[_delirium]

This is a great brainstorming tool for doing light blogspam-style "journalism", if your readers don't know about it (which they probably don't). Draw something with a rather unlikely looking feature— a graph that strikes the reader as quite definitely not just random noise. See if you get anything interesting in return. If yes, conjure up a backstory, and write up a post in a confident, assertive tone, that closes with the graph as your "care to explain this?!" evidence nailing home your suspicion.

[ZirconCode]

Draw a positive line which abruptly goes to 0 and invent conspiracy theories about what they're trying to hide from us.

Is brooks pharmacy being censored by the government?! (1) Doctors hate them, lobbyists~ etc...

Source: http://www.google.com/trends/correlate/search?e=id:5J79rEBVG...

[wyager]

http://www.google.com/trends/correlate/search?e=id%3AEJ2JLv5...

http://www.google.com/trends/correlate/search?e=id%3AEJ2JLv5...

[benologist]

That's far too much effort when they can just monitor RSS feeds and reword someone else's work.

[solistice]

Why do you think they'd actually monitor those themselves? Get a bot to monitor them, and a text spinner to reword the texts.

[CompelTechnic]

confirmation bias in its most unadulterated form. excellent.

[_delirium]

In a way it's even an improvement on confirmation bias. With confirmation bias, you have a conclusion you want to sell, and selectively search for evidence that might support it. But with this suggestion, you search for interesting evidence, and then invent a conclusion that it might support, post-hoc.

[Strilanc]

It's actually cherry picking, not confirmation bias.