Hacker News Reader

Comment by roylez | Hacker News Reader

It’s not up to a search engine to decide what is true or false. If they want to play this game, it’s censorship.

Surely you don't think that it's Google's responsibility to return any random bullshit that happens to be on the internet? I go there to figure something out. I don't care that some conspiracy theorists believe the earth is flat, if I search for "theory of gravity" I don't want any flat earth garbage.

You get neither you get ads for gravity weights and gravity named brands followed by a wiki entry in gravity and tons of amazon links for gravity games.

Part of being able to distinguish the garbage in life is being able to see all sides presented and being smart enough to know what is correct.

Sorry if you need Google to help you with this. You'll probably see 5 pages of ads, old sites, and spam before you see the wacky conspiracy stuff like flat earth and Russiagate.

Really? You want to do some research on, e.g. covid and you think it's best to just uniformly sample every idiot opinion across the internet?

> Surely you don't think that it's Google's responsibility to return any random bullshit that happens to be on the internet?

Uh, yes? It's an internet search engine, it's literally its job.

It's really not. Its job is to sort the internet. Just returning whatever low-value crap is not useful.

Is everyone trolling me? I’m simply asking for a reputable source stating that google is censoring their search results.

Feel like “reputable” is loaded here lol

I’ve had it happen before in searches where I’ll see something and can’t find it on google, but can easily find it on DuckDuckGo.

Idk here’s something for you: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/09/the-good-censor-le...

There are leaked slides showing the intent to censor. Not sure if this is “reputable” enough, but there is something.

> Not sure if this is “reputable” enough

The fact that Breitbart is your first choice says plenty.

Lol they link to source documentation. Imo it’s a fine source, because it links to the material. CNN on the other hand never does. Go ahead search cnn right now, always self referencing, aka they are “truth”, “trust us” -_-

Anyway, this was the first hit on DuckDuckGo related to google censorship. It was the first “choice” that a different engine presented me — kinda shows the problem with the political hostilities, no?

These were the first few results in ddg. If you couldn't find anything similiar in google perhaps that's a clue you might not be getting the whole picture.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/googles-search-leaves-users-d...

https://www.businessinsider.com/google-manipulates-search-re...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google

Search for "Encyclopedia dramatica" on Google, and then on Bing or Duck. Search for Rise of the Moors on Google, and then on Bing or Duck. You can repeat this for other controversial content, and you'll notice a trend: Google suppresses the controversial content entirely (e.g., Encyclopedia dramatica), or shows it after at least one "authoritative" result about it (e.g., Rise of the Moors). Whereas Bing and Duck have no problem identifying the original content and showing it as the first result.

Honestly unless you have been living under a rock this is common knowledge and many sources and lawsuits exist. I am not sure anyone is going to waste their time to find you sources when we all know and witness that it has been contrived for how long now?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com