Google urged to drop nuclear site images

The Australian ^ | 8th August 2005 | Natasha Bita

[postaldave]

do a search of "george bush" in google news.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=george++bush&btnG=Search+News

does that look fair and balanced to you?

[the invisib1e hand]

google sucks, they dominate search engine results (informational inbreeding), and seem to be developing -- purposely or otherwise -- a hedgemony on internet searches. screw 'em and get ready to short the stock.

[RightWhale]

That is plain silly since anybody can go to any of several imaging satellites and get the same thing.

[bwteim]

You wrote: "do a search of "george bush" in google news. http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=george++bush&btnG=Search+News
does that look fair and balanced to you?"

OK, I did that. And I found articles that are slanted (from my POV) against Bush. Is it the Google folks? No. My opinion is that these results are a function of several factors:

• the news sources that permit themselves to be indexed
• the news sources that contain, in your search example, the words 'george' and 'bush' but not necessarily in that order.
• and how the editors of the news sources choose to write their headlines.

In other words, since the majority of news media is MSM and is slanted against Bush what we see via your Google search is just what we would expect. It is a function of MSM, and not Google's searching mechanism.

But this is my opinion.

If your contention is that anyone else can manipulate Google search results for files or images, that I don't dispute.

Just try the following:

Do an image search on Google with safe search turned OFF for the following three individuals (keep the quotes)

"george bush"

"hillary clinton"

"john kerry"

The pictures for the individuals are not always flattering, depending upon POV, and will change depending upon how often the picture gets clicked on and thus affect ranking.

[postaldave]

i think there is one small point you may be missing.
their source isn't always the MSM. often they link
unknown papers and blogs for their source. when you
pick from that pool of knowledge you "could" present
a far and balance view "if" you wanted.

that is where i have a problem with them.

because google is not a spider engine search the results are based on human input. that human input is does by mostly west coast leftist hell bent on presenting a negative view on the conservative view point.

their image links just make it that much more clear.

[bwteim]

Evening, postaldave.

I think I understand what you are saying regarding the news sources, but the results are what they are, aren't they? Or are you saying there an equal amount of conservative sources and they are not being indexed or searched deliberately?

Regarding human input - that IS why I pointed out the image links. It is a function of hits - for example, I bet Kerry in that green space suit was higher during the campaign than it is now. But that is a function of human input (but not on Google's end, but ours, as in us users/ clickers/ searchers/and surfers).

My opinon. FRegards,

[postaldave]

>Or are you saying there an equal amount of conservative >sources and they are not being indexed or searched >deliberately?

i guess that's what i'm saying, i see all kinds of left-wing blogs and other websites as a source but never right-wing sites.

if you do a search of iraq you can't find one positive
news item. nothing? i would think somewhere someone wrote
something positive.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=iraq

[bwteim]

Well, FR is one place you can find things positive about Mr. Bush, about Iraq, about our soldiers.

But, as we all know, FR is not indexed in the Google news portion that started off our discussion.

Furthermore, we on FR have pointed out correctly about the lack of the true or whole story in MSM, etc. and many FR users have attempted to provide the truth on thousands of threads over the years. So if you are asking me to find the whole picture about our progess in Iraq, I would refer you back to FR ;)

And you can even use Google to find that:

just add site:freerepublc.com to your search word(s).

[postaldave]

sounds good lets try that.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=iraq+freerepublic.com&btnG=Search+News

wow, that didn't work out so well.(grin)

first hit.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/080205.html

that's why i get my news here instead of google.

good night bwteim

[bwteim]

Wait, don't put on your pj's yet.

You are not using
"site" in your expression and you are using the google.news

Use this before retiring or upon waking
;)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22day+in+the+life+of+president+bush%22+site%3Afreerepublic.com&btnG=Google+Search

Good night!

[Balding_Eagle]

Let's see Area 51!

[Howlin]

[RightWhale]

What is that? My humble hut?

[melt]

Me too, and I'm always watching for the speedos,...jibabs, waiting to explode.