Rush Limbaugh: Google in bed with Obama WH, results on him negative "by design, and on purpose"

Max Christian ^ | 18th March 2010 | Max Christian

[Don Corleone]

Google donated big bucks to the Obama campaign. They have a vested interest in him.

[RAR]

Cleared and essentially the same set of results - although Red State actually came up as a result on page 1 this time. How did that get past them. :)

[Rhetorical pi2]

As the Clinton administration was winding down, I recall several people who were in the White House moving over to AOL. (Which was dominate at that time).

Later - when GOOGLE was about to go public, there was a tremendous demand for their stock when they went public.

I clearly remember that Algore was able to obtain a large allocation to purchase. As you recall it made lots of people wealthy - including Algore.

I occurs to me that he fit in well with Google mangement and directors, and has had an influence on political decisions and editorial point of views.

[pyx]

This is quite disturbing. I typed in "deem and pass" without the quotation marks and every URL that Google suggested on the first page were LEFTIST websites that I would never visit along with some that are quite obscure.

I have now switched from Google to alternative search engines.

[GOP Poet]

bookmark

[mojitojoe]

Of course they are in bed with Obongo. This was evident back in 2007. You Tube is the same. They are stopping view counts, refusing to put high count anti Obama videos on the main page. They do everything they can to stop the view counts on anti Obongo videos. This sh*t needs to stop now. It’s getting to the point of creepy. People are starting to feel like they live in a Commie country and as long as people are freaked out, the economy is never going to get better.

[Mariner]

I use ONLY Yahoo

[AnotherUnixGeek]

This is quite disturbing. I typed in "deem and pass" without the quotation marks and every URL that Google suggested on the first page were LEFTIST websites that I would never visit along with some that are quite obscure.

I just tried the same thing. First two entries are news results from the Washington Post and FOXNews, followed by a couple of YouTube results and Twitter feeds. Then Mother Jones (they're still around?), MSNBC, Christian Science Monitor.

Tried Obamacare - news results from AOL and Townhall, some Twitter feeds, Time magazine, Michelle Malkin, Obamacaretruth.org, Wall Street Journal, Forbes, a Charles Krauthammer column.

Googled Rush Limbaugh: first two entries are to his website, some news results from CBS and BusinessWeek, his Wikipedia page, a fan site, a couple of hostile articles on left-wing sites, and Al Franken's book at Amazon.

I doubt there's any deliberate manipulation of results. Software developers and IT people are not uniformly left-wing - I have friends who work at Google - some liberal, some not. If Google's algorithms are somehow weighted toward left-wing sites, some of the coders who implement the algorithms would say so. If search results are being manipulated by hand, word would get out.

[RAR]

In reference to Rush’s site coming up at the top of the search, didn’t he say they had to work quite hard to make that happen? I suspect it would be buried if they hadn’t.

[teeker]

Glad I’m a Yahoo searcher.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Google has massaged its ranking algorithm quite a number of times to penalize people who try to mechanically cheat it by things like creating scads of dummy pages talking about something that they want Google to consider important.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Usually Google is pretty darn good at finding “authoritative sites” if they are built so that Google recognizes what they are. The “Rush Limbaugh” script graphics at the top of Rush’s page would not register to Google as meaning anything.

[La Enchiladita]

Google sent out legions of paid campaign workers for RonPaul in 2008.