Google suppressing anti-Obama bloggers

[Black Landlord]

Where else:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82113

Poor gal isn't getting hit on like she used to -- it would be a kind gesture if everyone reading this could click through to her blog.

[BigGuynRusty]

That's F**king Frightening!!!!
What a freaking nut.

BGnR

[Spock]

Black Landlord wrote:
Where else:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82113

Poor gal isn't getting hit on like she used to -- it would be a kind gesture if everyone reading this could click through to her blog.

That's funny.

Boo Hoo !!!!!

[Ted King]

I didn't click through because I didn't want to appear to be supporting her, and she may be a "nut", but I think it is worthwhile to be alert to the possibility that Google may be choosing to shuffle sites down the list because of their content. It seems plausible that there are innocent explanations for what has happened, 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 - even if at the moment it essentially amounts to "filtering" (not really cutting them out - just lowering them on the search lists) sites that I think are really lame. Google is a private enterprise and they have a lot of legal latitude about how they want to run their site, and there are good search sites that offer competition, but they are so pervasive that I would not like to see the kind of bias the woman cited has claimed.

[Grateful11]

"Good, Good"

[samintx]

Ted King wrote:
I didn't click through because I didn't want to appear to be supporting her, and she may be a "nut", but I think it is worthwhile to be alert to the possibility that Google may be choosing to shuffle sites down the list because of their content. It seems plausible that there are innocent explanations for what has happened, 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 - even if at the moment it essentially amounts to "filtering" (not really cutting them out - just lowering them on the search lists) sites that I think are really lame. Google is a private enterprise and they have a lot of legal latitude about how they want to run their site, and there are good search sites that offer competition, but they are so pervasive that I would not like to see the kind of bias the woman cited has claimed.

I agree, Ted. Thank you.

[Gutenberg]

This guy says that Google is suppressing lefty websites.

http://www.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/...66811.html

Seems like Google is suppressing everybody but moderates, I guess.

[Wags]

Maybe Google is worried about copyright infringement because of she's using the title of an Ayn Rand novel as her name. If I was her I'd try changing it to "Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations.com"

[NeverMind]

I love the ads, it takes a second to load the animation:

[Pops]

Ted King wrote: ...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.