Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
avatar
EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby EtienneSC » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Thu Aug 30, 2018 2:00 pm)

There was a period from around 2011 (and probably before) to around 2016 when it was fairly easy to find revisionist literature by searching for appropriate terms, such as "holocaust" or "holocaust revisionism" on search engines. Similarly for videos. Trying this on a work computer today, this seems very much no longer to be so, at least on google. Even when I searched directly for "Holocaust revisionism" there were no actual revisionist websites in the first three pages of results. The sites that did come up condemned or refuted revisionism ("denial") but without linking to what they are condemning or refuting.

As a result, it will be difficult for people not familiar with revisionism to find out about it under their own steam. The implication is that the millions who know about it will have to be bolder ambassadors to the unaware, or it will fade away in much the same way as it came to the fore in the first place. New waters are ever flowing in upon us.

Another answer would be more competition amongst search engines. I don't really understand why this is not the case already. Surely users would like more clarity about the "algorithms" beings used and the level of sub-processing by censors? Is it that difficult to create a rival database of search results, or access the computing power?

I am sure this has been discussed before here, but a reminder of the current situation is in place.



User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1533
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby Moderator » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Thu Aug 30, 2018 4:44 pm)

That's what is referred to as 'shadow banning'.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
TimeTraveler
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:48 pm
Location: Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby TimeTraveler » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:42 pm)

Yeah I noticed the major censorship recently too. When I first was studying this I could find information pretty easy. But now it's a whole lot harder. Especially for the average joe that has no knowledge of any of this. I know what sites to go to now so it's not that hard to find for me. But for someone that has no clue yeah it'll be a lot harder for them now to try to study this topic.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1533
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby Moderator » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:51 pm)

The good news is that the hits to the CODOH Forum and the CODOH main site are way up. I'll try to get some stats for everyone to see.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
JLAD Prove Me Wrong
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:35 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby JLAD Prove Me Wrong » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Thu Aug 30, 2018 7:16 pm)

Moderator wrote:The good news is that the hits to the CODOH Forum and the CODOH main site are way up. I'll try to get some stats for everyone to see.
M1

It's also good news that the first result for when, "askhistorians codoh" or "askhistorians codoh" is searched, the top result is the post I titled, "The Pseudohistory Website of "AskHistorians"", rather than the bigoted, racist, Palestine-denier website of "AskHistorians" (if you can even call it that.)

viewtopic.php?t=11930

My opinion would be to contact one's internet provider, and ask them how the search results are filtered.

Also, this is quite likely deliberate. Simply search "American inventors" on Google, and almost all of the seach results are African American. While it is true that there were/are African American inventors, the Google result makes it disproportionate.

http://www.unz.com/isteve/great-moments ... inventors/
If your beliefs cannot stand up to your own sincere scrutiny and skeptical evaluation, they are not worth having.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby Hektor » 1 month 2 weeks ago (Fri Aug 31, 2018 5:15 am)

EtienneSC wrote:..... Even when I searched directly for "Holocaust revisionism" there were no actual revisionist websites in the first three pages of results. The sites that did come up condemned or refuted revisionism ("denial") but without linking to what they are condemning or refuting.

As a result, it will be difficult for people not familiar with revisionism to find out about it under their own steam. The implication is that the millions who know about it will have to be bolder ambassadors to the unaware, or it will fade away in much the same way as it came to the fore in the first place. New waters are ever flowing in upon us.

Another answer would be more competition amongst search engines. I don't really understand why this is not the case already. Surely users would like more clarity about the "algorithms" beings used and the level of sub-processing by censors? Is it that difficult to create a rival database of search results, or access the computing power?...

Shadow banning, of course. Or Holocauster web sites getting pushed with more SEO.

I think Revisionism does spread more with word of mouth than with people finding literature online as per coincidence. Well, some people may find it on forums or in the comment section under articles / social media. And that's the way to go, since we can't dictate to google what to do and what not.

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby Sannhet » 1 month 1 week ago (Thu Sep 06, 2018 5:42 pm)

For what it's worth, I have never failed to find CODOH via google search.

I do notice that Youtube (owned by Google) has hidden most CODOH videos and hidden the rest behind "The following content has been identified by the YouTube community as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences" with an identity verification needed to proceed.

The results for a Googling of "Holocaust revisionism," though, are just brutal. Studies suggest that few people go beyond the first page of search results, and Google appears to have stacked ten strongly anti-revisionist sites on the front page for that search... :shock:

(CODOH doesn't make it till the 6th page of 'Holocaust revisionism,' behind some pretty marginal sites...suggesting a shadowban is in effect)

avatar
EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Search Engine results for revisionism in mid-2018

Postby EtienneSC » 1 week 5 days ago (Sun Oct 07, 2018 4:23 pm)

The following appears to reflect google's current or recent policy on historical searches:
A rating of Fails to Meet should be assigned to results that are helpful and satisfying for no or very few users. Fails to
Meet results are unrelated to the query, factually incorrect (please check for factual accuracy of answers), and/or all or
almost all users would want to see additional results. These results completely fail to meet the user intent, such as a lack
of attention to an aspect of the query (or user location) that is important for satisfying user intent. Fails to Meet may also
be used for results that are extremely low quality, have very stale or outdated information, be nearly impossible to use on
a mobile device, etc.
Fails to Meet should be used for the following types of Lowest Page Quality results: [.....] Pages that directly contradict well-established historical facts (e.g., unsubstantiated conspiracy theories), unless the query clearly indicates the user is seeking an alternative viewpoint.
The examples specifically include revisionism:
Google_Zensur_2018.PNG
Google_Zensur_2018.PNG (100.46 KiB) Viewed 84 times

The links in the document go to Wikipedia and the SPLC websites. Although the example is Stormfront, the reason given would apply to revisionism generally. Hence they are deliberately censoring search results based on the views of the SPLC and Wikipedia editors. Source:
https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/www.google.com/en//insidesearch/howsearchworks/assets/searchqualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf
https://thomasdishaw.com/bookmark-400-links-google-doesnt-want-visit/

Alternative search engines include: Good Gopher, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, Searx.me and Qwant.com.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests