[bitrclngr]

I've noticed the search results have gotten much more biased in the last few years. I wrote a paper on a political subject for a class and sometimes had to go to the second or third page to get something that wasn't extremely left biased. I switched to duckduck go. Thanks for the recommendation. Been getting tired of Google's crap for awhile now.

 

[DK PHILLIPS]

Worse than the Ukraine Russian fake connection..
.google never got called out on these things..wrongly redirected .

 

[davidsog]

Exactly. You cannot be free from liability as a platform but then censor like you are a publisher. The reason for the removal of liability was to preserve freedom of speech and thought, hence, the requirement for a lack of censorship.

If they want to censor, they they are a media publisher and subject to the liability that incurs.

That answers none of my questions and skips to a conclusion.

That is because I wasn’t replying to you.

 

[pinkie]

I'm not sure how it will all play out but search engines like Google , may be independently owned , yet are licensed by the Government. As long as there's competition , there is no censoring if they decide to exclude certain subjects, because there are other search engines to go to ,theoretically . However, it seems that the major search engines all have the same attitude on what kind of info and posts they don't like so , even though there are several sites, they all treat certain subjects the same . This is the concern of the Government, that these separate companies have made an unwritten agreement to exclude content they deem "Objectionable" , so you in effect have a monopoly !!
Search engines like duckduckgo , may be an alternate, but this is the first I have ever heard of them. Google is in the drivers seat because they were the first, I believe. Ask someone a question and they will say, "Google it" ! They and the others have grown so big, they write their own rules , which is the concern that alternate , opposing views are marginalized. That is a problem that needs to be addressed .

 

[DK PHILLIPS]

Ya duck it just don’t have the best interest!

 

[Estaban]

Search engines can filter what they want, just like private forums have the right to moderate stuff deemed inflammatory or false, or just like Faux news, FB and Breitbart does to a degree.

 

[Mosinitis]

show me in the constitution where it says it's "illegal" for a private entity to censor....... because if that was the case, this website or the countless of disscusion websites on the net are engaging in this illegal activity, by either censoring members post or banning members for what they write.

Section 230 of the Comm. decency act, allows 'platform hosts' immunity to liability for 2nd/3rd party content as long as they abide the rules. Censoring illegal content, fine, downgrading porn from non specific porn searches, ok... intentionally slanting the results of a search engine, questionable, BUT doing it with an obviously political bent, with a stated goal of influencing an election...

Who do they think they are, Russian? China? all those who they either blame or call a conspiracy?
Except this isn't, it's actually, factually, proven, with video of management saying it.

 

[DK PHILLIPS]

There sitting in the hot seat in front of c span viewed Congress...as we speak.