Being Googled

[Jekl]

Over the past year I have been doing research on a particurly sensitive subject using Google as my main search avenue.
I have noticed when I research the same subject now on Google that most of the information is not showing although I can find it using other search engines.

Do you think that due to Googles popularity, they are filtering stuff they dont want us to see? Kind of like the media does.

Are we being Googled.

Anyway, I have lost my trust in them. Has anybody else noticed this?

[SoCalDem]

1. Yes..

They have "mainstreamed".. and when I search with IE I get different results than when I use AOL.. Filters, maybe:)

[jackstraw45]

2. Can you recommend

which engine to use?

Man, Google used to be the best....

[SoCalDem]

3. sometimes altavista has more stufff

but it's not as "user-friendly".. Google spoiled us, and then tricked us :(

[Jekl]

7. Search Engine

One of my old time favorites that was around way before google is
webcrawler.com It was the top notch then and it appears to be so now.

There are several search engines out there though. Just do a search (not on google).

Then do some comparisons.

[Az]

4. Not filters

Weighting. Search engines can make money weighting various topics. Interested parties pay to have their keywords preferenced. Searches will be overwhelmed with those returns.

[Jekl]

8. Money

Yes when money gets involved the tables seem to start turning.

Such as,, Ill pay you to not list these particular articles or sites
that we dont want people to see.

[Robb]

5. Er,

If a site is not (a) updated or (b) linked to by a growing number of pages, after a while Google will stop listing it.

Most other search engines use a similar criteria to determine if a page will actually be worthwhile to a searcher; Google just seems to "drop" pages first, because it "picks them up" first as well (has one of the quickest updates).

[indigo32]

32. Yes

I understand that is is looking at both those criteria,
AND
be aware that it is the underlying technology behind a number of other search areas (Yahoo for example).

Sue

[DUreader]

6. Yes and you can see how many results google is withholding

Take for example our own Bev Harris

Google her screenname: bevharris

Go to the last page here:

http://www.google.com/search?q=bevharris&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=70&sa=N&filter=0

Results 71 - 75 of about 82

Google is censoring 7 results on that search


Unfortunately this can become difficult to calculate when thousands of

hits are returned for your search terms.

[Jekl]

9. More Googles

I think if you are shopping online or doing something where retail is involved, Google is very good. But when it comes to wanting to do some heavy researh on a subject, you dont what things being dropped out of the engine thus I find others to do better job now.

[DUreader]

12. Even more Interesting, I just went back and turned off filtering

After that the same page displays 71-74 out of 81

so still 7 being censored and 1 not even returned under the less

strict filtering.


Hmm...

[charlie]

16. That's not censoring

Google always returns just the top one or two matching pages from a site. It keeps you from having to scroll through multiple screens of results from a single domain, which was a common occurence on older search engines -- it wasn't unusual to have the first score of pages be nothing but links to a handful of sites. To drill down, click Search Within Results, and from those, choose More Results From... Or just jump ahead to the last page and opt to rerun the search with omitted results.

[DUreader]

30. No, I deliberately picked a search with fewer results

Google tells you that it is not displaying some results and

gives you the option to display the omitted reasults.

You do that and then jump to the last page.

The total # of hits is greater than the displayed hits.

[charlie]

31. Ohhh, I see what you mean

I didn't follow your link, my bad. I'm sorry.

Still, I don't think it's likely that Google's censoring stuff. For one thing, it would be foolish to list a total that includes the count of pages they're trying to hide. Setting the number to match the returned results exactly wouldn't be any trouble. Second, note that the total is cited as "about 82" -- it's an estimation, not an exact count.

[DUreader]

33. No it is an exact count, they do not display some stuff that is illegal

illegal but hosted outside of the country, And why not block whatever they are paid to?

Unfortunately they also no longer return the hits on the search

"how google censors" Another article down the memory hole that taught

me how to look for these missing pages

[charlie]

34. Illegal?

Do you have an example of something Google would consider illegal?

[foo_bar]

10. who's "they"?

Filtering Google for every touchy subject would be a chore comparable to the Great Pyramids. China has hundreds of bureaucrats assigned to the task but they'll never filter information faster than it appears. But it never stops people from trying to find the set-of-all-sets.

[grammysherry]

11. I avoid google..go to www.dogpile.com

this is the first search engine I use. Hope it helps.

[papau]

13. Google has accepted money that kills Reagan/Rape and other searches

by making the search words a "low result"/censored result

even going 100 pages into a google search you will find items that you obtained in years past, and which you know are out there, and which are right on for the key words, missing.

Try Reagan Rape and see if Kitty's book comes up, or the People Mag 1992 Article, or the two dozen comments on those items, or the Reagan statutory rape of the underage volunteer in the 70's - the one who was once quoted as saying he was so "gentle".

Indeed editorials I wrote and which are still on the web on this topic no longer come up.

I guess money talks.

But just as the media is not right wing controlled - they just act like they are, Google's "not often linked to or hit" criteria just seems to turn off stuff that offends the GOP, while leaving stuff that offends Dems. I guess GOP types read and re-read their "good stuff" a lot more than Dems. No problem with Google - innocent consequence of a procedure - no harm if no intent. And that could even be sort of true!!! :-)

[rman]

14. yes:

indymedia got removed as a source for googlenews after a few thousand emails requesting such. never mind all those millions who didn't seem to have a problem with that source.

a few days back the "404 - no WMDs found" parody page was removed because it caused confusion for some folks.

if google keeps up giving in to such requests so easily, it will soon render itself useless.

maybe we can get the corporate media removed from googlenews if enough DU-ers request it?

[peacetalksforall]

15. Try teoma.com

I think they are pretty good for things I need (for business).

[nolabels]

17. You guys are right, check out the results on this, any clues?

This


http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=utf-8&q=Office+of+Special+Plans&ocjp=1&o=0

1 - 10 of 6,956,707 Results for office special plans


Verses this

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-

Searched the web for Office of Special Plans.
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,820,000. Search took 0.58 seconds

There is quite a bit of difference,

Thanks for the tips guys

[charlie]

18. Yes

Beyond a small threshold, the number of results returned is of little importance. One of the original reasons for Google's ascendance over others is that it didn't toss half the internet into your lap. It's link-weighted criteria ensured that the initial returns were more likely to be meaningful, instead of just a raw dump of phrase matches. I don't know how alltheweb's algorithms stack up against Google's (probably good, they've all gotten a lot smarter chasing Google), but I wouldn't make much of a difference of returns that number in the millions -- the old Altavista used to routinely cough up scores of millions of hits, no matter how obscure or refined the search terms.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

19. google-watch.org

Here, check this out:

http://www.google-watch.org/bigbro.html

I'll tell you one good thing about google- the CACHE. While it's in fact illegal, they actually record and store every single web page.

[nolabels]

24. Very interesting site

http://www.google-watch.org/
(snip)
(snip)
Google Watch

A look at how Google's monopoly, algorithms,
and privacy policies are undermining the Web.

Why we target Google Is Google God?

PageRank: original sin Is God broken?


(snip)(snip)
Call it class warfare, if you like. Because that brings up the other major gripe that Google Watch has with Google. That's the PageRank problem -- the fact that Google's primary ranking algorithm has less to do with the quality of web pages, than it has to do with the "power popularity" of web pages. Their approach to ranking is anti-democratic, in that already-powerful pages are mathematically granted extra power to anoint other pages as powerful.

It's not that we believe Google is evil. What we believe is that Google, Inc. is at a fork in the road, and they have some big decisions to make. This Google Watch site is trying to articulate, publicize, and even dramatize the situation at Google, and encourage more scrutiny of their operations. By doing this, we hope to play a small part in maintaining the web as an information tool that is more useful for the masses, than it is for the elites. That's why we nominated Google for a Big Brother award in 2003. The nine points we raised in connection with this nomination necessarily focused on privacy issues. By the time the 2004 nominations are open, we hope that this list will be shorter rather than longer. But don't count on it.

Matt Cutts, a key Google engineer, used to work for the National Security Agency
(snip)

[charlie]

28. Hah. Google's power is worrisome

but true Evil has shown a glimpse of its face -- Redmond has unleashed the MSNbot prototype.

BTW, anybody here use Ebay? Those guys will cheerily hand your personal info to the feds for the asking, no court order necessary.

[salmonhorse]

20. META Tags ~

It is all about META Tags. Your stuff is still out there. Many engines, Google does, offer a more 'specific' search; a route around filter and into META Tags...

The reference to 'cached pgs' is a good one ~

[charlie]

21. Not to Google

Meta tag info is accorded low weight in their criteria.

[salmonhorse]

22. I never have any trouble whatsoever...

...finding anything on Google. They can be used as a quicker spell check for that matter. And no, I do not have stock in Google.

[charlie]

23. Oh I agree, Google's great

but if you're looking to improve your pagerank by rejiggering meta tags, it won't have much effect. Having the search terms within the title and body of the page is better. The best guarantor of a prominent listing though, is having a ton of links from heavily trafficked sites pointing your way.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

25. I think Alexa is bogus

in that the "People who visit this page also visit" and the 10 pages they list do not make sense. I don't know how they determine that but it doesn't seem reciprocal- for example: salon.com should be listed on several other pages (Salon is ranked 783) yet I could not find ONE single page where Salon.com was also visited.
WTF????

[Jekl]

27. Poof

Google is a good engine, I just think that they have a little too much control in what they want the general populace to find.

Thus most of the stuff I was researching has been delisted due to its sensitive subject matter. Someone wants the info shelfed and poof it is gone.

[HFishbine]

26. Try

This: http://www.dmoz.org

[chromotone]

29. "Search Engine Showdown"

http://www.searchengineshowdown.com/

Good site for general information regarding search engines (includes comparisons).

[nolabels]

35. I thought I might kick this thread, seeing how everybody Refs google

I do like that link and found this

http://searchengineshowdown.com//multi/index.shtml
(snip)
Multiple Search Engines

Multiple search engines query several other Web search engine databases in parallel. Of the many online multiple search engines, several of the best known are listed below. See also desktop client solutions further down on this page. Note the Problems with using multiple search engines before relying on their results.
(snip)

I have found quite a bit of buried information that should have had links. I am using Copernic Agent Personal from http://www.copernic.com/en/index.html it has quite a few engines that all kick on at the same time. Works good, thanks again to Elsewheredaughter

Btw they a free basic one that you can try, it even works well

[WoodrowFan]

36. Adult Content

Google recently added an "Adult Content" feature. Might that affect the searches you're running??