Mike Adams' "good gopher" search engine

Leifer

Senior Member
Mike Adams of NaturalNews, publicly unveiled his new 'pre-filtered' "GoodGopher" search engine.


From the 'about' section......
(edited 5/31/15, added a more correct quote)
Their claim (found in the video) that Google .... 'penalizes or bans independent websites' needs to be proved, or at least proved to me.
I'm not saying it couldn't or doesn't happen, but I can certainly find any 'alternative' health or "independent truth" idea or website I could imagine. I could find perhaps, "vegan neo-nazi" , a phrase I just imagined while typing this, and it's there.
I could also find hard criticism about Google the company....on a Google search.
If Google can't or won't stop these type search results about themselves, why would they bother censoring anything Mike Adams thinks his followers are interested in ?

This is another attempt to help people isolate their ideas and their search results. It's another way of 'searching for things they already believe in', and confirming their bias.
The hypocrisy can be stunning....where in order to avoid the accused 'mass media' selective censorship, their answer seems to be outright selective censorship.

.
 
Last edited:

Sausalito

Active Member
They're currently accepting site suggestions ahead of their unveiling. I would love to see the accumulating list.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member
sorry, couldn't help myself, put this in as a suggested site
http://www.dhmo.org/
 

Sausalito

Active Member
I had already put my snarky 2 cents in, but I decided to toss in another bid for your classic dhmo suggestion. Here's what popped up:
dhmo derpgopher.png
Not sure what to make of that. Guess I'll check back in a few weeks.
 

deirdre

Senior Member
Their claim that Google searches edit or withhold query results....needs to be proved
you forgot to put the claim in your post
https://archive.is/BzPU8



whats sad is i searched "geoengineering" on a clean browser and got this... so much for Googles "quality content algorithms"
save.PNG



and this scares me a bit:
http://searchenginewatch.com/sew/ho...turned-up-social-signals-as-a-ranking-factor#

this is just kinda cool:
http://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/google-algorithm-visual-history-infographic
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member
How about National Report?
So I guess this logically means there has to be some kind of blacklist of websites they *don't* want people to see; it'll be interesting to see that list.
 

Herman Aven

Member
... so much for Googles "quality content algorithms"
Although there are plans for quality to mean more as well "factual " or "closer to consensus view", right now with quality Google means generally stuff like "original research, citations, links, reviews and testimonials" and "not mass-produced or outsourced on a large number of other sites". -- source at Google
 

Auldy

Senior Member
oh dear..

Natural News has gone from giving out pickaxes for deepening the rabbit hole to full blown open pit mining. Gopher is a good name for it..
 

mrfintoil

Active Member
vaccine impactJust as a little comparison. Search query: Vaccine

Top Google hits:

Versus top GoodGopher hits:

Its safe to say that GoodGopher is every conspiranoid's wettest dream, and potentially one of the most intellectually damaging tools found on the net.
 

mrfintoil

Active Member
I wonder, it's just Google who are ranking their content based on accuracy? Why not just use Bing, or Yahoo Search? However, the official NaturalNews still comes first on all search engines I have tried. Not much of censorship is it...
 

Hevach

Senior Member
Other sites have different kinds of filtering that ends up targeting conspiracy sites indirectly. Bing is particularly aggressive about downranking pages that have had malware alerts, which hits anyone who uses shady advertising providers that don't ask too many questions - conspiracy sites are an afterthought on that list (porn and torrents being most of it), but certain ones get hit and drag down anyone linked to them.

But aside from DMCA takedowns, none of them completely omit results, and no matter how far down they rank them, there's a relevance floor that keeps them from falling too far. So conspiracy heavy searches on Google will still be heavily dominated by conspiracy results, even if you (sometimes, the process is hardly good) get a debunk or semi-neutral wikipedia entry first.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
In a nicely ironic turn of events, Mike Adams's main site, naturalnews.com has now been blacklisted by Google.

http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-02-...oles-natural-news-investigative-articles.html

Adams is less keen when the boot is on the other foot.

Of course, Adams made the point that Good Gopher would use human decisions to blacklist sites, rather than rely on algorithms. From http://www.goodgopher.com/About.asp:

 

deirdre

Senior Member
Mike Adams's main site, naturalnews.com has now been blacklisted by Google
Hearsay of course but,
 
Top