Report: Google News Does Not Have an Anti-Conservative Bias So Much as a Pro-Credible Source One

Nov 2005
8,958
3,437
California
#1
It’s pretty much conservative dogma at this point: Silicon Valley is secretly discriminating against Republicans and conspiring to push left-wing propaganda on everyone! Donald Trump throws out unsubstantiated bile on the topic left and right, while Republicans in Congress and right-wing media parrot it nonstop. That’s all been despite a lack of any credible evidence suggesting it’s true, beyond the usual hearsay and distortion.

Here’s something that will absolutely not change the most feverish minds opining on the topic—that would contradict the conservative persecution complex that now dominates much of GOP politics—but is interesting nonetheless. This Saturday, the Economist posted the findings of a year-long analysis it ran on Google’s news tab in search results, concluding there is no evidence that Google goes out of its way to mess with conservatives or lend a helping hand to Democrats.

To check for political favoritism among the 10,000 human evaluators at Google who rank sources on “expertise” and “trustworthiness,” the Economist “wrote a program to obtain Google results for any keyword” and then ran it on a browser with no history in a “politically centrist” part of Kansas. That program built a database of approximately 175,000 links (31 for each day in 2018). Then the Economist compared those results to a predictive model that estimated what share of search results a given outlet could be expected to receive on a given keyword, accounting for audience size, social media followings, how dedicated each outlet was to a specific beat, and a variety of metrics supposed to estimate accuracy:
Next, we built a model to predict each site’s share of the links Google produces for each keyword, based on the premise that search results should reflect accuracy and audience size, as Google claims. We started with each outlet’s popularity on social media and, using data from Meltwater, a media-tracking firm, how often they covered each topic. We also used accuracy ratings from fact-checking websites, tallies of Pulitzer prizes and results from a poll by YouGov about Americans’ trust in 37 sources.​
The result, according to the Economist, was that liberal and left-wing sites do appear more than conservative ones. But the left side of the news spectrum didn’t appear disproportionately more than conservatives: For example, the predictive model estimated the liberal New York Times would get 9.2 percent of Google news results, while it actually got 7.7 percent. Meanwhile, Fox News “beat its modest expectations” at 3.2 percent vs a prediction of 2.6 percent.

Far-right sites did not rank highly. But that was mostly because they had “bad trust scores,” the Economist wrote. (Shocker!) The same phenomenon impacted a left-wing site, the Daily Kos.
https://gizmodo.com/report-google-news-does-not-have-an-anti-conservative-1835362673

The right has become more of a rumor mill than anything else. People like Trump create talking points backed by absolutely no evidence EVEN WHEN THE PRESIDENT IS IN A POSITION OF ABLE TO SHARE EVIDENCE (IF ANY EXISTED).
Too many on the right start mindlessly repeating it cause they love to think of themselves and profess themselves as victimized and oppressed (when they aren't).
Research on the issue proves the claim wrong.

In many ways, it's a rather disgusting repetition of tactics that right-wingers claim they are disgusted by...
Sometimes you have some black people who are legitimately busted in illegal activity and they proclaim it is all about racism. Trying to cover up the wrong-doing by baseless counter-accusations.
We also have some right-wing "sources" who get legitimately busted in lying and they proclaim it's all about censoring the right. Trying to cover up the wrong-doing by baseless counter-accusations.
 
Apr 2013
38,309
26,302
La La Land North
#2
It's like all those reports about a year ago that claimed there was proof that media was anti-Trump. The proof was that there were more articles criticising Trump than praising him.

They chose not to consider the fact that he does way more dumb and crooked things than good and smart things.
 
Dec 2013
33,811
19,360
Beware of watermelons
#3
Gizmodo Media Group

Gizmodo Media Group is an online mediacompany and blog network formerly operated by Univision Communications in its Fusion Media Group division. The company was created from assets acquired from Gawker Media during its bankruptcy in 2016.[1] In April 2019, Gizmodo and The Onion were sold to private equity firm Great Hill Partners, which plans to combine them into a new company named G/O Media.[2]





Next



After Hulk Hogan bankrupted Gawker, most of their properties were scooped up by Univision. Univision has now been forced to accept a huge impairment charge as the former Gawker properties continue to lose tens of millions:

The company reported that the assets lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018.
Univision is acknowledging the financial weakness of the Gizmodo Media Group digital media assets the company has purchased over the last few years, including the former Gawker Media Group publications it picked up in the summer of 2016.
“In 2018, we recognized a non-cash impairment charge on our English-language digital assets,” a company spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday.
Earlier in the day, the company reported that its English-language digital businesses, which includes The Onion, lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018, compared to just $3 million in the same quarter a year earlier. But the losses were even greater in the third quarter of 2018, with the company reporting a loss of $96.1 million for the U.S. digital brands.
Univision is still looking for a buyer for the Gizmodo Media Group properties, which the company still believes to be strong.​






Huh?
 
Nov 2005
8,958
3,437
California
#4
Gizmodo Media Group
Read in another language
Gizmodo Media Group is an online mediacompany and blog network formerly operated by Univision Communications in its Fusion Media Group division. The company was created from assets acquired from Gawker Media during its bankruptcy in 2016.[1] In April 2019, Gizmodo and The Onion were sold to private equity firm Great Hill Partners, which plans to combine them into a new company named G/O Media.[2]
Next
After Hulk Hogan bankrupted Gawker, most of their properties were scooped up by Univision. Univision has now been forced to accept a huge impairment charge as the former Gawker properties continue to lose tens of millions:
The company reported that the assets lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018.Univision is acknowledging the financial weakness of the Gizmodo Media Group digital media assets the company has purchased over the last few years, including the former Gawker Media Group publications it picked up in the summer of 2016.“In 2018, we recognized a non-cash impairment charge on our English-language digital assets,” a company spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday.Earlier in the day, the company reported that its English-language digital businesses, which includes The Onion, lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018, compared to just $3 million in the same quarter a year earlier. But the losses were even greater in the third quarter of 2018, with the company reporting a loss of $96.1 million for the U.S. digital brands.Univision is still looking for a buyer for the Gizmodo Media Group properties, which the company still believes to be strong.
Univision’s Gizmodo Media Group is Losing Millions | Sparta Report
Huh?
That's nice. What does that have to do w/ the topic of the thread?
It amuses me how people like Sabcat can't pause long enough to recognize when a site like Gizmodo is simply repeating the findings of a study THEY DID NOT PERFORM.
But I guess the good ol' "shoot the messenger" approach works for some who can't think that far into the issue, eh...
 
May 2019
232
117
California
#5
Gizmodo Media Group

Gizmodo Media Group is an online mediacompany and blog network formerly operated by Univision Communications in its Fusion Media Group division. The company was created from assets acquired from Gawker Media during its bankruptcy in 2016.[1] In April 2019, Gizmodo and The Onion were sold to private equity firm Great Hill Partners, which plans to combine them into a new company named G/O Media.[2]





Next



After Hulk Hogan bankrupted Gawker, most of their properties were scooped up by Univision. Univision has now been forced to accept a huge impairment charge as the former Gawker properties continue to lose tens of millions:

The company reported that the assets lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018.​
Univision is acknowledging the financial weakness of the Gizmodo Media Group digital media assets the company has purchased over the last few years, including the former Gawker Media Group publications it picked up in the summer of 2016.​
“In 2018, we recognized a non-cash impairment charge on our English-language digital assets,” a company spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday.​
Earlier in the day, the company reported that its English-language digital businesses, which includes The Onion, lost $32.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018, compared to just $3 million in the same quarter a year earlier. But the losses were even greater in the third quarter of 2018, with the company reporting a loss of $96.1 million for the U.S. digital brands.​
Univision is still looking for a buyer for the Gizmodo Media Group properties, which the company still believes to be strong.​






Huh?
I think if you layed off all that meth you wouldn't have such a relevancy problem, Cindy.
 
Likes: Lyzza
Dec 2016
5,565
2,825
Canada
#7
[raises hand]

Did you find this article using google?

:nerd:
No doubt!
First page of a google search for these terms will cough up bullshit clickbait sites like gizmodo, which only observe identity politics issues, and naturally have no appreciation for how their results may be skewed because of the simple fact that there are billionaire conservative interests, a lot of billionaire liberal interests, but NO billionaire socialist-especially marxist interests to draw from!

If you go to the source and take a look at the fine print, their example of the far left is Daily Kos for christs sakes! Kos...the group blog founded by self-admitted CIA media asset - Markos Moulitsos is the LEFT in upper 10% polite liberal circles!

The real story is that being anti-war (same for both libertarians and socialists) means immediately being flagged by Google's glorious algorithms and pushed down in search engine results off of page one at least...as far as 99% of people ever search on a topic of any kind. Socialst/anti-capitalist talk similarly gets pushed down, and this was noticed long before it reached scandalous proportions a couple of years back when some liberal/but antiwar sites like Truthdig, OpEd News, Consortium News Truthout and especially the British Trotskyite Marxist - World Socialist Website started seeing a huge decline in clicks and view numbers before the official censorship announcements by Zuckerberg and Google's directors about how they were combating "fake" news.

So, that's how the permitted polite society discussions want to frame the narrative for us, and even at that, I still have this quote from ranking Democrat- Gerald Nadler from a Congressional hearing last year when Republicans started carping that their conservative media friends were being deliberately censored by Silicon Valley billionaire libs:
“Even if Google were deliberately discriminating against conservative viewpoints, just as Fox News and Sinclair broadcasting and conservative talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh discriminate against liberal points of view, that would be its right as a private company to do so, and not to be questioned by government.”​
And that's coming from a guy who's supposed to represent the "LEFT" side of the aisle in the American political duopoly! Personally, I use the DuckDuckGo search engine fwiw, but Google and Facebook control this playpen, making it essential for anyone who really wants to understand what's going on in this world, to educate themselves instead of just clicking on whatever crap their Facebook newsfeed throws their way, and scrutinize EVERY source! Even ones you feel are trusted, may tell the truth on most issues BUT throw you a curveball once in awhile, indicating that like the radical left media of the 60's that were found to have been bought off by the CIA through the Mockingbird Project, they are almost certainly doing the same today, when seemingly radical left organizations like DemocracyNow all of a sudden regurgitate State Dept-like reports on the failed regime change that's still ongoing in Syria. So, a cross-comparison of several sites is essential to actually get anywhere near the truth on what's going on in the rest of the world, and even at home.
 
Likes: Sabcat
Mar 2013
10,020
10,805
Middle Tennessee
#8
It's not surprising that the neo-right is complaining about the media. They've gotten in bed with the hard core Christians and they have of course brought their persecution complex with them.

25% of the population identifies as very religious. Evangelical Christians, devout Catholics, orthodox Jews etc
Another 25% of the population falls in the "somewhat" to "moderately" religious category.
On top of that an additional 30% of the population says while they aren't religious, they believe in God, Jesus, heaven, hell and the bible.

That's 80% of the population and that's today's numbers. As a young kid, I remember the civil rights movement still in full swing, but women's lib/equal rights, were just beginning to be talked about. Discussions of gay rights were still decades away.

Yet, even then I clearly remember the preachers talking about the persecutions of Christians. Even in a country where 80% of the population could be rightly classified as Christian, they were talking about how THEY were the persecuted. I find this whole we are the majority yet we are the persecuted mind set to be rather mind boggling.

But it stands to reason, when you have tens of millions of people already believing they are under attack, it's not a hard stretch to sell the belief that their political as well as their religious ideology is being attacked and censored by those evil leftists that own ALL of the social media !!!

They simply brought their persecution complex with them into the political and media world.
 
Dec 2013
33,811
19,360
Beware of watermelons
#9
Huh ok




Responding to a question about the “manipulation of information” on the Internet during an appearance at the Halifax International Security Forum, Schmidt announced that Google is working on algorithms that will “de-rank” Russian-based news websites RT and Sputnik from its Google News services, effectively blocking users’ access to either site.

Schmidt’s remarks at the gathering of military and national security officials confirm the World Socialist Web Site’s charges that Google has been deliberately altering its search algorithms and taking other steps to prevent people from accessing certain information and specific websites through its search engines. The WSWS has itself been a principal target of these efforts.

The statements expose as lies the company’s previous claim that changes to its search engine were aimed at “improving search results” and that these changes were politically unbiased.


Google admits censorship
 
Likes: right to left
Nov 2005
8,958
3,437
California
#10
Huh ok
Responding to a question about the “manipulation of information” on the Internet during an appearance at the Halifax International Security Forum, Schmidt announced that Google is working on algorithms that will “de-rank” Russian-based news websites RT and Sputnik from its Google News services, effectively blocking users’ access to either site.
Schmidt’s remarks at the gathering of military and national security officials confirm the World Socialist Web Site’s charges that Google has been deliberately altering its search algorithms and taking other steps to prevent people from accessing certain information and specific websites through its search engines. The WSWS has itself been a principal target of these efforts.
The statements expose as lies the company’s previous claim that changes to its search engine were aimed at “improving search results” and that these changes were politically unbiased.
Google admits censorship
"Huh ok". Wow. How incredibly insightful for you Sabcat...
#sarcasm


Let's see...
Google News Does Not Have an Anti-Conservative Bias So Much as a Pro-Credible Source One
The reality is that what you just pointed out IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT with what is being pointed out.

Sputnik?
  • Overall, we rate Sputnik Questionable based on frequent promotion of conspiracies and pro-Russian propaganda, as well as use of poor sources and numerous failed fact checks.

Sputnik News - Media Bias/Fact Check

RT?
  • Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, promotion of conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks and a lack of author transparency.

RT News (RT.Com) - Media Bias/Fact Check