Our blogs about
America's Wars
War on Iraq
War on Drugs
War on Afghanistan
War on Columbia
War on Philippines
War on Venezuela

More
Matrix Masters
Blogs
World Events
US News
Science & Health
Earth News
Free Speech
News from Africa
News from Palestine
Bill of Rights Under Attack

Matrix Masters'
SUPPORTERS

Lorenzo's
Random Musings
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope

 

Google Censors Michael Moore
Like millions of other movie goers, I woke up this morning wondering how other people viewed the Michael Moore offering Fahrenheit 9/11. It wasn't long before I found myself surfing the Internet, engaged in the new American pastime of "Googling" search phrases to find the maze of alternative views that make our country so great. . . . Casually sorting through the first page search results of Google, I quickly found myself noticing a disturbing trend that made little sense: an astonishing lack of sites in top rankings that expressed positive (or even neutral) view points on the Moore film. . . . This picture being painted today by my favorite search engine Google, however, greatly conflicted with the reality I thought I had experienced. The search results I was seeing looked more like Google had somehow morphed into a special "propaganda" division, focused on bringing the best of political counter measures against all of Michael's key messages to the forefront of US readership. . . . So why were the top rankings in Google telling me that without a shadow-of-a-doubt that Michael Moore was a liar? It wasn't like one or two searches brought back semi-seeded, half intelligent opinions. It was more like someone had identified all the ways people would search for the film, then ensured the most negative and manipulative counter points were placed cleverly at the top - accompanied by many other anti-Moore sentiments strategically scattered for maximum effect. . . . Why then does Google's main index consistently return specific sites in the #1 position that are most damaging to Michael Moore's movie for literally dozens of search phrases? . . . Why does search phrase after search phrase bring back the same manipulative messages that Fahrenheit 9/11 bears absolutely no resemblance to reality? That Michael Moore is a liar and hates America? . . . "The chances of these sites ranking so consistently high goes beyond logical probability", stated one industry professional. "It counters the very nature by which Google utilizes to sort and present all the data within the Google database". . . . "Should be pretty obvious that Google feels at some executive level that they have a personal stake in a Bush reelection", reflected another search engine strategist. "It looks to me like Google is actively leveraging their enormous market share to help provide "damage control" to the Bush administration." . . . At no point did sixty million Google users ever give their permission to have their favorite search engine edit rankings in an attempt to shape view points on such an important issue. . . . In doing our part, we have started archiving examples of Google results in response to search requests related to Michael Moore. We would also love to hear your theories on why Google might have manually manipulated search results to negatively influence the general public.

[COMMENT: The link above will take you to the full story, which includes detailed information about the searches conducted along with screen shots. As an experiment I did a Google search on ("michael moore" "Fahrenheit 9/11" "good review") and the first hit was a story on Slate titled "Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is unfair and outrageous." After trying a dozen other word and phrase combinations, I was unable to come up with any combination that yielded a positive review in the first five hits. . . . I guess we've got to begin looking for a more unbiased search engine. Apparently Google has gone to the dark side. . . . . It will be interesting to see if Google's rankings of Matrix Masters pages goes down with our negative comments about their politically biased algorithm.]

posted by LoZo 3:04 PM

 

Public Broadcasting Veers to the Right
(Chellie Pingree, AlterNet, June 1, 2004)
It is deeply troubling to learn that public broadcasting has been subject to intense ideological pressure from conservatives. . . . The decision by CPB to fund two programs -- one hosted by Tucker Carlson, who speaks for conservatives on CNN's "Crossfire," and one moderated by Paul Gigot, editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal, at the same time that "NOW with Bill Moyers," which receives no CPB funds, is cut from an hour to 30 minutes, in what appears to be a Bush Administration litmus test for choosing members of the CPB. . . . Bill Moyer's statement to Auletta: "This is the first time in my 32 years of public broadcasting that CPB has ordered up programs for ideological instead of journalistic reasons." . . . George W. Bush's most recent CPB appointees, Gay Hart Gaines and Cheryl Halpern, have along with their families given more than $800,000 to the Republican Party and candidates since 1995. And both appointees have backgrounds that raise questions about their suitability to serve on the board. . . . Current board chairman Kenneth Tomlinson has given $7,700 to Republicans since 1995, and has been active in Republican politics. A friend of Karl Rove, he is quoted in The New Yorker article as saying,"It is absolutely critical for people on the right to feel they have the same ownership stake in public television as people on the left have." Tomlinson has also objected to Moyers' including commentary in his programs. . . . The fact that members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which provides federal funds to public radio and TV, play politics with its program content should disturb us all -- irrespective of our political views. . . . We cannot let partisans drive an ideological stake in the heart of public broadcasting. At a time when media consolidation is making it more difficult for Americans to hear diverse points of view and to be exposed to substantive, challenging journalism, we must save public broadcasting from these attempts to meddle with its editorial independence. Today I'm calling on our 250,000 Common Cause members and supporters and all those who support public broadcasting to phone or e-mail members of the CPB board. Tell them we won't tolerate playing politics with public broadcasting.

posted by LoZo 2:01 PM