By now, you are surely aware that your Google Search results are dictated by a political doctrine that you are supposed to hold. The algorithms overwhelmingly favor approved talking points, even if false, with a vast and hugely influential machine now serving one political interest and dictated by one agenda. Google has become the tip of the spear in the management of the public mind.
The latest example is the sudden redefinition on Google of the word “bloodbath.” In a matter of days, it went from the actual definition to a highly politicized definition, all in the interest of feeding the obvious myth that former President Donald Trump said something about how not getting elected would lead to a bloodbath. What he actually said was a metaphorical reference to what would happen to the car industry.
Google Search is no longer reliably informative of what’s actually out there.
It was not always so. This deserves some explanation if only for the history books. The change has been dramatic but also surreptitious to the point that many people have not noticed that it happened. The user trust built up from the early days has been ported over to become a user habit with many people completely unaware of how they are being manipulated.
“I’ll Google that,” once meant to get a wide range of outlooks on a topic. Now it means mostly to find out what the opinion cartel wants you to believe.
In the old days, everyone knew the broad outlines of how Google Search worked. Google was hoping to put the most credible results up top under the assumption that this is what users wanted. People simply wanted the best results, period. And how were the algorithms seeking to determine which were the best results? The main driving force here was user behavior itself.
If you were running a website, you knew for sure that you would get terrible search rankings if you were just starting out. The goal was to have excellent metadata with keywords and a good sitemap. Then the next step was to engage users with credible material. That would lead to incoming links from other credible sources.
The sources, too, were ranked by use and design clarity. That created a network of which you would strive to be part. The more incoming links and use you received, the higher were your search results. So the whole thing became a circular pattern: The more use you received, the more you could expect. You could bank on this the same way you would investment capital.
Everyone knew the rules. They were imperfect but they were the best thing around. In other words, Google was trusting the market, which is another way of saying that Google trusted the users. It was a form of technological democracy, imperfect but the best thing going. We were all fine with this, and a vast industry developed to help sites obtain high search rankings with “search engine optimization.”
The problem was that the whole system was vulnerable to manipulation because it was centralized and increasingly under the control of a single trusted source. However, even then, there were checks.
There was competition in the system, and also systems for verification. One of the main ones was a company called Alexa. It provided public rankings of website use. Your website would be ranked based on tracking user behavior.
The higher your rank in Alexa results was, the higher your search engine results were. This system made sense. Again, we all knew the rules and played by them.
The company Alexa was independent. Then one day in 1999, it was bought by Amazon. That seemed encouraging because Amazon was well-heeled. This acquisition seemed to codify the tool that everyone was using as a kind of metric of status on the web. It was common back in the day to take note of an article somewhere on the web and then look up the site to see its reach. If it was important, one would take notice, but if it was not, no one particularly cared.
This is how an entire generation of web technicians functioned. The system worked as well as one could possibly expect.
Years after acquiring the ranking service Alexa, Amazon did a strange thing. It released its home assistant with the same name. This was in 2014. Suddenly, everyone had them in their homes and would find out anything by saying “Hey Alexa.” I recall that something seemed strange about it acquiring a business that had the same name as its new product. There was surely confusion that ensued.
Here’s what happened next. Amazon actively took down the web ranking tool. It didn’t sell it. It didn’t raise the prices. It didn’t do anything with it. It suddenly made it go completely dark. This was in 2022.
No one could figure out why. It was the industry standard, and suddenly it was gone. Not sold, just blasted away. No longer could anyone figure out the website rankings of anything without paying very high prices for hard-to-use proprietary products.
Crucially, we could no longer check search results against what we believed were the known algorithmic standards. Looking back, it seems obvious now why this change happened. It’s because the algorithms were all being changed, away from allowing user behavior to operate as a proxy for credibility and instead substituting other standards.
And what were those standards? To put it bluntly, the new standards were dictated by ruling class priorities rather than any standard of democracy. What we would see when we searched represented what powerful players wanted us to see rather than what people actually believed to be important.
You could see this change happen with all the COVID-19 controls. If you searched “masks,” you only found out how well they worked. If you searched “lockdowns,” you only discovered how great they were for virus control. If you searched “vaccines,” you only got propaganda telling you to get the shot. Finding anything else required scrolling page after page or abandoning the search completely and digging through other sources or just going to places you knew for sure to be credible.
This is the situation in which we find ourselves today. The search tool used by 96 percent of users gives results entirely prioritized by politics, not actual credibility. That political turn is very obvious and decisive toward the priorities of the Biden regime and everything it represents.
It’s not entirely a waste of time to keep trying to outsmart the algorithms, but it is increasingly less effective. The Epoch Times deals with this problem daily, and so does every alternative news source. It’s actually astounding to realize this, but Google Search is far less effective and credible now than it was 10 years ago.
This is true in general of the internet. It is less revealing, less informative, and less representative of truth and the wide scope of opinion now than a decade ago. We are going backward, not forward, with the great dream of democratized information. We have begun a long march back to monopolized and controlled information streams.
The dream of a new world of universal power devolved to all citizens with a voice has been all but destroyed.
Make no mistake and be not naive: The ambition of our ruling-class masters is complete control of the public mind. That means getting control of the free parts of the internet above all else. The sooner they can do this, the more they count it a success. They want a world that worked the way it did in the 1970s, with three channels and highly limited information streams. That’s the ambition.
The more they succeed in this, the more the dissidents are made to feel crazy and out of touch. That’s the goal in any case. That puts everyone who is aware in the difficult position of having to hold onto shreds of sanity in a world that seems increasingly distorted and even insane.
To the new generation, it might seem like this is how it has always worked. I can assure you that this is not true. There once was a dream that technology would emancipate ideas and people. That dream is dying the death, and not by accident but by human hands that do not want a world in which the people have power.
