Google (1 Viewer)

[Nebraskaboy]

This is something I bet many of you have not thought about. Could a search engine have a bias. I was a little skeptical at first when my friend pointed something out to me, which made me very curious about Google. Type in the Worst president ever and see where Google takes you. It will take you to George Bush's White House biography. Smart plan huh? Its a fact that Google is a very popular search engine, it is easy to say that millions use it a day. I never thought I would see the day that a search engine MIGHT have a bias. I'm not going to jump to conclusions but right now I am very suspicious.

 

[26 X World Champs]

This is something I bet many of you have not thought about. Could a search engine have a bias. I was a little skeptical at first when my friend pointed something out to me, which made me very curious about Google. Type in the Worst president ever and see where Google takes you. It will take you to George Bush's White House biography. Smart plan huh? Its a fact that Google is a very popular search engine, it is easy to say that millions use it a day. I never thought I would see the day that a search engine MIGHT have a bias. I'm not going to jump to conclusions but right now I am very suspicious.

Why are you confused? He is the worst president ever, by far!

 

[jtm]

I agree with "26 X World Champs", though I do not agree that Google is bias. The search engine simply takes keywords and returns the results in order of popularity. Usually the more uncommon words are then put into priority, in this case President. The only word it really found was President. Try this: Search for "President" you will see the same first result.

Cheers,
jtm

 

[akyron]

It is a trick. It automatically discounts the words worst. Yahoo does the same thing.

Below is a cache of http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/gwbbio.html. It's a snapshot of the page taken as our search engine crawled the Web. We've highlighted the words: president ever

The word worst is eliminated and president ever is searched for.


Nice Prank.

Almost everything else is preceeded by One liberal recently claimed.....

That and 60 cents will get you a diet coke in some places.


Ranking as failures were Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, Warren Harding, and James Buchanan. Those listed among the failures were judged by the scholars to have been incompetent chief executives whose inability in office threatened the very institution of the presidency. The Civil War, for example, erupted under the presidency of James Buchanan, whose vacillating personality led him to attempt a separation between the moral and legal aspects of slavery. "What is right and what is practicable are two different things," Buchanan argued. That logic led to civil war, and at the end of Buchanan's administration the very future of the republic was in doubt. As Christopher Buckley commented: "It's probably just as well that James Buchanan was our only bachelor president. There are no descendants bracing every morning on opening the paper to find another headline announcing: 'Buchanan Once Again Rated Worst President In History'."-----edited by James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal and Leonard Leo of The Federalist Society

 

[Arch Enemy]

Tell me which President recently started an unprovoked war.

 

[jtm]

President Bush?

 

[ShamMol]

Dude, google's not biased, its correct...wow, I just said dude, lol.

 

[akyron]

Is He the Worst President in American History?
February 2004
Depending on whom you read, he is either the worst or the most undervalued president in American history.

Fans see him as straightforward and unpretentious, simple and sincere.

His detractors interpret this as simplistic, uneducated, naive and ignorant.

Supporters say he is confident, funny and bold.

Some say arrogant, flippant and reckless.

He inherits a country evenly and deeply divided by opposing ideologies.

Critics say that he is himself the reason for much of the division. His election, they say, split rather than united the nation’s citizenry. They remind him often that he did not win a majority of the popular vote.

He inherits a war set in motion before his election and propagated by those opposed to the American idea of freedom.

Some say he provoked the war himself, that he overstated the case, that he prodded the enemy into action.

His stated goals are clear: to free oppressed people and to protect the long-term security of the nation.

He is accused of having a hidden agenda, of engaging the enemy for his own political gain and to further his own financial interests.

He believes war is unavoidable.

His critics say the war is unjust and unnecessary.

He believes freedom is non-negotiable.

His detractors say that compromise is possible, but that he would rather use brute military force.

He proceeds slowly and reluctantly towards armed conflict.

Some say he rushes to war.

He tries to gain consensus among the nation’s leaders.

He is accused of going it alone, of using the war powers of the president rather than the consent of Congress.

He gives frequent speeches laying out his reasons for a just war and his vision of the freedom it will win. He is candid about his intentions.

He is accused of moving in secret, of muzzling the press and silencing opposing viewpoints.

He stakes his presidency on the belief that all people are entitled to freedom and liberty.

He is accused of suppressing civil liberties, of violating the very Constitution he claims to uphold.

He mobilizes a trained and well-equipped army.

Yet the enemy proves ingenious and stubborn in its resistance. Its warriors fight on their own turf and are able to kill many brave American soldiers.

These casualties make the war and the president increasingly unpopular. If the tide doesn’t turn soon, he will not be elected to a second term.

His opponent for the upcoming election is a decorated military officer who advocates an end to the war, even if it means allowing the oppression to continue.

This Republican president is known for championing human rights.

His critics say that he and his army deny the human rights of POWs.

A religious man, his speeches are peppered with references to God and Scripture.

He is accused of using God for his own ends, of being a hypocrite.

He stays the course, refusing to give in or give up.

Nearing the end of his first term, conventional wisdom says he will be remembered as American’s worst president, that he will never receive the thanks of a grateful nation.

Only history can vindicate him.

And history does.

In 1864 Abraham Lincoln is the most undervalued president in American history.

Copyright © 2004 by Mike Bellah



Interesting.

 

[Pacridge]

This is something I bet many of you have not thought about. Could a search engine have a bias. I was a little skeptical at first when my friend pointed something out to me, which made me very curious about Google. Type in the Worst president ever and see where Google takes you. It will take you to George Bush's White House biography. Smart plan huh? Its a fact that Google is a very popular search engine, it is easy to say that millions use it a day. I never thought I would see the day that a search engine MIGHT have a bias. I'm not going to jump to conclusions but right now I am very suspicious.

Do a Google search for “best President ever.” Bush is peppered all over that page as well. So?

 

[stsburns]

Google is paid by liberal group advertisements, which in turn run thier site. . And I didn't see 2 many GOP sites advetising on Google? It's no surprise to me, I ran this experiment last fall

My search Results for:

Kerry: 1st (MTV promos), 2nd (How to Picket!), 3rd result down actually went to Moveon.org.

Bush: 1st result (worst president), 2nd (advertisement for F 9/11 movie), 2nd page led to GOP.org.

I think they worked out thier "bugs" but, they are paid to give certain results. Kind of like Online polls?

 

[sebastiansdreams]

Do a Google search for “best President ever.” Bush is peppered all over that page as well. So?

Odd, all I got was Reagan and a bunch of facecious posts. Oh well.

 

[Schweddy]

Wow, how did I miss this post?

Google doesn't really like us. So I am biased against them.
We rank high in every other search engine.

Back to topic:
Of course Google is biased - they have a product to sell and do it well.
Currently the only way to get listed for us in google is to buy advertisement - which gets very expensive!

But, do a search for 'foxnews' in google and we are #3! lol

One of the ways that google does its algorithm is the 'link text'. For instance, Debate Politics is a link to us. But, if we put Bush is awesome - google would associate us with Bush instead of politics. That is how the bloggers did it - they used 'Bush is a looney' or 'Kerry waffles' as the text link.

So, it is not only Google, but the link itself that creates that 'bias'.