https://sputniknews.com/us/20160912/1045214398/google-clinto...

NOTE: The site is an organization sponsored by Russia. But the researcher is well respected with a Ph.D. from Harvard. His 2015 paper was published in PNAS and reviewed by very respectful people. This article is a preview of his upcoming paper.

Where did you see this proven to be false???

It's sad how critics and whistleblowers have media blackout in USA and only can do it via Russian agencies or Al-Jazeera.

And he lacks basic understanding quite often. In one example, Google pulls a Hillary image instead of a Trump (or both) when referencing the 2016 election in a fact card. He doesn't even think that image is simply the first to appear on that page.

Heck, I type "next president" into Google right now and I get a fact card with Obama as the image and "5 Reasons Why Trump Will Win" by Michael Moore as the top result.

When the chairman of Google's board is directly funding a startup with the mission of electing Hillary Clinton, and a Alphabet subsidiary CEO is one of Hillary's former aides, and Google has an incredible shield from prosecution under the current government leadership, I think we can safely assume Google considers it important to it's interests to ensure she's elected.

The article often cited isn't really a solid proof of Google manipulating results, but that doesn't mean it's true that they aren't. And of course, with Google's search algorithm one of the most guarded secrets at the company, some of the only code that regular rank and file Googlers aren't allowed to see, even you, a Googler who's failing to disclose your bias here in these comments... can't prove otherwise.

Long as you can't do that, you're not really doing much to advance the conversation. Just being a paid shill for your employer.

The cool thing about linked logical fallacies as an argument point is that, like Bible verses you can find one to support every side of an argument.

There's no proof that Google is manipulating search results, and when anyone fabricates a new possible manipulation it is immediately debunked. And yet you still want me to prove the negative. I'm not asking for a key proof, I'm asking for any proof.

Given the clear relationship of corrupt influence in our government by Google (feel free to try and "debunk" this one, please), can you not accept that it is not just reasonable, but prudent to be skeptical of Google's search ranking motives?

I mean, your employer has literally actively gotten involved in overthrowing governments in collaboration with Hillary: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/google-built-tech-to-sup...

I personally am generally hesitant to factually state "Google is manipulating search results in favor of Hillary Clinton", because, as you said, I don't see conclusive evidence. But acting like people are wrong to be suspicious is not much better. If I were to make an educated guess as to whether or not they are, I'd be inclined to guess that they are. You work for a company that makes Comcast look positively cuddly by comparison.

The fact that some bad articles used bad evidence does not prove Google is not manipulating search results, it's merely the http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy at work.

1) Google posted about putting healthier snacks closer to eye level in employee kitchens.

2) Unsubstantiated claim that Google has a corrupt influence on the US Government.

3) Google Ideas helped create a visualization of Syrian officials who publically opposed the government for the newspaper Al Jazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/syriadefections...

Therefore, Google is manipulating search results in favor of Hillary Clinton.

It is difficult for me to believe that you take your own arguments seriously

"Unsubstantiated"? Do your own homework on how many Congressmen are in Google's pocket: http://www.opensecrets.org/usearch/?q=Google+Inc&cx=01067790...

EDIT: Sorry, your company hid most of their donations under their shell corp this year: http://www.opensecrets.org/usearch/?q=Alphabet&cx=0106779074...

Not to mention Google literally having bought out one of our previous FTC Commissioners, who was paid to fabricate "academic studies" that supported Google's legal positions, which Google then used as "independent" evidence of their claims. During his FTC term, the investigation of Google's conduct mysteriously disappeared, despite the staff at the FTC recommending a case proceed. (And almost every other civilized country has opened such a case against Google. Why's the US silent on the matter?)

You work for a criminal organization that uses deception and manipulation as basic operational currency. And you expect me to take your arguments seriously?

As to your other points, I'll refer you to my original post.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)#E...