Trump says he will “address” Googles “suppressing” of conservative news

EnlargeJaap Arriens/NurPhoto via Getty Images

On Tuesday morning, the 45th president of the United States woke up around 5:30am Eastern Time and decided to begin his Tuesday by berating the "Fake New Media," claiming that Google was somehow "rigged" so that "all stories & news is BAD."

He then asked if this was "ILLEGAL?" (it isnt) and continued, claiming that "96%" of "results on Trump News" are "very dangerous."

Google search results for “Trump News” shows only the viewing/reporting of Fake New Media. In other words, they have it RIGGED, for me & others, so that almost all stories & news is BAD. Fake CNN is prominent. Republican/Conservative & Fair Media is shut out. Illegal? 96% of…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 28, 2018

….results on “Trump News” are from National Left-Wing Media, very dangerous. Google & others are suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good. They are controlling what we can & cannot see. This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 28, 2018

Googles precise algorithm is of course proprietary. But the criteria by which Google selects news outlets and stories to feature—criteria which include longevity, reputation, linking, search history, and more—are known.

Trump's claim appears to be based on a recent blog post on the conservative site, PJ Media.

The PJ Media post, which makes statements like "Social Media Companies the Most Dangerous Monopolies Ever," in turn, relies on a "media bias chart" by Sharyl Attkisson.

Attkisson, formerly a reporter with CBS News, currently works for conservative news conglomerate Sinclair Broadcast Group. While she has authored noteworthy journalism, Attkisson also has a years-long history of reaching questionable conclusions, including suggesting that there is a link between autism and vaccines. (There is not.)

Trump's rant concluded with: "This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!"

It is unclear what was meant by this.

Original Article


Ars Technica


Leave a Reply