Google's Censoring and Bias Toward Sarah Palin and the Promotion of Barack Obama

google ^ | October 17, 2008

[Red Steel]

Not all of Google searches are random algorithms which they show on your first Google search page, but filtered to reflect their leftist beliefs. Compare and contrast the same search for Sarah Palin and the other for Barack Obama.

The Google image search for "Palin Rallies"

and the same Google image search for "Obama rallies"

or see below.

[potlatch]

They fall into all categories, as all people do. From the best to the worst.

[devolve]

.

I’ll pass on the worst

Maybe wurst with Beck’s might be OK

[potlatch]

I got your joke Did I misspell worst? Nope, spellcheck says it’s right.

Have your ‘worst’ with a beer.

[devolve]

.

Knockwurst !

[potlatch]

OK, I did, but nobody was there......
knock-knock

[devolve]

.

You have to bring horseradish

[Red Steel]

Basically, PageRank doesn’t rank it’s news by topic, but by popularity.

Generally speaking probably so. Don't be too naive. Do you think Google is going to tell you what type of functionality they have to modify their basic software functions? Of course the liberals at Google can pick and choose what they want ranked first.

Lets look at the output that Google has ranked as the most popular for the search of "Palin rallies".

Ranked number 1, "http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c290/stevemist1" is a photbucket.com site complaining and mocking Bush for winning the 2004 election and calling his voters DUMB.

The second website is "The Church of the Apocalyptic Kiwi; We know people who know people so you don’t have to." An obscure leftist loony site shows a kid looking at an UFO spray painted on a concrete wall with the caption displayed on the Google search page saying "Sarah Palin rallies for the KKK".

The 3rd is another obscure dingbat site 'Scienceblogs.com' "I thought McCain-Palin rallies looked familiar..." a blog that solicits comments, but no one has. It has a link to a youtube.com vid of the movie 1984. I left the very first comment for the numbskull who runs the site that Google has linked.

The 4th goes to the idiots in DUmmieland of DemocraticUnderground.com. A clownish website that falls well below the FreeRepublic in popularity. FreeRepublic gets a hell of a lot more traffic than the DUmmies, so where are the gazillion of Sarah Palin pics not on Google?

I suppose you think these silly websites all outrank the search for Palin rally pictures over all the other legitimate websites that draw a hell of a lot more traffic than Google has listed here.

[PressurePoint]

The really bad ones of Obama tend to disappear too.

Straight down the memory hole. I always assumed the Ingsoc government of Oceania was universally considered bad by all who read 1984. Never occurred to me that many of our socialist friends read 1984 and thought "Hmmm, this would be a great system as long as we are in charge instead of the evil conservatives."

One good thing though, these spoiled punks that run the memory holes at MSN, Yahoo! and Google will feel pretty sad when the new media is nationalized and their lush paychecks get replaced by government subsistence stipends.

[potlatch]

[...our socialist friends read 1984 and thought “Hmmm, this would be a great system as long as we are in charge instead of the evil conservatives.”]

Yes, Google leans to the left.
I’ve never understood the mindset of the politicians and others who favor socialism. I fear for my children and grandchildren, why don’t they? They won’t be in power forever, even though they might think so.

[potlatch]

Forgot the HOOK 'EM HORNS

[devolve]

.

The “entitled” percentage grows

The Congress bribes for survival

[Swordmaker]

It’s not bias. I think Google’s image search algorithm isn’t all that good.

It's deliberate. They did the same thing to disappear all of the images of Obama's bogus birth certificate. One day you found thousands of images, the next day the headings for the images were there, but the images were random images having nothing to do with birth certificates... just like the random images on the Sarah Palin rallies pages.

Once is interesting, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.

[potlatch]

[The “entitled” percentage grows]

Well, they won’t like that! Eventually it will be half and half and then the trouble starts.

Maybe it already has.

[Swordmaker]

I hate to break it to you, but Obama’s rallies are better “documented” because more pictures of them are out there, due in part of the big news making crowd he (used to) attracts, and the fact that he was making speech even before Palin was picked.

No, it's not. Google disappeared EVERY SINGE ONE of the images of Obama's fraudulent, forged Certificate of Live Birth. They were present one day, gone the next. I know. I did the research after I went back to get a specific image I had seen just the day before they disappeared. I went through every one of over 5000 pages and found NOT ONE image of the birth certificates that were litterally all over the internet. I found several that showed random non-certificate images that linked to REAL images of the fake COLB on FreeRepublic (that I had posted myself). I found several random images of things like apples, schoolbusses, or basketball players, that linked to AtlasShrugged.com, the website that was covering the exposure of the Photoshop manipulation of the COLB.

The images have since been returned to Google's database after it became known on the blogosphere what Google had done.

If the search was for "political rally" then popularity of images might affect the ratio and positioning of Obama rallies to Palin rallies. However, the popularity of images of a "Palin Rally" search will have NO EFFECT like the one observed because there can only be popularity comparisons between Palin Rally pictures. There SHOULD be pictures of large groups of people at the Palin Rallies that exist all over the internet that SHOULD appear on the first pages—IF the search were honest. Instead, it has been manipulated for political purposes.

Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is Enemy Action.

This is far more than three times, girlgenius

[Swordmaker]

There are numerous images on Freerepublic of Sarah Palin rallies. Here are fifteen of the only 21 results of a Google search I just did using "Sarah Palin Rally site:freerepublic.com"

Not one of them is a legitimate image of a Sarah Palin rally. Do you see any crowd pictures there? They are gone, purged. They don't exist according to the chief librarian of the Internet, Google. The crowd images are still on the websites... but the index no longer links to those particular images. If the image isn't capable of being found, does it exist? This is reprehensible.

Here is an example of what happened to the COLB images.

Google Search results for "Barack Obama Birth Certificate":

Results from the day of purging of the COLB images on Google, July 17, 2008"


Same Search, July 16, 2008, the day before Google purged the COLBs.
The green certificates are the Obama images.

See? Not poor algorithms. It's Enemy Action.

[Red Steel]

I remember you bringing this up. Good to see those images again. :-)

[Swordmaker]

Re: Google

And I stand by mine. I watched it happen. Those screen shots were taken in July. The one with ltterally thousands of hits to Obama’s COLB on July 16, 2008, and the expunged one on July 17, 2008.

The excrement was just hitting the fan with Polarik and other forensic document examiners revellations that the COLB was phony.

When I discovered the purging of COLB thumbnails, and the deliberate substitution of random unrelated thumbnails to legitimate links to COLB images, including some that I had posted on FR, I posted the event on FR and on Atlas Shrugs as well as sent out emails to every one on my mailing list. Google was caught red handed and it was all over the Internet. They are slowly allowing the search bots to repair the fraudulent links and replacing the bogus thumbnails.

I checked back every few days for a month or so after the purge and no COLB images were to be found on Google. If you choose to disbelieve me then you are being naive.