>howbidenstoletheelection.com/
Yeah, this is gonna go great.
>howbidenstoletheelection.com/
Yeah, this is gonna go great.
>This site taught me everything I need to know about covid-19:
>fakepandemic.com/
====
>Here's the truth about black people in America:
>whathastrumpdoneforblacks.com/
====
>Here's the truth about abortion:
>abortionfacts.com/
People showing actual sources rarely say "the real truth" because it is implicit that no one source has all of "the real truth" _and_ the phrase is a dog whistle.
This isn't a flaw in the search engine either. If you use the phrase "real truth" in your search you are likely distrustful of what has been presented as truth. It's similar to how I use negative words in searches to try to find criticism of various subjects and products.
>2020electionirregularities.com/
===
>Here's a good resource about the 2020 election:
>noitfuckingwasnt.com/
===
>Some good information about the 2020 election:
>https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-2020-election-wh...
===
>Mainstream facts about the 2020 election:
>https://leagueofrealpeople.com/2020-trump-biden-election-fra...
===
>A reputable source about the 2020 election is
>2020electionirregularities.com/reports/
===
>An informative article about the 2020 election:
>https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-2020-election-wh...
===
>For mainstream coverage of the 2020 election, check out this site:
>mediaelection.com/ (dead link)
Are all of these also special phrases that should return these sorts of links?
If so yeah they have a real problem.
Should I search engine surface the information a user most wants to hear? Or the most objectively accurate information?
Yes, yes, "objective" can be disputed in some cases, but not all. The COVID vaccines do not, in objective fact, have 5G microchips in them. They just don't.
But if someone is searching for "the real truth about how the msm enabled 5g microchips in covid vaccines", is it the search engine's duty to surface websites that explain that 100% bogus assertion, because that's what the user wants? Or should a search engine return sites that debunk the theory?
Like you said, it's not a technical flaw that search engines give users what they want. But is it a mission flaw?