Dear Readers: I am slowly getting into the swing of things, after eating tons of great food for Thanksgiving. I wanted to give you a heads-up that I am giving up “Google” for the New Year. I am switching to bing.com. In part, it is because bing.com had a tasteful graphic commemorating Sept. 11th and Goggle had….nothing.
This is the same Goggle that went “dark” during some elite environmental demonstration. And the Anchoress notes, Goggle is trying to go “dark” about Climategate. She links to this piece by James Delingpole:
What is going on at Google? I only ask because last night when I typed “Global Warming” into Google News the top item was Christopher Booker’s superb analysis of the Climategate scandal.
It’s still the most-read article of the Telegraph’s entire online operation – 430 comments and counting – yet mysteriously when you try the same search now it doesn’t even feature. Instead, the top-featured item is a blogger pushing Al Gore’s AGW agenda. Perhaps there’s nothing sinister in this. Perhaps some Google-savvy reader can enlighten me…..
UPDATE: Richard North has some interesting thoughts on this. He too suspects some sort of skullduggery.
Speaking of Bing, and in keeping with the season, here is a little something by the original “Bing” — joined by one of my favorite entertainers:
I have used bing.com for a couple of months, and I really enjoy it. It has more tailored searches, more in keeping with my quests. Bing.com is also less cluttered — visually and ideologically.
I really don’t get this practice. We citizen activists have learned how to get around the legacy media since we began our protests this February. Do the proprietors of Google think so little of our intelligence, technical savvy, and passion that we wouldn’t figure out this “skullduggary”?
PS. As a history lover, I am sad to say that I have also been forced to give up wikipedia. Here are some reasons why:
Bias, sabotage haunt Wikipedia’s free world
Not Sharp, Drew: USA Today/Freep Sportswriter Used Fake Wikipedia Quotes to Savage Limbaugh
Wikipedia locks smears of Mark Levin into place in their online ‘encyclopedia’
Here is a helpful marketing hint from the Goddess of Flaming Capitalism : If you only cater to 20% of the population, it is likely you will not earn money from the other 80% (or at least the newly active 40%).
Google maintains that search results are driven exclusively by an objective computer algorithm.
However, in a fit of honesty, last year they admitted that their staff picks the winners and losers. This became apparent to me when I did an image search for the satircal (and popular) “Obama-Obey” during the presidential campaign and had to sift through 8+ pages of other stuff before finally landing on it.
I blogged some on Google’s curious search results here:
http://beerswithdemo.blogspot.com/2009/11/google-vs-google.html
I haven’t paid any attention to Bing…but will definitely check it out! It is the Capitalist thing to do
Wikipedia is one of the downfalls of the free internet…sad really.
Great work as always girlfriend!
Both Bing and Google do this, the difference is that Google as an Environmental Intiatives Director that is a religious believer in AGW.
“Google as” should have been “Google Has”
For Firefox users, here is a very interesting add on
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/12661
You can directly compare results from both engines and use the dual search/compare right from your search bar in Firefox