- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Did Google pull a "Gavin Belson" on search manipulation w/ Hillary Clinton
Posted on 6/10/16 at 9:57 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 9:57 am
LINK
quote:
A video created by the Facebook page SourceFed is raising questions about possible collaboration between Google and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
quote:
In the video, narrator Matt Lieberman explains how the popular search engine seems to hide search results of articles that bring up negative perceptions of Hillary Clinton when typing “Hillary Clinton cri” into the search bar, like the possibility of criminal charges in relation to her use of a private email server to conduct official government business. However, the three top search results that Google suggests when typing “Hillary Clinton cri” are “Hillary Clinton crime reform,” “Hillary Clinton crisis,” and “Hillary Clinton crime bill 1994,” in that order.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:00 am
14
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:00 am to Snoopy04
it really is amazing how politically polarized this country has become.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:02 am to Snoopy04
That dude doesn't understand the basics of search engine work, so there is that.
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Science! It's not magic!
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Science! It's not magic!
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:02 am to Snoopy04
quote:
and “Hillary Clinton crime bill 1994,”
Meh, this is more damning than her email bullshite.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:03 am to Snoopy04
It would blow my fricking mind if Google was stupid enough to do something like this.
More than likely, there just aren't that many people googling the phrase Hillary Clinton criminal
More than likely, there just aren't that many people googling the phrase Hillary Clinton criminal
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:03 am to Kracka
quote:
it really is amazing how politically polarized this country has become.
when the government becomes that powerful and controls that much money, you're going to have major players picking sides
take google. imagine the favors they may get if HRC wins. with those terrible NSA programs and all the legal, financial, and moral burdens they impose on companies like Google, it only makes sense they're trying to gain some favor to gain an advantage over their competition
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:03 am to Breesus
quote:
More than likely, there just aren't that many people googling the phrase Hillary Clinton criminal
he pulls the analytics in the video
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:04 am to Snoopy04
quote:
popular search engine seems to hide search results of articles that bring up negative perceptions
The same exact thing happened in House of Cards. I am seeing so many instances where that show and real life are the same in today's political environment.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:05 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
he pulls the analytics in the video
That really makes it irrefutable. You can't argue that Google isn't doing this intentionally. I mean you can, I guess, but not if you have any understanding of facts and data.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:44 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:05 am to mahdragonz
quote:
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Which in itself is very telling. It's obvious she broke the law.
ETA: I just did a Google and DuckDuckGo search of "Hillary Clinton criminal charges" and I was surprised that Google didn't link this WSJ article on the front page, but DuckDuckGo did.
Clinton’s Emails: A Criminal Charge Is Justified
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:10 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:09 am to mahdragonz
quote:
That dude doesn't understand the basics of search engine work, so there is that.
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Science! It's not magic!
Uh you're wrong.
There are multiple examples, like Hillary Clinton Indictment (Hillary Clinton India comes up, among other things, which is patently absurd). Not to mention he pulled up the analytics.
It is a brewing "scandal", especially in the wake of Facebook actively clamping down on conservatives, twitter taking credentials away from reputable conservative journalists/tweeters, etc.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:14 am to mahdragonz
quote:
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
you're wrong. removing the terms from suggestions means you're removing it from the articles written by her media cohorts using the terms but defending her behavior. take the "indictment" search for instances. the NYT, LAT, etc have reported on a possible indictment, often dismissing the idesas behind it. those articles are not from "low quality" sites and should be following the search trends
removing the concept entirely removes articles from both sides of the disucssion
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:16 am to Snoopy04
A company the size of Google cannot afford to pick a side. Their nutsack drags the fricking fence line, no matter how it seems.
All these motherfrickers are riding the fenceline, pandering to the stupidity of the masses acting like there's an actual difference between politicians on either side.
All these motherfrickers are riding the fenceline, pandering to the stupidity of the masses acting like there's an actual difference between politicians on either side.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:17 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:18 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
especially in the wake of Facebook actively clamping down on conservatives, twitter taking credentials away from reputable conservative journalists/tweeters, etc.
It doesn't surprise me in the least bit that dipshit liberal companies like Facebook and Twitter pander to their retarded customer base. 98% of their user based won't give a frick because Facebook and Twitter are populated by functional retards.
But Google actively changing the search engine for political reasons is absolutely one the all turn stupidest business decisions in the history of mankind if it turns out to be true.
This post was edited on 6/10/16 at 10:19 am
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:19 am to Breesus
quote:
But Google actively changing the search engine f
it's the suggestions for sure
don't know what manipulations they've done on the search engine, but i'm sure we're about to see some nerds digging
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:20 am to Breesus
quote:
More than likely, there just aren't that many people googling the phrase Hillary Clinton criminal
geezus christ your IQ
stop reproducing
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:20 am to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
quote:
A company the size of Google cannot afford to pick a side.
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:23 am to rocket31
Yeah, that one made me laugh
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:24 am to hendersonshands
imagine the lifted burden google will feel when it's exempted from NSA regulations while microsoft, yahoo, etc remain within them
Posted on 6/10/16 at 10:25 am to mahdragonz
quote:
That dude doesn't understand the basics of search engine work, so there is that.
But for the dim, the reason his terms are not being listed is bc those words essentially are used on low quality websites.
Clearly you're the one that didn't understand.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News