican Party: 'Why are they so intimidated?' [go.com]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:55PM (8 children)
Eventually "monopolies should be able to do whatever they want" impacts the numerous draconian regulations of the Federal Election Commission and then fireworks will ensue.
Technically it can all be a "coincidence" that a company is being run in a manner indistinguishable from a political action committee, but if they're not documented correctly as being primarily a propaganda outlet, that can result in a great pile of felonies.
(Score: 4, Funny) by bob_super on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:03PM (1 child)
When did the topic change to Twitter ?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:30PM
Ok, I clearly have not kept up on all the dog whistles.
From over here, it looks like the topic changed to Twitter with your post. Help me, Obi-wan Kenobi!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:47PM (4 children)
Ok, question for you Trump-types since I tend to bash on the right-wing authoritarian followers called SJWs but don't spend nearly enough time bashing on the right-wing authoritarian followers called the alt-right.
Does Faux News and other alt-right news sources promote the Duck and StartPage and other search engines? If not, why not?
There's Conservatopedia, gab.ai, etc, but are there any initiatives to create an alt-right search engine if Goog is to be the SJW search engine?
(I've been using Duck for years, very happy with it.)
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:49PM (2 children)
Sounds like you are pretending to be 'fair and balanced'
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @11:21PM
Nope. I'm left of the USA Green Party. I believe that the working class should own and control the means of production.
There's a whole political space out there above [theadvocates.org] and to the left of the USA Democratic Party.
The global lurch towards authoritarianism concerns me deeply.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:52AM
"Fairly Unbalanced", sort of like "round the bend", or "off kilter", batshit rabid republican insane, or Mike Judge Jennine Pirrogie Faux News insane, brought to you by Rupert.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:03PM
Faux news is the swamp that needs draining, its much closer to CNN than the alt-right.
Look at coverage of McCain dying, for example. Alt right stuff complains about how McCain was a war criminal working for the deaths of milions of innocents in the middle east, and his tumor gave its life for the peace and safety of the world, etc. Meanwhile fox news is just like CNN and MSNBC in that they've never seen a RINO globalist warmonger they don't love and he should be canonized as a saint. Thats just one example of course.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday September 25 2018, @10:02PM
It should be considered an in-kind contribution, because that's what it is.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:12PM (1 child)
"contribute"
Clever. "Contributing" in this case means modifying search results to bias for a particular political goal. But guys, they were just "contributing" (contributing to what? Exactly?)
(Score: 4, Touché) by bob_super on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:03PM
Awareness that the echo of the 1930s was getting stronger than before ?
Some people seem to think that the current state of affairs is okay. Those people need a History lesson.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:05PM
The company spokeswoman is lying in some way. Even if they are unaware of manipulation, they are a willing participant in false claims.
Here, an example:
https://i.redd.it/px1819v0bbo11.png [i.redd.it]
Look at all those political parties. Some are really obscure. Notice one that is missing?
Google for "Judge Kavanaugh" and Fox, the most popular news in the USA, doesn't appear until the fourth page. Prior to that, it's all hateful fake news.
YouTube, owned by Google, recently banned Alex Jones. His behavior is nothing compared to what leftists normally get away with. Leftists can get away with calling for republicans to be killed.
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:26AM
It fills the last three people in the US who didn't know Google was full of radical progressives in on the fact. That's about it.
They've got every right in the world to do whatever they like with their search engine. They own it and a monopoly argument for regulation would be patently absurd. Transparency of a company's political motives if they have any is never a bad thing though.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @06:48PM (15 children)
that would be another story indeed. We would manipulate the shit out of results!
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:24PM (14 children)
What's it even mean to manipulate the results now? It's already an opaque multi-dimensional algorithm that's designed to optimize some unknown set of variables.
If you add a "reduce results that promote racism/bigotry" is that meaningfully different from "reduce results that promote conspiracies/pseudoscience" that they already do? That's not a rhetorical question, what actually defines unfair versus fair meddling in this already hyper-complex space where we just trust a giant corporation to give us the best* results for what we ask for.
*violations against US copyright laws need not apply.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by DannyB on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:51PM (5 children)
I remember SEO scammer manipulators that would game Google's search algorithm. Google would tweak their algorithm to not be manipulated and send all SEO pages to the bottom where they belong. So "Search King" sued. Google argued, and court agreed that search results are Google's opinion about what Google's users want in response to any particular query. That opinion might also include that the SEO pages do not belong at the top. Google has a 1st amendment right to express this opinion through its search results.
(NOTE: my negative opinion of the term SEO was formed by events similar to the above.)
Now suppose Google believes users want search results that don't promote racismm, bigotry, sexism, mysogeny, homophobia, treason or nazis.
Is it political manipulation of the search results, or just good business on Google's part to exercise its right to give users what Google believes they want.
The great thing about the intarweb tubes is that if you don't like Google's results, you can try to find, or even create your own search engine more to your liking. If other people share your view, then your search engine would get more traffic. See Conservapedia which has facts more to some people's liking.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:00PM (3 children)
like providing a Site Description that is 160 characters or less so it's not truncated in the search results. That enables searches to more-effectively decide whether to visit the page.
Using simple natural language words in URL pathnames like "../jam/strawberry.html" that are directly related to the content.
Keyword stuffing hasn't worked in years.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:54PM (2 children)
> There really is a good kind of SEO
IMO, no.
They need to come up with a word that is not forever tainted.
SEO stinks to high heaven of scam, deceit, gaming the system, and manipulation in order to perpetrate "dodgy" web sites.
SEO is not the same thing as a best practice to make a site more transparent so that search engines can better classify it, and who would be interested in it.
Just my opinion. But I'm not alone in that view. When I read about sites that want to practice SEO, I cringe, and might even stop reading if I haven't yet formed the opinion that the site in question is respectable and simply doesn't know how tainted SEO is.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:48PM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:22PM
It's like a stance that there is no good SPAM.
The word is entirely tarnished.
Is it possible to legitimately use email in business? I think so.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:03PM
-"
That's why I created Soggy Jobs: craigslist and the like our filled with stuff like "Our client is seeking a rockstar" without identifying the actual client. That means the only way to determine whether you'd want to work there is to actually apply. By linking directly to each company's own job posts my user can limit their applications to only those companies they've already checked out.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:29AM (7 children)
"What is the user trying to find" vs. "What do we want the user to find". Adjusting for the former is what users want. Adjusting for the latter will piss them off. I'm amazed you couldn't figure this out on your own. You usually speak like you've put at least some thought into $the_matter.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @12:59PM (6 children)
If a search engine is not optimizing for what the user is trying to find, then ultimately they are self defeating. And indeed Google, like the life cycle of many other companies, may eventually jump the shark. Users will find something else. It will be a gradual shift. There isn't one single day where you can point to when it happened. Ten years ago I was saying the same thing would happen to Microsoft. There would be a tipping point. It would be obvious that Microsoft's best days would be behind it and not ahead of it. And I said there would be no single identifyable day this occurred. Like a grayscale gradient from white to black. Which point on the gradient is where it instantly switched from white to black?
I hope Google continues to focus on what the user is trying to find. But I can accept that they might not. They may have crossed that point already. It's difficult to say.
There are alternatives. Think how FireFox gradually took all of IE's market share -- a thing that seemed incredible, even impossible, yet it happened.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:38PM (5 children)
Exactly. Search engines are entirely too easy to make and host for monopoly to ever be a worry. Lessen your quality of service at your own peril.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:09PM (4 children)
Your new, fair, search engine might not take the market overnight. And Google might recognize the competition and mend its ways -- which doesn't help your project to be successful. So now there is a potential cycle.
10. Monopolist starts to become abusive
20. Open competition starts to become a threat
30. People start using the competition
40. Monopolist pretends to be nice again
50. Most people come back to the monopolist.
60. GOTO 10
With each iteration, the competition gains more users. Unless, the competition is wiped out on each iteration, or even only some iterations.
However this didn't seem to work for Microsoft. Linux won. Open Source won. Microsoft is now trying to embrace.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @02:09PM
I suppose I could have added:
70. PROFIT
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:27PM (2 children)
Monopolist doesn't mean "has all the customers", it means controls the supply of $product/$service. Google doesn't and can't for search engines. Google isn't on top because they can control what people search for, it's on top because they have a reputation for providing the most relevant results very quickly. Having to repair a reputation they've damaged if they want to keep users is the market functioning precisely as intended.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 26 2018, @06:29PM (1 child)
I don't disagree.
Another factor that contributes to Google being on top is that it is the path of least resistance. Since I've used it for ages, it took me a while to try another the duck thing. Then a while to bookmark it. Then a while to make a habit of it. Even thought I still use Google search a lot.
Google also has built a moat around its castle. A 250 mile wide moat. (not length but width) That moat is all of its other free services. Gmail. Keep. Docs. Drive. News. Android play store, with cloud backups. Etc.
Basically the same factors that keep people locked into Microsoft. Not just inertia. But deep hooks into a lot of things that would have to be changed.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:42PM
Eh, it's not as wide as you think. Most of the stuff they have besides Android and YouTube is garbage compared to other free services or products out there. Just Android the OS, mind you, not the Google apps.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:13PM (4 children)
What does "algorithmically biased" even mean? Those words sound like they refer to an algorithm that is somehow biased to return islamophobic/prejudiced results even when they're less relevant to the search query. But if so they surely would have just fixed it, right? It wouldn't even be controversial to correct a bias in the algorithm so it returns the most query-relevant results regardless of whether they're islamophobic/prejudiced or not.
The context, on the other hand, suggests it means the algorithm is already returning the most relevant results for someone's query, but those results are deemed distasteful for reasons unrelated to the algorithm or query. If so, "algorithmically biased" is a strange, and seemingly dishonest, choice of words to characterize these results.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:41PM (1 child)
Probably harder than it sounds. A lot of the "algorithmic bias" probably comes from user targeting. Racist or borderline racist profiles are more likely to see racist information because it is more relevant to them.
My preference is that we do away with targeting altogether and have the same Google search be the same for everybody. People can learn to sprinkle the bias they want to see into their queries. For example, if you like news about Trump, you might need to start telling Google whether you want "pro Trump news" or "anti Trump news".
Too bad advertisers put a lot of unfounded faith in targeted advertising, making it worth too much money to Google to build and maintain this search profile for everybody.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:46PM
there was a time when I could determine the effectiveness of my SEO efforts just by searching myself. That hasn't worked in years.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 1) by Aurean on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:43PM
Because algorithms that produce fair results for other queries (e.g. 'farming' or 'pet food') may not return fair results for others, depending on traffic metrics (wide and shallow for non-controversial topics vs. spikes for high-traffic sites obsessed with certain topics).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:57PM
"biased" is probably the wrong word here. It anthropomorphizes the algo. Probably the more correct word is "variance" or "selection". Bias may be introduced into the algo, but the algo itself is not biased.
What you have here is a paranoid perception of a persecution by a non-cogniscent system. The question is whether not technicians are using the program as a mechanism of social change, rather than whether the program itself does that. Yes they certainly are, whether they are aware of it or not. Conscious decisions are less prevelent than they appear.
Of course this doesn't mean anything. A greater variance is probably introduced by factors that effect search time. IOW, the bias of the engineers is unlikely to ever be as severe as the bias that has been introduced by commercial SEO. And since SEO and costs time and money, the output is going to be most biased towards large commercial interests.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @07:44PM (2 children)
More and more I have to switch to duckduckgo or bookmarks to find old forum posts and such I used to be able to just search for. I dunno if its related to them switching priorities to supporting the DNC, rather than just providing good results, but there's definitely been a noticeable decline. None of these posts are really political in nature either, so if it is due to their meddling it is probably incidental.
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:14PM
Searx is another good option.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Wednesday September 26 2018, @09:32AM
I don't know the answer, but all I can say is that Google's results have for me become worse than useless over the last few years. I hardly ever find what I am looking for in the sea of crap sites that all seem to just link to one another. I've come across sites that basically ripped off the original site of content, yet that is nicely in the top results, and I can't find the original source anywhere.
Even worse, Google "Helpfully" replaces and "corrects" my search terms to things it thinks I am searching for (because apparently I don't know what I am doing, and need to be patronised).
Don't even get me started on the fact every search result page for the same terms is radically different depending on which device/IP is doing the search. So I can't tell people to "search for 'terms'" and it will be in the first five results on the first page. I can't even get the same search results from my office PC and my workshop PC, or I get different results based on whose WiFi I am using at that point in time.
I switched to duckduckgo, but they use Google's search engine tech underneath, so while they are better for privacy and consistency of results across systems, they still inherit all the problems of Google search.
Seems a lot of third party search engines are just wrappers around Google anyway, so far the only "non Google" engines out there that I have found is yacy (open source peer-to-peer search engine) and Microsofts Bing. I might give Bing a try, and try setting up Yacy and see how it performs.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:06PM (1 child)
reelDonaldDrumpf and Wall Street Journal? Great submission, but do I smell a Murdock? Biased news about news biasing? What is a propaganda piece like this doing on the front page of SN?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 25 2018, @09:06PM
That's just manure you smell.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday September 25 2018, @08:42PM (1 child)
For the Republicans to gripe about that is just like it would be to complain that Mother Jones doesn't adequately represent right-wing views.
They're private businesses, and so are not constrained by the bill of rights.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 26 2018, @01:28AM
"Mother Jones" the magazine would make the real Mother Jones grab a club and raise hell in the main office. MJ magazine has become a corporate democrat mouthpiece carpet bagging on the good reputation of real radical.