But how is Google/Youtube influencing minds of the electorate?
So I went to Youtube to look for the speech. I entered what I thought was an innocuous search:
trump state of the union
It's logical to think that upon entering the aforementioned search criteria, the first result would be the SOTU speech.
Not so fast.
What came up was in order of appearance was 'Fact and Fiction', Socialist Rebuttal, "Trump: Sexual Predator", more reaction, a 'LIVE' feed (no longer available), Jimmy Kimmel & Stormy Daniels and on and on.
In fact, to see just the speech and nothing but the speech, one had to scroll down to the FOURTEENTH result.
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. I'm sure #aclockworkshill will fill us in on HRC's thoughts.
Comments
-
Youtube’s influence on the electorate is convincing alienated teens and adult shut-ins that failed academic Jordan Peterson is a generational philosopher for saying shit like “boys need to clean their rooms”.
-
Helps Trump IMO
-
My mom was ahead of her timeHardlyClothed said:Youtube’s influence on the electorate is convincing alienated teens and adult shut-ins that failed academic Jordan Peterson is a generational philosopher for saying shit like “boys need to clean their rooms”.
-
Is responsible voter synonymous with effective critical thinking adult? Or is age just a number?
-
65,800,000 examples say “No”
-
This is just not how search engines work, there is a lot more going on behind an algorithm in addition to just keywords. They are also heavily weighing reach, "reputability," social signals, etc... In that way, search engines are inherently biased towards whoever is consuming particular content at the time.pawz said:Like a *ahem* responsible voter, I ventured out to the interwebs to see exactly what POTUS had to say for the SOTU. I wanted nothing more, nothing less. In his own words.
So I went to Youtube to look for the speech. I entered what I thought was an innocuous search:
trump state of the union
It's logical to think that upon entering the aforementioned search criteria, the first result would be the SOTU speech.
Not so fast.
What came up was in order of appearance was 'Fact and Fiction', Socialist Rebuttal, "Trump: Sexual Predator", more reaction, a 'LIVE' feed (no longer available), Jimmy Kimmel & Stormy Daniels and on and on.
In fact, to see just the speech and nothing but the speech, one had to scroll down to the FOURTEENTH result.
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. I'm sure #aclockworkshill will fill us in on HRC's thoughts.
In this case, it seems like there was more interest/traffic/links about rebuttals than the actual speech. This is totally anecdotal, but I think "the left" is probably more likely to seek out this stuff on sites themselves, which then boosts them in the algorithm. "The right" seems to stick more to Facebook and social media for their discourse for obvious reasons. Social signals I don't think are weighed as heavily in the algorithm, so in a way the major outlets non-coverage of conservative talking points will suppress it online via side-effect.
So again, Google isn't inherently biased, but a biased user base can sway results. Search engines or Russian bots/trolls, pick your poison.
Edit: I also know your original poont was that you were just looking for the speech itself, not conservative viewpoints. But still. -
Right. And in your mind @pawz the brietbart dick sucking video should be the first link.
-
Leftist computer nerds fucking up America.
-
See the Sledog's of the world as another reason "the right" is losing in the rankings.Sledog said:Leftist computer nerds fucking up America.
-
WilburHooksHands said:
This is just not how search engines work, there is a lot more going on behind an algorithm in addition to just keywords. They are also heavily weighing reach, "reputability," social signals, etc... In that way, search engines are inherently biased towards whoever is consuming particular content at the time.pawz said:Like a *ahem* responsible voter, I ventured out to the interwebs to see exactly what POTUS had to say for the SOTU. I wanted nothing more, nothing less. In his own words.
So I went to Youtube to look for the speech. I entered what I thought was an innocuous search:
trump state of the union
It's logical to think that upon entering the aforementioned search criteria, the first result would be the SOTU speech.
Not so fast.
What came up was in order of appearance was 'Fact and Fiction', Socialist Rebuttal, "Trump: Sexual Predator", more reaction, a 'LIVE' feed (no longer available), Jimmy Kimmel & Stormy Daniels and on and on.
In fact, to see just the speech and nothing but the speech, one had to scroll down to the FOURTEENTH result.
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. I'm sure #aclockworkshill will fill us in on HRC's thoughts.
In this case, it seems like there was more interest/traffic/links about rebuttals than the actual speech. This is totally anecdotal, but I think "the left" is probably more likely to seek out this stuff on sites themselves, which then boosts them in the algorithm. "The right" seems to stick more to Facebook and social media for their discourse for obvious reasons. Social signals I don't think are weighed as heavily in the algorithm, so in a way the major outlets non-coverage of conservative talking points will suppress it online via side-effect.
So again, Google isn't inherently biased, but a biased user base can sway results. Search engines or Russian bots/trolls, pick your poison.
Edit: I also know your original poont was that you were just looking for the speech itself, not conservative viewpoints. But still.
This makes sense.
Forgive me however, for my suspicion when I see the words "Trump Sexual Predator" in a row, in a query about something completely different.
