Do an Experiment - Obama fired Mattis

Yarddog said:

But the "experiment" that you proposed in the OP was just showing that using quotation marks while using Google would narrow your search and give better results if one is looking for a specific subject.

Click to expand...

While searching for one particular thing i.e. Obama firing Mattis produces first something not that at all but something different. Why was the use of quotation marks made a necessary thing by Google for finding the exact thing one was looking for? If one was looking for something other than the exact thing they were looking for I assume they would phrase it more vaguely . I can only assume that the algorithm creators at Google wish one to see something other than what was specifically asked for first or Google would not have muddied the waters by making quotation marks necessary. If I misspell a word as in -Obama fiers Mattis- google will ask me if I meant - Obama fires Mattis- why then if I write- Obama fires Mattis- does it not first ask me if I meant -"Obama fires Mattis" - before showing me Trump firing Mattis?

BobRyan said:

"Forget what they searched for -- just give them recent news" is one way to look at

Click to expand...

That’s rather stretching the point - in a particular direction, which might be an indication of bias?
Generally people want recent results. I know I do. Google tend to provide what customers want. They also provide tools - like adding quotes - that enable searches to bypass that particular algorithm.
It’s pretty standard for a search anywhere for anything on the internet to list articles chronologically. If you think that indicates some sort of political bias, maybe you should reflect on any bias in your own thinking.

Next month let's all see if we type in- Obama gives State of the Union Address - no quotation marks if articles about Trump giving the address comes up first. If the argument of Google's defenders here is correct that should be the result.

BobRyan said:

The search engine should prioritize "ALL words as a match" OVER "some word as a match" as do other search engines. The question is not "can you override Google's logic with exact phrase quotes" --( one would hope that everyone's software for search would always let you do that, it is the easiest rule to write).

Click to expand...

So you believe that Google should what "you" want it to be instead of how it was designed to be.

BobRyan said:

Indeed that is the lesson. Google has a bias.

Click to expand...

...or some people don't understand how search engines work.
tulc(which is the more likely possibility)

BobRyan said:

That's not my question.

Click to expand...

uhmmm...so it doesn't matter that you can get better search results if you use the search engine in the way it was designed?
tulc(is just curious)

BobRyan said:

Turns out - they are all "designed" to search in both the quoted string and the unquoted string format - what is your point?

Click to expand...

My point would be "Why don't you just use the search engine you like instead of google?"
tulc(thought that would solve the problem)

Actually, Trump didn't fire Mattis. Mattis quit in disgust.

Trump responded: "You can't quit! I'll fire you!"

Yarddog said:

So you believe that Google should what "you" want it to be instead of how it was designed to be.

Click to expand...

I believe all business ought to design their products with their customers in mind. If google designed their product to cater to liberal and left wing sensibilities because those were the customers they were trying to please then they did it just right.

grasping the after wind said:

I believe all business ought to design their products with their customers in mind. If google designed their product to cater to liberal and left wing sensibilities because those were the customers they were trying to please then they did it just right.

Click to expand...

Do you have proof that Google designed their search engine to cater to liberals? They designed the product with customers in mind.

Yarddog said:

Do you have proof that Google designed their search engine to cater to liberals? They designed the product with customers in mind.

Click to expand...

I would say they designed the algorithms through a lens of liberal and left wing sensibilities not the search engine. As I am convinced that they see liberals and left leaning people of all stripes as their customers I agree that they designed those algorithms with their customers in mind. What I am not saying is that they are absolutely doing this in a conscious manner, though they may be. They may just have an inability to understand that their POV is a POV and not simply an objective truth. When someone is shocked that their opinion might be seen as an opinion rather than an objectively arrived at fact, I can only assume they are incapable of imagining how another person could honestly disagree with them, so they assume any disagreement to be dishonest and a result of an ulterior motive or willful malevolence.

grasping the after wind said:

I would say they designed the algorithms through a lens of liberal and left wing sensibilities not the search engine. As I am convinced that they see liberals and left leaning people of all stripes as their customers I agree that they designed those algorithms with their customers in mind. What I am not saying is that they are absolutely doing this in a conscious manner, though they may be. They may just have an inability to understand that their POV is a POV and not simply an objective truth. When someone is shocked that their opinion might be seen as an opinion rather than an objectively arrived at fact, I can only assume they are incapable of imagining how another person could honestly disagree with them, so they assume any disagreement to be dishonest and a result of an ulterior motive or willful malevolence.

Click to expand...

...or the algorithms do not have a liberal bias and all the "hidden motives that they can't see" aren't actually there? So again: don't like google? why not just use a different search engine.
tulc(problem solved)

grasping the after wind said:

While searching for one particular thing i.e. Obama firing Mattis produces first something not that at all but something different.

Click to expand...

If the event happened this month you may have something but since it occurred 5+ years ago it means nothing. Google isn't intended to search for exact matches unless quotation marks are used. Without them the search is for common words which were in the search.

I like Duckduckgo as a search engine, it doesn't track your activity either. BTW the CEO had some interesting things to say about why there is at least a location bias with Google.

mark kennedy said:

I think he was fired from Central Command because of some conflicts with Obama. What was the point of this exercise?

Click to expand...

Would you say the same if Trump fired Mueller?
Did you say the same when he fired Comey?
Or is that somehow magically different, all of a sudden?

Only Democrat presidents get to fire people, apparently. If republicans do it, it's a coup and "like literally Hiter"

Would you say the same if Trump fired Mueller?

Click to expand...

Since Trump is being investigated by Mueller, it would likely result in an impeachment.

Did you say the same when he fired Comey?

Click to expand...

Since he had asked Comey to back off on the investigation of a criminal and Comey did not comply, it was a concern, yes.

Or is that somehow magically different, all of a sudden?

Click to expand...

Normally, when a politician fires a person investigating him, that's considered obstruction. Is it your claim that Mattis was investigating Obama? Tell us about that.

Only Democrat presidents get to fire people, apparently. If republicans do it, it's a coup and "like literally Hiter"

Click to expand...

You're hyperventilating. Calm yourself. Do you see the difference, now?