What is Google up to?
By pm317 on December 20, 2008 at 2:14 PM in Current Affairs
Here is another one of Flineo’s (this guy is a genius) brilliant videos from during the primary (nobody can accuse us of not warning the people.) Watch it and then we will talk about Google.
Did you see Step #3: infect the media, infect the Internet?
This election season we saw how media outlets like the NYT or the MSNBC got infected with the Obama virus. But Google too?
A little background first. Our regular reader Teakwoodkite wrote this comment on my post, Obama’s Train Ride a la Lincoln:
Pm317, so I google “Lincoln’s train ride to inauguration”, and what do you know? Instead of getting Lincoln as the link, I get Obama this and Obama that. [snip]
On the 13th page there was this gem about Lincoln train ride on the CIA’s web site, about “Saving Mr. Lincoln”
The search string is “Lincoln’s train ride to inauguration” and did you see the word Obama in it, anywhere? No. The user Teakwoodkite’s intent is plain and simple — “give me search results pertaining to Lincoln’s train ride to inauguration.” Well, he found it on the 13th page. I repeated the search with mixed results also. The first result from the first page was about Obama’s train ride. There were one or two vaguely related Lincoln only documents on each page and I found the CIA report once on the 3rd page and another time on the 11th page. I tried the same search on Yahoo. Lo and behold, the first search result was in fact, Lincoln’s train ride story. Yahoo should think about capitalizing on this!
There was a time in the early 90s, when computer scientists struggled with a two dimensional world in black and white within the computer — the battle between keyword-based queries versus content/context-based queries in the evolution of search engines. The second category referred to removing the ambiguity in the user’s query about what they mean by attributing context to their queries, instead of doing a plain word match as in the first category. For instance, when the user looks for “restaurants in Paris,” does she/he mean Paris, France or Paris, Texas? In other words, how do we make the computer “read” the user’s mind or gather their intent when they search for information on the Web using words or phrases?
We still don’t have a solution for reading another person’s mind, especially with a computer. But with the advances in computing power and cheap memory we come close by building the context or content of the query. A user’s plain word query is modified into something closer to what the user may have meant by enhancing the keywords with relevant images, audio/video, maps and so on. Sometimes relevance feedback from users is incorporated to further refine a search. All of this is done in good faith to make the interaction with the user more effective and efficient.
In and of itself, it is not a bad idea to try to “read” the user’s mind that way. What we see, however, in Teakwoodkite’s and my experience is a potential for subversion. We may be forced to read what they want us to read, just like Orwell’s 1984.
Subversion of the kind that happens on NYT or MSNBC in replacing everything political with pro-Obama politics, to be a propaganda arm for his campaign and perhaps for his administration in the future. Has Google fallen prey to that temptation? Google’s VP for User Experience, Marissa Mayer recently admitted that editorial judgments of staff may be usurped into search results as reported in this article:
This week Marissa Meyer explained that editorial judgments will play a key role in Google searches. It was reported by Tech Crunch proprietor Michael Arrington - who Nick Carr called the “Madam of the Web 2.0 Brothel” - but its significance wasn’t noted. The irony flew safely over his head at 30,000 feet. Arrington observed: “Mayer also talked about Google’s use of user data created by actions on Wiki search to improve search results on Google in general. For now that data is not being used to change overall search results, she said. But in the future it’s likely Google will use the data to at least make obvious changes. An example is if “thousands of people” were to knock a search result off a search page, they’d be likely to make a change.”
Now what, you may be thinking, is an “obvious change”? Is it one that is frivolous? (Thereby introducing a Google Frivolitimeter™ [Beta]). Or is it one that goes against the grain of the consensus? If so, then who decides what the consensus must be? Make no mistake, Google is moving into new territory: not only making arbitrary, editorial choices - really no different to Fox News, say, or any other media organization. It’s now in the business of validating and manufacturing consent: not only reporting what people say, but how you should think.
Earlier in a 2003 article, the same author showed how easy it was to redefine an anti-war slogan by a handful of A-list bloggers in 42 days and not for the better. So, when Mayer talks about thousands of people able to make a change, how many thousands are actually needed to generate consensus in a democratic society? For example, can a few thousands of Obama supporters manufacture consent that is not reflective of the general population? How will Google prevent such abuse? Contrary to anticipating or preventing such abuse, it seems to me from Mayer’s comments above that they may be open to such user intervention regardless of its consequences. We may have seen results of such interference already during this election season, when search results are manipulated, videos have disappeared on YouTube, articles have been scrubbed on media outlets.
Abuse of the Web and the Internet disheartens me more than anything. Science and politics should not mix in the same way religion should be kept out of statecraft, especially when political or religious fanaticism rears its ugly head. Google can be a beautiful technological invention built to foster an intellectually honest deliberation/dialog in a democratic forum. To empower people in the way that only unbiased information can. Right now however, it seems to me that the integrity of the product can be easily compromised by a few for malicious purposes. Influenced by having allowed China to subvert its original version, is Google thinking that a little mischief in American democracy is inconsequential? Sergey Brin should perhaps have a heart to heart conversation with his parents who emigrated from Russia to the US looking for personal freedom and individual choice, neither of which can be fully realized with state-owned (figuratively or literally) media.
We don’t know what Google is up to. But we know that Google’s Chief Executive, Eric Schmidt has not been shy about his support for Obama and even advised and campaigned for him. He was the front-runner for a cabinet post on technology until he refused.
As a researcher with a personal stake in Google’s integrity, I want to see a separation between these behemoth technology companies and the Government.
I want to be able to find Lincoln’s train ride story before I find anything on Obama’s, especially if I did not ask for it.
If Bush eroded the constitution, Obama is beginning his tenure by eroding the fourth estate.
{Speaking for me only.}
(List Price: $27.95 - Your Price: $15.47)
By Sarah Palin (Release date: November 17. 2009)
The Press/Media DIED in 2008 and apparently the internet search engines too!
I don’t think this is the change that improves FREE SOCIETIES!
The press/media died much earlier, ~1992, when it went along with the Clinton witch hunt. It never did return to objectivity.
You’ve got that right. Everyone PLEASE read Gene Lyons “Fools for Scandal” and his and Joe Conason’s “The Hunting of the President”(or get the DVD). The media was heavily involved in promoting the bogus Whitewater scandal instead of doing their job of getting to the truth. They also sold the public on Bush by promoting him as a regular guy while simultaneously trashing Gore. (See the dailyhowler.com archives for more information.)
Until people wake up to what our media is doing there is no chance it will stop.
I have never forgiven the MSM for the shit they pulled during the Clinton administration and during the run-up to the 2000 election culminating in the coronation of Bush II. They weren’t done even then. No, they have to give us Bush III. I am disgusted with all American media. They suck.
you’re right, ferd; they joined in on the clinton witch hunt; i suppose they thought that the “scandal” was good for ratings, and besides, they can never resist the temptation to pass sanctimonious judgement on everybody but themselves. it’s been all down hill from there.
I am not a fan of Obama. But what about Fox News Where is the outrage?—- They all suck! The internet may actually save the universe with no current limits on free speech
LMAO. It isn’t so much free speech as it is free spin, NQ excluded. Most of the internet is full of the same bs as you see in the MSM.
“current” being the operative word.
If Bush eroded the constitution, Obama is beginning his tenure by eroding the fourth estate.
{Speaking for me only.} - pm317
……….
I wondered why some of our friends had gone underground and I too fear this IS happening. For me I noticed on May 31, when there were thousands of protesters at the DNC RBC meeting and yet my family said they didn’t catch any news of it. In Iraq, there were less than 1500 protesting for the release of the shoe throwing journalist and it made news around the world.
I protested Bush, but I never felt afraid.
SILENCE IS OUR GREATEST ENEMY.
Bush played the press like the cheap fiddle it is. I only blame That One for being the same sort of weasel as the one he is replacing. The American electorate was bamboozled yet again. Two twerps in a row pretending to be president. Marvelous.
Obama = Bush III
Right.
I stopped using Google, cold, its’ lack of relevance obvious.
It’s staid, and some have outgrown it, the pattern of return, the results too obvious, and really, dull and predictable.
So, I use other search engines, I go back to the library, and I reference others who link.
And I know you were using it allegorically, but the idea some could actually read another’s mind, in the end, would mean nothing, the “reader” still limited by his lack of intellect, his lack of ability to understand, or communicate, or interpret, facing the same social and intellectual obstructions in the “virtual,” so to speak, that he encounters in the real.
A moron is a moron is a moron, even with a programming degree, evolution of the human intellect still triumphs.
Any gain would be temporary, at best.
Actually, I should have said “a moron is a moron is a moron, even with superpowers” — that would have been better — just look at Bush and Cheney.
I use Alltheweb, it is a clean search engine and fairly fast.
Thanks for the tip. I will try it. We’re in for some scary, sad times.
Google has been absolutely marvelous. I mean, does Google Earth boggle the mind, or what? So Google has boggled the mind, and now my boggled mind is susceptible to being googled every which way. They are one of the true wonders of the modern world–who would have thought that their technological marvels could be enlisted to advance the ambitions of a political con artist?
In a tiny remote corner of my brain a clunky old obsolete robot is waving its arms up and down frantically and intoning “Danger! Danger! Emergency!”
Thanks PM317 & Teakwoodkite. This is an absolutely necessary topic. And the Flineo vid lives up to expectations: brilliant.
The issue of net neutrality out to give people reason for great concern. This was a superb post! Thank you!
There is an article by Jaron Lanier,
“Digital Maoism: The Hazards of the New Online Collectivism”
that deserves a wide audience. For those interested, here is the link:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier06/lanier06_index.html
“The hive mind is for the most part stupid and boring. Why pay attention to it?
The problem is in the way the Wikipedia has come to be regarded and used; how it’s been elevated to such importance so quickly. And that is part of the larger pattern of the appeal of a new online collectivism that is nothing less than a resurgence of the idea that the collective is all-wise, that it is desirable to have influence concentrated in a bottleneck that can channel the collective with the most verity and force. This is different from representative democracy, or meritocracy. This idea has had dreadful consequences when thrust upon us from the extreme Right or the extreme Left in various historical periods. The fact that it’s now being re-introduced today by prominent technologists and futurists, people who in many cases I know and like, doesn’t make it any less dangerous.”
Maybe there is hope. When I put “Lincoln’s Train ride to inauguration” in Google currently the #1 listing is “Obama’s Train Ride a la Lincoln: NO QUARTER”
LOL.. We should con the con.
Priceless!
pm317
Kudos to your powerful video! You should send it to John Kass, Rush Limbaugh, and Lou Dobbs.
Bob- Fox News does not delete videos or news programs. BO reminds me of a Communist Dictator.
Oh, NO. The video is from our brilliant Flineo. I just put it there.
My a-hole neighbor works for Google, might be a programmer, not sure cause I can not stand talking to him and his incredibly arrogant / rude ass. I do remember though, him talking about how he and his office buddies would laugh over some of the search terms people used. I doubt that my neighbor is an anomaly there, I get the feeling the entire company looks down on its clients.
And Y gets stuck with princss Caroline
http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2008/12/20/princess-caroline-no-opinions-no-comment/
You know, we all have tolerated your comments promoting your posts in each thread. But I would like to think this is a serious enough post that you read it and add your 2 cents worth instead of (or before) linking your own unrelated stuff.
Google’s and SEO make it so that during a search the latest info on a key word will pop up. For example right now the most popular searches are Obama, Lincoln(in camparison articles related to Obama)and inauguration. When you type in a term like “Lincoln’s train ride to inauguration” you will indeed get the most recent articles that includes articles that compare Obama and Lincoln’s inauguaration train rides.
Its all about using specific keywords: if you type in ‘Lincolns train ride” only in Google’s search engine you will find results such as Lincoln Train Museum, and other results that mention Abe Lincoln only and oh a article here on No Quarter shows up also.
When it comes to Google,often folks add too many words in a specific search and they end up with articles that have nothing to do with what they are searching for. LOL Thats the problem my mother in law has- she would type in a one long drawn out sentence while searching instead of 2-4 specific keywords
This is basic 101 for a search engine:
Lincoln + Train + Ride + Inauguration
Instead of giving that, they think you should read about Obama, and that is the point of this post.
They also use the term relevant on the results page. Relevant to whom or to what agenda is the operative question.
They should have named the engine googol, a 1 followed by a hundred zeros. But that would be misleading. It is probably one with untold thousands of zeros behind it. Like That One.
This post merits repeat; I will use this as a teaching tool in my classrooms. I have been trying to instill in my students that regulatory agencies are ‘where it’s at.’ And that the people who participate in federal regulatory hearings are the people who rule the world. For example, if you want to control the means of communication, get the FCC to write licensing regulations favorable to you.
Before this election cycle, how many of us were overly concerned that at any given time, seats remained vacant on the FEC?
This post merits repeat; I will use this as a teaching tool in my classrooms.
………………..
I agree, and maybe a point by point one. All the points in the video are so important. Free societies rely on Free Communication/Speech/Expression, otherwise they are not FREE!
I can’t tell you how many times i google things, that have nothing to do with obama, but get results that related to him. PISSES me off! ahaha
God, ALL the time I would google hillary, and get results for Obama.
i am thinking of not even using google anymore, it makes me so irritated.
Great piece! :OD
A day with out GOOGLE? That might send a message that gets thier attention.
The Flineo videos are all brilliant. I wish there were more.
PM317;
Learning to me is like breathing.
Fascinating read for which I am very glad you choose to write about.
Where does one start with this issue?
The grist of your article is connected to so many aspects of our ability to fathom the nature of our surroundings and the validity of information presented as fact.
To be honest, being a student of history, I wanted to find out about Lincolns train ride. The fact that I had to “dig” would be a bad thing if I wasn’t motivated. I would be like many who use the web as a research tool without stopping to think about the information that is being retrieved.
Garry makes a valid point up thread about the skill level of an individual in searching the web for a given topic. I accept as a given that a google bombing has gone main stream. But Garry’s comment is not the point.
For me it is about the quality of “Open Source” information in the Global Economy.
Can a democracy operate in a vacuum? Can the ever increasing use of the internet and the body of knowledge that is available (and increasing geometrically) be “sysops manipulated”? Will one be able to leave Plato’s cave un-molested or be forever buried in the rubble of biased knowledge structures at the mouth of the cave?
Flineo’s “Reality Infection Program” would make a great full length film. Very talented human and a generous person.
You’re right. Some of it is human-computer interface limitation; some of it is limitations inherent in a language; some of it is human intellectual limitations. And, on top of all this, how governments with the aid of technology and media companies and a fanatical few can abuse these limitations to their own nefarious purposes.
Strange times!
Flineo is a MAJOR genius.
PM317;
Learning to me is like breathing.
Fascinating read for which I am very glad you choose to write about.
Where does one start with this issue?
The grist of your article is connected to so many aspects of our ability to fathom the nature of our surroundings and the validity of information presented as fact.
To be honest, being a student of history, I wanted to find out about Lincolns train ride. The fact that I had to “dig” would be a bad thing if I wasn’t motivated. I would be like many who use the web as a research tool without stopping to think about the information that is being retrieved.
Garry makes a valid point up thread about the skill level of an individual in searching the web for a given topic. I accept as a given that a google bombing has gone main stream. But Garry’s comment is not the point.
For me it is about the quality of “Open Source” information in the Global Economy.
Can a democracy operate in a vacuum? Can the ever increasing use of the internet and the body of knowledge that is available (and increasing geometrically) be “sysops manipulated”? Will one be able to leave Plato’s cave un-molested or be forever buried in the rubble of biased knowledge structures at the mouth of the cave?
Flineo’s “Reality Infection Program” would make a great full length film. He is a very talented human and a generous person.
Thank You NasuS.
Pm317, as it appears my post are getting trapped, I wanted thank you for your article.
I would like to know if there are any ways to tell which browser are the least biased. Are they rated by any “neutral” body?
I don’t think so. Yahoo! is in quite a lot of trouble financially; other search engines are small and their reach is short. Google is the giant and the monopoly now, unfortunately. I must thank you too. Your comment was one of the main things that triggered this whole post.
Flineo’s “Reality Infection Program” would make a great full length film. Very talented human and a generous person.
I know, isn’t he brilliant? There are so many others on his site that I can hopefully use in other posts.
Eric Schmidt even campaigned for Obama.
Google, the COMPANY has become a major disappointment as they have been polluting any concept of a Free Internet. Maybe Eric got this idea to use his company and it’s capabilities to become Pravda of the online when China starting making it’s demands. But it really doesn’t matter when they decided, the point is they HAVE done it and have now ruined their company and the idea of free internet with their control and messaging.
Google (Guidance On Obama Government Limiting Enlightmeant)
For you folks who have the problem of unrelated responses to your Google searches there is a fix.
Lets say you were looking up the use of deception in warfare by Muslims in the past you could use terms like:
“deception Islamic undermine”
that will get you a bunch of results with Obama in them.. so to avoid getting anything with Obama , what you do is put Obama in the search text with a dash before his name Like this:
“deception Islamic undermine -Obama”
That is not the point of this post. The point is if I say I want (Lincoln+Train+Ride+Inauguration) why should they “think” that I should also read about Obama? It is ok, if they interpret the query straight and give me Lincoln only docs first and then enhance the query to give me Obama docs. The potential for subversion here is not giving you what you want which is plain and simple but giving you what THEY think you should want. If this is happening inadvertently, they should go back to the drawing board to design better algorithms. How many know of saying -Obama and why should they? But that is a different issue.
I understand the main point. There’s nothing I can do about that. I was just trying to help people who didn’t want their results cluttered by names they know aren’t pertinent.
Yeah, I thought that may be your point.
But I felt compelled to respond.
Or better yet, use another search engine. I refuse to use Google for anything.
i trust google as much as i trust obama and that is zero.makes you wonder who is realy running the USA.
They don’t. Google’s algorithms are set up to give you all the terms in your search string and to present the pages by ranking, so you will get the pages that have all your terms that also have been served to the most people. Because there were many pages at the time that contained your search terms and also the term Obama, and those pages must’ve been ranked high as well, those pages appeared first. Using the minus sign tells the server to pass over documents that contain that search term.
You miss the subtlety of the post. So a few people using “Obama” in their search string would generate the consensus that everybody looking for Lincoln’s story wants to read about Obama? I would think it is more intuitive to produce results with only my search terms and then enhance that with others (which they think I may be interested in.) I don’t want them to second guess what I want. Don’t care about the minus sign detail as it is counter intuitive (I shouldn’t have to tell the search engine what I don’t want — that set could get infinite for some searches, theoretically speaking).
Pm317, he’s been googled.
The other day I hit a deadend on a perfectly normal phrase. It was a strange feeling to reach the blank white page of the “Great Barrier”.
In one of the most memorable of the “Great Barrier” episodes, “Is There in Truth No Beauty?” the Enterprise becomes lost inside the barrier and is saved by the incredible navigational skills of an alien passenger.
I am just along for the ride. LOL