Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marble falls

(57,075 posts)
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:04 PM Jun 2014

What the hell is wrong with search engines?

I've used bing, google, duckduckgo, dogpile and they all do it.

Type in any variation of racist attacks on blacks, white on black violence and all that comes up is blog crap on racist black on white violence.

If one believes the search machines - there are NO racially motivated attacks on blacks, only whites.

What up with that?

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

philosslayer

(3,076 posts)
1. White on black attacks
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:07 PM
Jun 2014

Whether physical or economic, are an epidemic. Yet there are many people who would like to convince you otherwise. They rarely get reported.

marble falls

(57,075 posts)
2. They get reported but they don't get searched. Its like the "Santorum" search joke but in reverse...
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:12 PM
Jun 2014

a lot of white people must be extraordinarily afraid of being attacked by black people. So much so they bombard the search engines.

I know racially motivated attacks on blacks by whites happen a lot, I just can't search for articles on the usual search engines.

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
3. Use inverted commas and minus signs
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:14 PM
Jun 2014

"white on black" violence-"black on white"-"black on black"

Note, no spaces between the minus sign and the inverted commas

It produces this result for me

marble falls

(57,075 posts)
5. And they're still about black on white violence, the Salon article takes you to RW blogs .....
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:33 PM
Jun 2014

check it out - no matter which you use "white on black" or "black on white" what you get is about "black on white" and "reverse racism".

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
10. Sorry, my error but did get some results this way
Tue Jun 24, 2014, 01:54 AM
Jun 2014

using site searches
white on black violence site:www.salon.com
white on black violence site:www.alternet.org
"white on black" violence site:thinkprogress.org

Nothing on Talking Points Memo or Huffpo or al Jazeera
a few results for BBC news (bbc.co.uk) and Slate
Only one for the US Department of Justice
Nothing from FedStats

It really looks like this problem has hardly been examined and that seems like, well, institutional racism

Warpy

(111,245 posts)
4. It means that bigots are doing most of the searches, that's what it means
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:33 PM
Jun 2014

All search engines throw the most popular items to the top of the first page. Often it takes wading through several pages or pure drivel to get what you want. This is especially annoying when searching for medical items, sometimes there can be five pages of New Age donkey bollocks before the first legitimate medical item pops up.

It was actually easier pre Google on some items since you could parse it pretty specifically, eg. Saxony+Spinning wheel+1820-1920-fishing reel - blood sweat & tears...and so forth.

marble falls

(57,075 posts)
7. That's exctly right. And the result is it dumbs us all down along with them. Only BS results on ....
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:35 PM
Jun 2014

serious inquiry.

NYC Liberal

(20,135 posts)
8. It has to do partly with how many pages are linking to them.
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:38 PM
Jun 2014

So when people here link to that crap (including Freeper garbage) -- even to critique -- it helps that page's ranking.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What the hell is wrong wi...