Are you voting for trump?

mancini · Jun 10, 2016 11:03 AM

Try "trump mis" on google: Google predictions I got were missouri, miss universe, miss america, mississippi" Try "trump mis" on yahoo: Yahoo predictions I got were "miss universe, misogynist, misogynistic comments, missouri" OMG this means google is secretly supporting Trump , or maybe I shouldn't jump to conclusions so foolhardily Last edited: 10-Jun-16 12:01 PM

mily · Jun 10, 2016 11:55 AM

Mily mily as usual you are missing the whole point and being naive as usual. The google suggestions are based on what is trending, what is being searched for - which you can easily find at google trends website. When you do a comparision of "trump missouri" vs "trump misogynist" then it clearly shows that "trump missouri" is more trending than "trump mysogynist" - see below: On the other hand, when you compare "hillary clinton indiana" and "hillary clinton indictment" to see what is trending, clearly "hillary clinton indictment" is trending more than "hillary clinton indiana" - but Google suggestions do not even show "hillary clinton indictment" at all! Therein lies the veil that google is putting on unsuspecting users by manupulating its suggestions and by doing that it is changing the way people are perceiving reality because most people believe that google is fair.

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 12:14 PM

I'm pretty sure google's prediction algorithm is a little more complicated than just "what is trending, what is being searched for". "trump mis" was just one example. I can think of many more. For instance, try "trump fr" on google and you get "friends, freedom girls, free trade, frog" while on yahoo you get several phrases with "fraud".

mily · Jun 10, 2016 12:18 PM

Mily this is what google says about how the predictions work. So when there are politically biased information missing then you can accurately conclude why they are missing :)

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 12:48 PM

Looks like neo watches House of cards and believe it seriously 😏😏😏

OBAMA · Jun 10, 2016 12:49 PM

Obama nah I don't watch that show :s Most people only follow the mainstream media so they happily accept the narrative that mainstream media wants them to believe. If you do some research on your own about what's real then only you will wake up from the matrix. Till then, enjoy the matrix :) Last edited: 10-Jun-16 01:00 PM

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 12:59 PM

just two parties and candidates!!...heads or tails?

Alias_ · Jun 10, 2016 1:39 PM

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/10/1... There’s a video making the rounds purporting to show that Google is suppressing the phrase "Hillary Clinton crimes" from autocomplete results, thereby boosting Clinton’s candidacy. The video points out that if you type the phrase "Donald Trump rac," Google will suggest the word "racist" to complete the phrase. But if you type "Hillary Clinton cri," Google will suggest words like "crime reform" and "crisis" but not "crimes." This despite the fact that Google Trend results show that people search for "Hillary Clinton crimes" a lot more than "Hillary Clinton crime reform." So what's going on here? The folks behind the video suggest that this reflects an unholy alliance between the Clinton campaign and Eric Schmidt, the former Google CEO and current chair of Google’s parent company, Alphabet. But there’s a simpler explanation: Choose any famous American who has been accused of a serious crime and Google their name followed by the letters "cri," and in no case does Google suggest the word "crimes." That’s true even of people like Kaczynski and Madoff, who are famous only because they faced prosecution for serious crimes. Apparently, Google has a policy of not suggesting that customers do searches on people's crimes. I have no inside knowledge of why it runs its search engine this way. Maybe Google is just uncomfortable with having an algorithm suggesting that people search for other people's crimes. In any event, there’s no evidence that this is specific to Hillary Clinton, and therefore no reason to think this is a conspiracy by Google to help Clinton win the election.

mancini · Jun 10, 2016 2:13 PM

I did get racist costume for hillary

mancini · Jun 10, 2016 2:25 PM

"Choose any famous American who has been accused of a serious crime and Google their name followed by the letters "cri," and in no case does Google suggest the word "crimes." That’s true even of people like Kaczynski and Madoff, who are famous only because they faced prosecution for serious crimes."  Mancini unfortunately the article you posted seem to not have done any research before posting it. Mily, I am sorry that you cannot "unlike" :( This article is not telling the truth and you can find that out very easily by searching for "kaczynski cri" and "madoff cri". Last edited: 10-Jun-16 02:37 PM

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 2:36 PM

How about this one ? :)

mily · Jun 10, 2016 3:00 PM

So you see they don't want you to see "hillary clinton cri" but in general "clinton cri" is fine. Which again debunks the garbage article from Vox since it is not true :)

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 3:03 PM

there he(neo) goes with another conspiracy.. Im tired of these conspiracies.. Neo might also knows the result of NBA final ? Can you tell me please who gonna win I'm betting on Cavs. kinda irrelevant to your post though :) but you seems like a conspiracy master.:)

gone12 · Jun 10, 2016 3:30 PM

Gone12 nah not really a conspiracy when its a verified fact as it's been shown :)

ne0 · Jun 10, 2016 5:03 PM

You've failed to debunk the vox article, all u did was twisted/misinterpreted it :) On google search, if your keywords are full names followed by "cri" like "bernie madoff cri", "ted kaczynski cri" or "hillary clinton cri", you will not get a phrase with the word "crime". But if you type "madoff cri", "kaczynski crime" or "clinton cri", you will get phrases with word "crime". This proves that it's not google that is biased, the biased one is YOU. Lastly, I stick by my "like" for the vox article :)

mily · Jun 11, 2016 8:33 AM

Mily, don't shoot the messenger :) I just shared this article because it seemed concerning. If such thing is not concerning to you then I have more respect for you! In any case, the paragraph I quoted from Vox did not mention anything about searching for full name and it simply said "That’s true even of people like Kaczynski and Madoff, who are famous" so I just searched for "Kaczynski cri" and "Madoff cri" which were the words mentioned. However, I do stand corrected that when you search for the full name it does not show the "crime" auto suggestion. Google did come out with a statement regarding this saying they filter out "offensive or disparaging" search predictions for all people. Personally, I think it would be good if google left the auto suggestions to popular searches instead of having to monitor which words constitute a person's name and which does not. Or have to monitor what is offensive or disparaging. For example although there is no suggestions made by google for things like "bill clinton chea" or "donald trump chea", it must have forgotten to remove it for Barack Obama Although, it's petty to go back and forth regarding what's been ignored versus what's not, the original message does convey a good point that people should not believe corporations (and mainstream media) blindly :) PS: Here's another one they must have forgotten. Oh wait, this guy is a very very bad guy so they didn't have any option but to leave it. :s  Last edited: 11-Jun-16 11:17 AM

ne0 · Jun 11, 2016 10:47 AM