Google suppressing anti-Obama bloggers

[Ted King]

Pops wrote:
[quote=Ted King]...but if Google really is deciding how to rank some sites based disproportionately on content that someone in power at Google doesn't like then that would be disturbing...

Why?

That's a serious question.
As I said, I'm sure they have a legal foundation for doing so if they choose to but I would find it disturbing because I think a great many people just type in search terms and look at the first few hits without much reflection about whether or not there is some bias in which sites pop up before others. It seems plausible to me that a bias at Google based on say the political preference of the people in power there could at least subtly effect political discourse without most people being aware of it. It's part of my inclination to optimize egalitarianism - I prefer that powerful information centers generally available to, and frequently used by, the public give as much equal/unbiased access to everyone as much as it is practically possible to do (with a few exceptions).

[NeverMind]

google regularly changes it search algorithm

[Black Landlord]

My understanding is that the top hits are the ones that get the most requests.

[mikeylikesit]

I know when I'm doing a Google search for hard information the last place I want to click through to is somebody's blog site. Maybe Google could just identify blogs as such and resolve the issue for both of us.

[incognegro]

remember 'miserable failure'?

it still works, and Google didn't do it.

[Stizzealth]

This lady may be a bit of a kook, but it is certainly true that Blogger wasn't quite as quick as it might have been in freeing up blogs frozen by automated user complaints.