[mc32]

Search engines typically surface what people search for based on some semi-secret sauce. That’s all good.

What’s not good is overriding those results not because of keyword bids, but because they deem the link inappropriate despite a lack of some oversight like a court injunction.

They simply don’t like one side of the conversation. It’s not as though people on the other side don’t have extreme opinions and have their sites black-holed.

[Jeff_Brown]

To elevate the kind of radical violent conspiratorial fringe that needs a separate platform to the status of "one side" of an implicitly two sided debate does a gross disservice to the variety of political opinion, and to the many reasonable conservative viewpoints that run into no difficulties expressing themselves in a more open forum like e.g. Twitter.

[ineedasername]

Right now it is entirely likely that people searching for 8chan are interested in it's news value, so surfacing news stories about it-- with the wikipedia results at the top providing a "what is 8chan" result-- is entirely possible that it's part of the "secret sauce"

Regardless, the true purpose of the "secret sauce" is to maximize use of the search engine to maximize ad impressions & revenue. It could very well be the case that putting the actual 8chan website at the top of the listings wouldn't actually do that. Advertisers are probably more likely to target attributes associated with people searching for 8chan-- news seekers-- rather than targeting 8chan itself. Just a guess though-- I'm essentially saying this behavior doesn't necessarily have to be Google messing with it's secret sauce (although that is entirely possible too)