Is Google’s search-engine now appallingly corrupt?

Eric Zuesse

Here is the evidence I’ve come across which indicates to me that the Google search-engine is now appallingly corrupt, and for which reason I am seeking (and hope to see in reader-comments at sites that publish this article) an alternative explanation for what presently appear to me to be systematic efforts by Google to hide crucial information and understanding from the public — to hide it so that the public can be manipulated to tolerate increasing control, by billionaires, of their governments (the diminution of democracy):

THE BACKGROUND

I am an independent free-lance U.S. investigative journalist who has lost respect for both of America’s political parties. I published previously and was recently searching for on the Web, two articles laying out a case, arguing that when James Comey announced, on 5 July 2016, that the FBI would not bring to a grand jury and seek indictments of Hillary Clinton, for her violating six specific U.S. criminal laws (which top FBI had actually prohibited from even being investigated), he was defending his decision on the basis of severe deceptions of the public. The appropriate indictments for the FBI to have sought, I argued, did not entail any need for the FBI to be able to prove criminal intent on her part (such as did the issues that Comey was focusing on in his announcement). The indictments would instead be strictly for her privatization of her State Department emails, since that privatization was even admitted to by Clinton and it clearly violated those six federal criminal laws (with total maximum sentences of 72 years in prison). Comey was, at that time, unwarrantedly and secretly protecting Hillary Clinton, from any possibility of being prosecuted for her clearest criminal-law violations — the easiest-to-win charges against her — in the entire emails matter. Those two articles, setting this case out, against both Clinton and Comey, were:

“In Clinton Case, Obama Administration Nullifies 6 Criminal Laws”

“Why Hillary Clinton’s Email Case Is Still Not Closed” 

GOOGLE’S NEWS-SUPPRESSION

On 10 June 2017, I did a Google search for those two articles, by googling in one search, the seven words shown on the following line:

zuesse washingtonsblog comey emails six laws Hillary

Nothing appeared on the first page of the Google search-results that would bring me directly to either article. I was stunned. I had never encoutered the likes of this before.

I then did a duckduckgo.com search of the same seven-word string, and the first page of search-results at duckduckgo.com brought me to multiple web-pages for each of those two articles, including both of the specific web-pages that I’ve linked-to just above here.

HOW GOOGLE HAS CHANGED

I happen to know from prior experience that what has changed is the Google search-engine — it’s gotten appallingly worse; duckduckgo.com has not gotten any better, so far as I’ve been able to determine; but, Google has gotten a lot worse.

Until recently, this type of problem — the exclusion from Google of web-pages that expose things which the people who control the U.S. government want the public not to know or certainly not to understand — simply did not occur. In fact, until recently, I considered google to be the best search-engine, though no search-engine is good. Suddenly, google seems to have become the worst of a mediocre-at-best lot. (Since, sadly, no existing search-engine is good.) How can any researcher trust a search-engine that censors-out well-documented but ‘unpleasant’ (to the powers-that-be) facts?

GOOGLE’S PRIOR ROTTENNESS

I have previously indicated that Google (now calling itself by a conglomerate name, “Alphabet Inc.”) has hired contractors to threaten independent news websites that publish articles that Google will treat as being ‘fake news’, so as to make the owners of those sites fear loss of their advertising income-stream from Google if the site does not promptly remove specific articles that those contractors request them to remove. I had first gotten indication of this fact when one of the sites that publishes some of my artcles became threatened about one of my articles. (You’ll see my article about that incident, at several sites on the first page of the search-results for the string — but without quotation-marks — “zuesse google rinf” at https://duckduckgo.com/?q=zuesse+google+rinf&t=hz&ia=web (and click there onto the articles “Google Is Now Threatening My Publishers”), but not at https://www.google.com/search?q=zuesse+google+rinf — where “rinf” itself is rejected as being in the first page of a search — and so this is yet another example of the phenomenon I’m discussing here: Google-Alphabet trying to block the public from finding certain types of truthful information.)

Only later did I come to realize that Google does not itself issue these threats but instead employs contractors to do it for them so as to protect itself from the guilt.

THE POSSIBILITY OF A LESS-MALIGN INTERPRETATION

Again: I am open to innocent explanations of this phenomenon. I hope to see such innocent explanations at sites which will be publishing this article, in reader-comments; and, as usual, I shall be submitting this article, without charge of any sort, to virtually all English-language newsmedia that cover international affairs; so, perhaps there will be some thoughtful reader-comments about this significant matter, at a number of such sites; and, I shall be interested in the views that others have regarding it. This possible censorship of Web-search results could warp not only my findings, but the findings of everyone who uses google.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • DiveshopinGoa

    Learned this years ago when trying to find out if the internet was finding my website. At first any words close would bring my website up first on the list. As time went by google sent notices that I could get into my gmail account faster if google was my default search engine which it was not. When checking search engines for my site I noticed mine slipping down the google page. Putting in key words from my site and the state I was looking in I would find half page of people doing the same but in other states. I gave up on google search when I slipped below the fold.

    Learned about google hiding HRC medical search from this site Washington’s Blog.

    The problem is it is really hard to find out what a search engine hides unless your search is a collection of engines and even then who knows.

    • Tiffanylroberts


      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj274d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !mj274d:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash274MarketCodePay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj274d..,.

      • cettel

        Tiffany L. Roberts, will you please drop dead fast and thus quickly go to hell as the spammer that you are? How trashy can you be?

      • HalleG

        Doing what? Harassing independent journalists or suppressing news?

  • K. Chris C.

    There is a reason Orwell selected “Emmanuel Goldstein” as the name for the defector from “Big Brother.”

    An American citizen, not US subject.

  • gamesjon

    Of course any speculation on this is going to be just that, speculation. Google doesn’t release the algorithms or anything else that it uses in how it prioritizes search results. I am a computer network administrator & I am pretty good with general tech-related things. In this specific instance & actually in the previous RINF instance I don’t think there was any sort of chicanery in the results, personally. I think it would be fair to say that to some degree (and personally I believe a rather large degree,) of the search results priorities are determined by site traffic numbers & also specifically the traffic numbers of a particular web page on a site.

    I think the issue with the first search results would be your inclusion of “comey” & “emails”. Taking those 2 out when I replicated your search actually brings up as first result this article & then the, “Hillary Clinton’s Email Operation Violated At Least Six Criminal Laws” second & “In Clinton Case, Obama Administration Nullifies 6 criminal Laws” fourth, actually the first 6 results are all from washingtonsblog. The original search terms you used brought results that included only 2 washingtonsblog pages, neither of them this article.

    The second article link you mention “Why Hillary Clinton’s Email Case Is Still Not Closed” links me to a zerohedge article. If I type in the terms “zuesse zerohedge clinton email” the results list that article as the first result & the 6 criminal laws article second (this time at zerohedge.) I was also able to get this article as the second result with the Obama administration nullifies 6 laws article as the first simply by changing the “washingtonsblog” part of the search with “zerohedge” making the search “zuesse zerohedge comey emails six laws Hillary”.

    On the prior instance involving RINF. Google automatically searches for what it believes the correct word is if it believes there was a spelling mistake & it can identify what word it things it should have been (they are actually even pretty decent at being able to recognize the correct words if your fingers are offset left or right by one & so all the letters are 1 key to the left or right of the actual word you meant, so long as those keys don’t by chance happen to also spell a real word.) Since “RINF” is only 1 letter off from spelling “ring” Google automatically searched for “zuueusse google ring” when I replicated your search. You can tell when this happens as above the first result you should see “Showing results for zuesse google ring” message along with a smaller print “Search instead for zuesse google rinf” underneath it. Now if you click on that smaller print link to actually do the search for the terms you tried you still don’t get the article you are referencing (it is “Google’s Censorship Of Independent News – RINF Becomes Latest Victim” right?,) but you do get 3 links to the RINF website on the first page, the first result is actually a washingtonsblog post titled, “Google Is No Threatening My Publishers – Washington’s Blog” where you are talking about the threat to RINF, 3 results are of web pages that are mentioning & talking about your article, 1 result is actually to the duckduckgo search like you linked to in this article, & the final first page result is to a forum post talking about this article.

    Now, if you add the word “censorship” into your search string to make it “zuesse google censorship rinf” the article, “Google’s Censorship of Independent News – RINF Becomes Latest Victim” is actually the third result, the second result is an off-guardian page that is actually about your article, & the first result is the same above-mentioned washingtonsblog article, “Google Is Now Threatening My Publishers – Washington’s Blog” & all the rest are pages that are discussing or re-printing your article on their sites (including 1 in German.) So here I believe the problem was likely not knowing/noticing that google automatically searched for “zuesse google ring” instead of “zuesse google rinf” which it does not appear that duckduckgo does this sort of thing. Which to be fair while something that definitely can cause some annoyance by doing this can also be helpful at times so this sort of thing seems more of a design decision by search providers as to what they think the user’s would prefer most & seeing how google is by far the most popular search engine & most people are some combination of not great speller’s & typers for Google user’s it probably is better.

    One thing that might be useful in the future (other than tip that Google automatically searches for what it believes to be the correct word if it thinks there is a misspelling,) is that on google if you want to find something on a particular website at the end of your search string you can add a
    “{space} site:{site name}” without the “www.” portion of the site name to only return results from that web site. So doing this would look something like “zuesse emails six laws Hillary site:washingtons.com”. This will not only narrow the search results to make it more likely to find what you are looking for if you know it is on a particular web site, but like I said every result on every page will actually be from that web site (while I have not every personally took the time to verify this fact I did just do it with the string I mentioned & every result up through page 20 was from washingtonsblog.)

    Hopefully this helps a bit & I will pay particular attention to my emails for the next week or so in case you reply to this & have any other examples or any questions/comments about what I wrote so I can respond in a timely manner. It isn’t that I would put it past Google to do something like this, it is just in these particular instances I do not believe that was the problem.

    • cettel

      Thanks, for those benign interpretations. I had noticed that on “zuesse google rinf” the first page was for “ring” instead. However, if Google’s management have rinf on a list of sites to suppress, then a convenient way to find an excuse to do it would be to treat “rinf” as simply a misspelling of “ring” and they’ve always done that, and they could likewise treat, for example, “washingtonsblog” as a misspelling of something else, but in any case the correct way for an honest search-engine to handle any such matter would be to deliver whatever the actual searched string or phrase was, but to place above the search-result on page one: “Were you intending instead to search for” and then present the perhaps-corrected spelling. This way, if it actually was a misspelling, then that would be a random error on the searcher’s part, not a systematic and possibly search-result-tampering on the search-engine’s part. That would be the intelligent honest way to handle it. Consequently: on that matter, Google’s management are either unintelligent or else dishonest.

      Other, and clearer, examples of sheer dishonesty on the part of Google’s management, are provided, referenced and linked-to, in my article here. For example: Why did Google (or, probably, a paid contractor of Google) threaten the owner of rinf, regarding an article of mine? Somebody should sue Google (Alphabet Inc.) demanding to know the specific contractual criteria that Google provides as guidance to its contractors to determine which specific articles, and which specific sites, are to be booted off the front page of any search-result. The least malign interpretation I can imagine here is that Google-Alphabet is too stupid to even recognize that they’ve, at the very least, now gotten themselves onto the slippery slope into censorship and participation in dictatorship, by their pretense to be trying to ‘police’ the Web to eliminate ‘falsehoods’. Are they really that stupid? I doubt it.

      • gamesjon

        Like I said, the spelling thing is more of a design choice. Washingtonsblog doesn’t get automatically corrected because what word would be similar to it? I don’t particularly like that either as I type pretty well so what I type in is almost always exactly what I wanted to search for. I did also so that while I didn’t think this was the situation in this instance it wasn’t something I would put past Google in general. As for the threats on advertising revenue I didn’t address it because there isn’t really anything I can say to defend it & don’t agree with it.

        I guess I didn’t say this in my post & probably should have. I definitely wasn’t trying to say Google wasn’t censoring things, or trying to, in general as I know their news page is certainly set up to not show particular things. I was merely trying to show that it was likely the search terms that caused the issues discussed about in these search attempts, mostly judged by the extremely simple ways they were fixed.

  • USA_objector

    Hey, Eric – agree completely. Google has hopelessly “dumbed down” its search capabilities repeatedly over the last few years. Not just politically sensitive info and websites, but it also has dumbed down the scientific or knowledge-based searches. I suppose TPTB have weaponized Google since most of its competitors have been shut down (Netscape, anyone?) and it has a near-monopoly gateway to the information age.

  • Jill

    Yes, I have noticed that it has become increasingly difficult to find many things, including scientific research. I’ve done the same experiment and gone to duckduckgo and had luck finding things right away or much more quickly.

  • Brabantian

    The corruption of Google is a topic in the bombshell memo of a former US Dept of Justice employee who is in dialogue with Trump’s personal lawyers & the new US Attorney General Jeff Sessions

    The memo showed how Comey is hip-deep in horrific scandals of his own, and apparently led both to Comey dropping the ‘obstruction of justice’ claims against Trump – and Comey’s delay in testimony whilst Comey talked to his own lawyers.

    Plus, the memo was background for the remarkable turn-about on Julian Assange, with the US gov’t asking Sweden to drop the ‘rape charge’ enquiry. The memo informed Donald Trump & US Justice chief Jeff Sessions what they hadn’t known – that Julian Assange & Edward Snowden are frauds created by the CIA in the Obama years.

    Snowden especially had been bashing Trump in concert with his anti-Trump CIA handler … and after the bombshell memo informing Trump & Sessions of this USA intel employee fraud on Trump himself … CIA director Mike Pompeo was told to put a leash on those fakers & to begin winding down the Assange & Snowden frauds. Hence the dropping of the Assange charges by Sweden at USA request.

    ‘DOJ Dossier Memo – James Comey hid crimes of law firms defrauding client millions’, with the help of Google’s General Counsel
    https://pastebin.com/CE1qV0Bm

    Trump’s team & Sessions learned the accuracy of the following, and began to act upon it in their instructions to the CIA:
    ‘Intel Agency Report: Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald are CIA frauds’
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/09/21/russia-govt-report-snowden-greenwald-are-cia-frauds/

    And we now of course have seen Greenwald’s ‘Intercept’ outfit do a monstrous sell-out leading to the arrest of leaker – whistle-blower Reality Leigh Winner … not the first dissident we know has been destroyed by Greenwald & co., given that Greenwald just recently had betrayed UK hacker Lauri Love to being extradited to the US … after Snowden & Greenwald & Assange cynically used the Lauri Love case for their own benefit … but then joined Google Inc in helping hide the legal files that would have blocked Lauri’s extradtion

    Hacker Lauri Love sold out to USA by lawyers Assange Snowden Greenwald
    http://pastebin.com/AdwKwPYC

    So, immediately after the above DOJ veteran’s memo detailing a history of major scandal involving James Comey – and touching on the Assange-Snowden frauds, and the corruption of Google – we saw

    (1) James Comey backed off & reversed his story, testifying that there was ‘no obstruction of justice’ by Trump
    (2) US Senator John McCain, the deepest of deep staters, announced that it was absurd to talk of ‘impeachment’ of Trump
    (3) Suddenly, the Swedish government – long said to be under US intel influence – ‘dropped’ the ‘rape investigation’ of Julian Assange, cancelling everything, no extradition request, Assange is ‘free to leave the London Ecuador Embassy’ where Assange has claimed to be ‘living’ … tho apparently Assange said to be only ‘at the Embassy’ for photos, moved in & out by UK intel when the ‘police watch’ by London coppers advise it is a good time.

    Also related and cited in some of the above links, is the EU police file on Google running the Wikipedia fraud, written by one of the EU Commission’s key informants in their anti-trust case against Google Inc / Alphabet
    http://homment.com/FB3PjBQ2DF

    • Douteux55

      I’m sorry but anyone who proposes this Reality Winner as a bona fide person loses a lot of credibility with me, at least insinuate that that isn’t his/her name. The Trump treason show is exactly that. Google is evil and has been for some time.

  • TBrites

    Simple solution… USE OTHER WWW SEARCH ENGINES!

  • Malakie

    Anyone that is computer savvy and has common sense can clearly see the changes in Google. There is NO doubt, they have been altering searches, skewing results and mis-directing people from what they are actually looking for.

    Google is the ‘best’ search engine mathematically and speed wise, no doubt on that. BUT it is now part of the elite power cabal and dark state we see growing on a daily basis.

    I use the tools now knowing full well that I have to double check everything. I do not rely on any internet information as being factual. I have changed to where I now just consider the information and add that to my decision making process.

  • rayzie

    This has been going on with google for a while now. I don’t use google for research.

  • Ghostly

    Ditch Google and start using Startpage.com! A great alternative because you’ll get the same results with complete privacy protection. Sometimes the results are even better because the anonymity breaks you out of your filter bubble. Other private search engines like Duckduckgo and Qwant are also great, check them out.

  • ICFubar

    In short the Clintons , and others, have done yeoman service for the western plutocracy and all of its agencies of power and control, including Google, will and have circled the wagons to protect their own. There will be no penetration of this protective circle that will amount to anything of a substantive measure like even a grand jury let alone criminal proceedings in a trial. The web is secure and strong despite any posting on the internet. Terror attacks it seems only come from the one direction as the fascist invasion attempted in the 1940s comes on again on its coat tails in all manner of subtleties and incrementalisms. As Churchill once opined ‘You can always take one with you.”

  • potty

    I just tried the same search and this article came up first, so maybe Google is watching and let it go through this time.

  • Zartan

    “Anything and Everything” you type into the search engine, and pages viewed, goes directly to the NSA. Everyone is monitored. The Government built that site in Nevada to Store all the data. When one of the peasants becomes of interest they simply “google” and get the entire bill of goods.

    Americans should have burned that place to the ground, but of course, Americans are a lame and beaten creature to be ruled and spat upon!

    Never Use the Same IP. Never USE the Same Location. Never Write in the Same Style. Always use indiscriminate typos! All this will help if you ever becomme a subject of interest.

  • Josue S. Lopez

    Odd. You think they’d suppress blogs like this too, if you’re claims are true. Yet, I can find your blog. Odd indeed.