kalikshama
Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010 Status: offline
|
As you know from reading the article Santorum is wrong, and now sounds whiny: Danny Sullivan, who writes at the blog SearchEngineLand, notes that Google has a history of being hands-off when it comes to these controversies, regardless of the politics or sensitivities involved: "Google is loathe to touch its results in any way, shape or form. That's because if it does intervene in any way, there's some interest group that will immediately claim a bias. Way back in 2004, an anti-Jewish web site started ranking in Google's top results for 'Jew.' "Despite Google co-founder Sergey Brin being Jewish and himself disgusted with the result, it stood. Intervention, when Google's ranking algorithms had spoken, was seen as harmful to user trust," Sullivan writes. In December 2009, when racist images of first lady Michelle Obama popped to the top of Google search results, the company took a similar free-speech stance. "We have a bias toward free expression," Google spokesman Scott Rubin said at the time. "That means that some ugly things will show up." Still, Google has removed offensive content from searches, usually by making changes to how its overall search equations function. In 2007, for example, a change to Google's search algorithm stopped the search term "miserable failure" from directing Internet users to pages about former president George W. Bush, according to SearchEngineLand.
|