[Gareth321]

> Search for far-right content if search engine is US-based (suggestions please)

I use a similar litmus test. I search for the website for the Proud Boys. Google doesn't just censor it. They place obviously hand-curated results critical of the movement on the first page. Bing is the same. DuckDuckGo also fails the test. Kagi and Yandex both pass this test.

Google fails almost every one of these tests.

[varispeed]

Just because Yandex passes the test, doesn't mean the can be relied upon.

Remember, because they are Russian, it is in their interest to show you content that US corporations censor, but they may be censoring the content that Russia wants to be censored or manipulate it for the benefit of Russian propaganda.

What I am trying to say is that it is probably better to get information from many sources as every can be biased one way or another.

edit: Just query yandex about WWII, you'll see links to conspiracy sites and sources whitewashing Soviet Union involvement in starting it.

[ChoGGi]

> What I am trying to say is that it is probably better to get information from many sources as every can be biased one way or another.

I guess it's back to dogpile for me...

(if they still did the multiple search engine thing)

[heap_perms]

> Powered by Metasearch technology, Dogpile returns all the best results from leading search engines including Google and Yahoo!, so you find what you’re looking for faster.

According to their 'About' Page, they still do it right?

[ChoGGi]

I only did a quick search, I probably just remember their interface from when Google started :)

[MichaelDickens]

Maybe the solution is something like a search engine aggregator? A website that sends your search to both DDG and Yandex and shows you the top 5 links from both, removing duplicates. That way if something is censored on Yandex or DDG but not both, you'll still see it. Something like that would be non-trivial to implement, but a lot easier than writing a new search engine.

[callalex]

Dogpile has been around since 1996. Now I feel like an old greybeard ;)

[nioj]

You could try something like Searx which is an open source metasearch engine. You can host it yourself if you want to.

Here is the wikipedia page for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searx

[Gareth321]

You are absolutely right. I’m certainly not claiming Yandex passes these tests either. They’re clearly guilty of censoring content critical of Russia. So far only Kagi has passed all my tests.

[Kerbonut]

Where does brave search fall in?

[Gareth321]

Good question. I just tested them. The results share about a 70% overlap with Google, with similar ranks, so I'm assuming they basically just use Google's results with a filter and privacy layer. There's no sign of the actual website, so Brave fails the same way Google does on this test.

[MichaelDickens]

FWIW when I searched WWII on Yandex, the top 5 results I got were:

1. Wikipedia

2. Call of Duty: WWII official website

3. Britannica

4. The YouTube channel @WorldWarTwo

5. history.com

[varispeed]

While websites such as Wikipedia, Britannica, and history.com are trusted sources of information, they may not always provide a fully balanced perspective on historical events such as World War II. These sources, largely based in the West, can sometimes underrepresent or insufficiently emphasize the role of the Soviet Union's aggressive actions and atrocities in the lead-up to and during the war. Which is probably why they are so high on the list of results.

On the first page you get a link to https://wwiifoundation.org/timeline-of-wwii/ that doesn't even mention that Soviet Union invaded Poland and other countries.

[MichaelDickens]

Wow, I didn't realize even DDG was censoring this hard. I tried what you suggested and the results between DDG and Yandex aren't even close. This comment convinced me to switch to Yandex.

[callalex]

Please educate me: what makes the results “obviously hand-curated”?

When I search on DuckDuckGo I get a list of Wikipedia entries for its prominent members, and a few recent articles involving its members. In this case it’s their convictions related to Jan 6, but it seems like the articles showed up because they are recent in time, not because of some sinister plot.

Edit: To be clear I am not trying to discount your experience, I fully accept that the results you are served for the same term could be completely different than mine.

[Gareth321]

Forgive my poor syntax. I didn't mean to imply that DDG provides hand curated content on this search. I accused only Google of that. Google provides obscure university links which are critical of the movement in the top few places, above news stories (which are also, incidentally, negative). The links are very different in nature to all the other engines I tested. DDG only censors the links, from what I can tell.

[FireInsight]

Tried this with ISIS. Same results, Yandex doesn't shy away from gore materials and finding the supposed ISIS website is easy.