What do you see when you search for "Donald Trump"?

filter-bubble

(Justin Brown) #1

I’m interested to see whether the “filter bubble” operates when we search for “Donald Trump” on Google.

Here’s a definition of the “filter bubble”:

I think the “filter bubble” is in strong operation in the Facebook newsfeed. I’m not so sure how it operates with Google.

So let’s do an experiment together.

When I’m logged into Google and do a search, it’s going to show personalized results. Here’s what I see when I search for “Donald Trump”:

Of course, it shows the Wikipedia entry. I would assume it shows this for everyone.

I’m most interested in that news section at the top. It shows articles from BBC and County Press for me (I haven’t heard of County Press though and don’t remember visiting their site).

What does it show for you?

Please share a screenshot of the results of your own searches in screenshots below. I also welcome further discussion about the general phenomenon of the “filter bubble” and “echo chambers”.


(Mark's Myth) #2

From my iPad in Google…


None of those news channels are regular sources for me.


(Helen Emmett) #3


I see CNN and The Guardian. If I scroll to the right it shows Stuff.co.nz - which I go to often. This screenshot if from Google Chrome using Google. I get quite a different result from Microsoft Edge using Bing - which I very rarely use. The top news articles on that one are New Zealand based websites, and People.com.


(Helen Emmett) #4

It would be more interesting to see what comes up if we google “Which president should I vote for” or something like this.


What do you see when you search "Which president should I vote for"
(ACD) #5

I get the following on my tablet (which is not allowing access to stored images):

1 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48917307

2 https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/09/politics/us-britain-ambassador-memos-diplomacy/index.html

After this, the results are offered in a slideshow gallery of choices which include the Independent, CBS News, Axios, SkyNews, the Guardian, and the Washington Post.

After this, a Twitter slideshow gallery of choices.

After this, About displays material from donaldjtrump.com.

Then another Twitter result.

Finally, and last, Wikipedia.


(Bill Ames) #6


(Bill Ames) #7

As I have previously mentioned, anything between my question and available data had better be very obvious. If a search tool displayed a message that indicated it had a suggested, improved question and would I want to use it, that is ok. If it does it behind the scenes and shows me bogus results I will be very unhappy. Some questions have a very limited range of answers. Anything else is not acceptable. Part of this “bubble” thing is it would take a very good AI to interpret the original question so an alternate question would be meaningful.


(Mark's Myth) #8

@justinbrown on point…


(ACD) #9

I use duckduckgo instead.


(Bill Ames) #10

It is assumed that smart people know the answer to a question before they ask it. Probably a good idea, it is difficult to trust unknown sources.


(ACD) #11

Smart people know what they don’t know.


(Bill Ames) #12

and they realize they don’t know what they don’t know.


(ACD) #13

What one does not know may be learned. See, now, I am putting up with poor conversation as I continue to search for mutually overlapping latitudes of acceptance.


(Bill Ames) #14

Do you have a statement that reflects your position on a subject? Something more than an opinion?


(ACD) #15

My statement on the subject of this discussion is that feeding people digital material to which they are predisposed, as does google, is a mechanism which contributes to the development of factions within society.


(Bill Ames) #16

I have not changed since I cast my first vote so it was all wasted on me. Perhaps factions are made in the children and it only becomes viable when they have a place to talk about their feelings. Like the internet? Google may be having an effect on weak minds but those minds might not vote reliably.