criticizing social media platforms for mass-censoring conservatives and
the alternative media earlier this month, President Trump has turned
his attention to Google. Not a moment too soon —
of all the politically biased tech giants, Google is by far the most
critical comments about Google referenced statistics from a report in
PJ Media which found that a staggering 96 percent of search results for
“Trump” return results from news sites that are hostile to the
President. Breitbart News’ own investigation found
the same result.
Google search results are personalized, this wasn’t a strictly
scientific study — that would require tests on hundreds, if not
thousands of Google users. But the fact that a conservative
columnist received search results that were 96 percent
liberal should be deeply worrying. If that’s what a conservative with a
(presumably) conservative search history sees, what kind of results are
being sent to swing-voters?
fact that it could be a problem
of all search engines, not just Google, due to the way search
algorithms detect “trustworthy” content is true, but Google holds a
stranglehold on the search market. It’s closest english-language
competitor, Bing, holds 7 percent of the market for searches according
obvious problem with Google search is how its algorithm repeatedly
surfaces information from Wikipedia at the top of search results.
Wikipedia is an “online encyclopedia” that relies on a mass of
anonymous, unaccountable editors to create its myriad of pages. The
encyclopedia’s citation rules, which favor academic and establishment
media sources while excluding sources like Breitbart News and the Daily
Caller as “unreliable” inherently favor the left.
too does its cabal of unaccountable left-wing editors, who are slowly
but surely turning the purportedly non-partisan encyclopedia into a
platform for anti-Trump propaganda. Wikipedia editors recently added
Trump to a list of advocates of the “white genocide conspiracy theory”
following his comments on the racially motivated murders of white
farmers in South Africa. They previously included
ICE detention centers on a Wikipedia list of “concentration camps.” The
result of Google’s reliance on a far-left encyclopedia is that false
information – fake news, you could say – has the potential to reach the
top of the search engine’s results, like the time when the California
GOP were labeled a “Nazi” party on Wikipedia, a categorization that then
made its way to Google.
Google leaps to address individual scandals like the California GOP,
don’t expect any fundamental changes to address bias — the company is
fundamentally hostile to Trump and to Trumpism. After all, this is a
company whose senior management was on
the verge of tears following his election victory.
Furthermore, the company has quite publicly announced their intention to pour
millions of dollars into propping up the legacy
media, including direct funding of far-left anti-Trump publications like
Google’s well-documented far-left biases are trickling into its search
algorithm, what is the worst that could happen? If recent research is to
be believed, the worst would be no more election victories for
conservative candidates — ever.
research, led by former Psychology
Today editor Dr. Robert Epstein shows that
when presented with negative search results about a candidate, the
opinions of undecided voters shift against that candidate by a
staggering 43.4 percent — enough to swing virtually any election.
suggests that Google already biased its search results towards Hillary
Clinton in 2016, shifting up to 2.6 million votes in her favor (just
below the margin by which she won the popular vote).
upper management has, in the past, been brazen about
its political biases. Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google parent company
Alphabet in 2016, set up a shadowy organization called “The Groundwork”
aimed at harnessing the expertise of Silicon Valley to put Hillary
Clinton in the White House. In a 2014 email leaked by WikiLeaks, Clinton
campaign manager John Podesta also claimed that Schmidt wanted to be
“head outside adviser” to the Clinton campaign.
impossible to say for sure if Google is deliberately stacking its search
results against Trump. And that’s the entire problem — the company is
not currently required to be transparent about its algorithms, who’s in
charge of them, and what their biases are. Given the vast power that
this company has accumulated — the power to “organize the world’s
information”, as the company’s own mission statement reads — how can
this be allowed to continue?
Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News.
You can follow him on
Twitter, Gab.ai and add
him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to email@example.com.