[personasdfghjkl]

> Results for "evidence of election fraud 2020" - at least 5 results showing major election fraud took place.

Shouldn't an "objective" search engine return results that are true (that there was no systemic election fraud) instead of results that fit his personal biases?

[senssore]

A search engine should return what I'm searching.

If I type "the daily stormer" (a very unique name which corresponds to something very specific, i.e. the website for the far-right online newspaper by that name), I expect to find that thing in the first 5 results. That's not the case with Google; it's just not there at all. You have articles from other papers talking about it, you've got a wikipedia page talking about it, you've got sites like the ADL and the SPLC talking about it, but not the actual thing itself. Bing, Yahoo, Yandex all return it as the first result.

[remarkEon]

This.

When I “search” for something, I am searching for it. I mean, it’s the definition of the word “search” for crying out loud. Somehow over time this idea of a “search engine” got perverted into something that either tries to predict what I don’t know I really want or what someone else thinks I need to see.

[splintercell]

That query is biased to begin with. Let’s say I want to understand the flat earth arguments. Should the search engine fill my feed with “earth is not flat” when I’m trying to search for “proof that earth is flat”. This is different from searching “is earth flat” which is an attempt to discover the truth.

Your claim that the search engine should show results which indicate that there was no systematic election fraud, is a wishful thinking that you don’t want people to believe in it, not a good decision making regarding what search engines should display.

[freediver]

> Should the search engine fill my feed with “earth is not flat” when I’m trying to search for “proof that earth is flat”.

What should it do? Article titled "There is no proof that the earth is flat" also satisfies the query completely from a keyword perspective, although not from a semantic. But if there is no actual proof that earth is flat, any article claiming there is would satisfy the query only from a keyword perspective but technically not semantically. It is a good question.

[voldacar]

How can a search engine know what is true?

[StanislavPetrov]

An objective search engine should return the results that are most relevant to your query without attempting to be the arbiter of "truth". An objective search engine doesn't try to weigh in on disputed events like the existence of systemic election fraud (which has been a regular occurrence in every election since before any one of us was born, despite the exhortations of the DC blob and legacy media outlets). For example, a Special Counsel in Wisconsin recently did a report on 2020 election fraud. If you Google "Wisconsin report on election fraud" the front page is comprised entirely of DC blob legacy media outlet editorials about why the Wisconsin report is debunked without a single link to the report itself. You are within your rights to think that the Wisconsin report is total garbage, but if you go to a search engine and search for "Wisconsin report on election fraud" an objective search engine will have a link to the actual report on the front page, if not as the first result.

[rsfern]

DDG for me is a mixed bag on that query, some links on how it’s been debunked but more than half promoting the report…

It I mean it would be nice if it surfaced whatever actual report you’re talking about, but maybe it’s just not the best query for that? I’m sure I could find it by clicking through any of the links