Google trying its best again to manipulate people

google trying its best again to manipulate people

If they did this to blacks there would be such an uproar.

"European History"

I use dukduckgo so i don't have to put up with google's bullshit.

that's pretty surprising actually. Can't believe they're that blatent.

something smells jewy

lost

the world is a fucked place man, I hate living in a corporate world

haha omg this was under happy american couple and its one of the first images

yup there is a subversive white genocide because we are the final bastion in front of Israels total world domination

A woman with her pet nigger

wth are you talking about? I love israel and they hate sand niggers

Why has ISIS never attacked Israel?

fucking niggers

I am actualy amazed. The world is going nuts, i swear

the fuck? their AI is supposed to be good

being more specific doesn't help either

their algorithm is flawed

its not the a.i.. this was done on purpose

bing isn't much better (maybe uses google beneath in secret)

funny enough they required me to turn off safe search

type "thebarchive tits"

what do u see user

see

duck duck go, pretty much the same

everybody are returning the same results. the pages that host them must be tricking the algorithms somehow

duckduckgo seems to be fine

finally yahoo

seems like a pretty open-and-shut case

i just checked white man and that seemed to be fine and stopped at that

no, maybe a little less but bad they too

Google has been slowly aggregating reasons to stop using them. Sad as I have been using since 1999 and it used to be so great. I'll still ocasionally use it, but it will be the FoxNews or CNN of search tools. Somewhat useful but full of lies.

What are the best options for search engines and image searches now?

EXTERMINATE.
ANNIHILATE.
DESTROY.

google

i tried using others but always fall back to google to actually find anything

It's not just Google. Bing, Yahoo, and even DDG do it too - even with the extra qualifier "white women and white children."

But note what gets returned if one asks for "black women and black children." (All 4 engines return similar results.)

The assault on the white race by the Zionist oligarchy - to create a single race of brown slaves, to be ruled over by their Zionist masters - is very real.

...

Become Alex Jones red pilled please.

Alphabet changed their motto from "Don't be evil" to "Do the right thing" ages ago.

Oh they know.

Also remember that Google is Alphabet. They changed names to Alphabet and started a daughter company named Google.

Proof is what Alphabet is listed under on the stock market.

It would seem the more logical explanation is the companies that take these stock photos are more prone to have "diverse" families, rather than a conspiracy theory involving completely independent search engines try to manipulate people.

Just did other races/ethnicities for completeness (4 engines, 4 searches: white, black, asian, hispanic) and the only ones that have problems are the white ones.

I should buy a water filter?

You guys are idiots. Consider this: a large majority of the internet and its culture/lingo/population is developed by white people. Additionally white culture accounts for the "norm" of Western Society. Therefore if one wants white people, they have no need to specify "white". On the contrary, when one specifies white, they are doing so to differentiate in some manner, from the norm. Hence you see white women with others who aren't white.

And in the same way all others return their labels because they labels are necessary in the "norm".

So specifying "white people" is the reason the search results explicitly *don't* return white people?

And you're calling *us* idiots?

p.s. Here's what happens when the engines get asked for your supposed "norm."

Oh shit what counter evidence

Oh fuck wait here's more. Thanks for playing the cherry picking game, Alex Jones

I CAN DO THIS ALL DAY

Compelling counter-"argument" you have there.

Here's the result for "white children."

Ahahahahaha

Are you fucking retarded? Did you read what I said above?

You specified "WHITE children" you therefore got pictures of white children with children of other races because that is when white must be applied. Alex, please tone it back.

Point being
.... that's right most of them are white.

Yes, I suffered through your attempt at an explanation.

It accounts neither for the racial consistency when asking for other races, nor the color consistency when asking for "white " when is something other than people.

Searches for "children" "women" "men" and "people" all return diverse results, the non-white racial modifiers all return uniform results, the only ones that don't are with the modifier "white."

The suggestion that it's impossible to find white people because they're so privileged is both ludicrous and perverse.

Here's Google's results for "white people." I thought the "SCREW WHITE PEOPLE" was a nice touch.

What exactly is your point? What do you think Google is trying to push here? I'm honestly confused.

Looked up "family pictures." I count

N total = 29 pictures
N with discernible reace = 25

Unambiguously white = 14
Latino/White = 7
Black = 1
Black/white = 1
Asian = 2

None = 4

So whites account for 56%, Latino/Whites for 28%, Blacks and Black/Whites for 4%, Asians for 8%. Sounds pretty normal to me.

In contrast, here are the very racially uniform results for "asian children." The results for "black children" and "hispanic children" are equally homogenous.

Compare this uniformity to the earlier results for "white children."

Forgot picture.

But seriously, what is the narrative here? You realize that Google returns results based on the web site right? Like says, because most of the internet that Western English-speaking people browse concurrently with our searches (i.e. Americans for the most part) is white or assumes whiteness, the only reason an article would specify whiteness in the webpage the picture was found on would be to address the whiteness itself, whether to make a jab at whiteness or to comment on the non-whiteness of the subjects (e.g. mixed families).

Listen, Google freaks me out as much as the next guy but I don't get how any of this thread makes sense.

Cool, here's the results for "cute children." 100% white, all across the board. Huh, Google must be trying to push the "white children are cute" narrative! Those devils!

You bunch of fag burgers
Search without white, and there you are.
White is still superior

Fuck, I forgot the fucking picture again.

Hahaha. That's funny as hell.

ayyyyyyyyyyy

What? I was claiming that there wasn't any 'Narrative' jack ass. It is exactly that: normal. I was disagreeing with the Zionist spy bullshit that started this thread.

Lmao my bad man, I may have gotten you and the eprson you were responded to confused. Well it looks like we're in agreemen then.

why is this what i got with duckduckgo? i had to blur out a cp result

stfu, jew

ITT: Sup Forums autists learning what it means to be triggered

zionist agenda

Google (other engines too) perform lots of natural language processing on the search query.

If Google is able to return a mostly-sensible result for something as complex as "How many games do the Mets play the Yankees" then it seems disingenuous to suggest Google can't discern the intention of the search "white children."

It's impossible to get white children even by forcing the search phrase.

So the general narrative is it seems particularly curious that the only race to experience this mixing-dilution is also the dominant race in the parts of the world under racial attack (in the sense that migration is being used as a weapon to replace white cultures with non-white ones - as the UN itself stated was the goal back in 2000).

That doesn't guarantee that's the cause of this observed result. But that there are other times when the effect isn't so obvious also doesn't prove that it's not race-cultural gaslighting.

The SEO arguments are especially irrelevant when considering children who want to find examples of what it means to be their race, whatever that one is, aren't going to GAF about how to qualify their searches and what the crawl really does. Google results are their mirror, and when they want to know what it is to be "white children" their mirror shows them a very different result than the children of other races. Whatever the reason, this is a significant problem.

Maybe the search engines are displaying non-white people because it knows people like you get triggered over it, which leads to more internet use.

Thank you for your response. I'm not sure you're correct but I don't think I'm informed enough on either Google's search algorithm or any perceived political/cultural agenda against whiteness. You've given me something to think about at least.

You should probably turn on Safe Search.

This is the DDG search for "white women."

Thanks very much for being open to thinking about it.

I think in either case there's a problem. If it's just a weird result of a crawl, then it ought to get fixed. If it's a result of something more pernicious, then that is something deeply serious we *all* need to fix.

Remember that Google has a history of explicitly altering search results to fit its agenda for society. Here are the search results from the 4 engines back when Hillary Clinton was rumored to be very sick, but the Clinton camp was insisting she was fine (right before her Parkinsonian lockup on 9/11).

That Google will skew search results to fit its cultural agenda, along with the recent "Google Manifesto" debacle (which Google may consider a success), suggests it's not at all unreasonable to consider search results are being managed to achieve a cultural result.

Oops, in my haste I called those the search results, that's a comparison of the suggested auto-completes.

That's more important when trying to hide the existence of something.

It's more like you don't know how to search properly. Use quotations for terms or phrases you want searched. Then it searches for "white woman" instead of "white" and ""woman".

I swear some of you faggots get stupider by the day then blame everything on some big bullshit conspiracy.

I have no doubt in my mind that Google manipulates search results/autofills, and it wouldn't surprise me if they were pushing some sort of agenda. I guess I just don't know what that agenda entails exactly, and whether or not it has something to do with some sort of racial/cultural warfare. Race is a very hot cultural topic right now and I do see things headed to a boiling point in some ways. I get the feeling things are going to swing one way or another in the next couple of years. It's possile that Google, as a major mover of culture, has some stake in this but I have no real evidence to suggest this.

I would like to know who owns Google? What are their connections within the political sphere? How might they benefit from the sort of narrative you speak of? Is it a voter thing? A consumer thing? I just don't know enough about this at the moment.

Samefag here... And on another note most of you seem to be too stupid to realize that the reason it isnt just white people is because the most popular stories on Google end up with the top spots in the images often (if the tags add up)

There is nothing interesting about a story of a white woman who gives birth to white children, but if a white woman gives birth to a dark ass African kid then it would make headlines. If a white family adopts a African kid and it's a tragic story it will make headlines. There is nothing interesting about a plain white family.

That's just an expression of the values taught to you. That White is boring. This is on purpose. Just like White Pride being baited into being a hate group. Gay pride isn't a hate group or an 'Organization' or Radicals. Why? They can be radical. They can cause violence. Whites are being pushed out socially by intelligent liberals in the media via subtle wordplay.

>you seem to be too stupid
Ahh, another attack the messenger fail.

Here are the Yahoo results from the quoted search term "white women." It returns white women, and white women with black men. No other races, and no white women with white men.

Thanks Jesus

>That's just an expression of the values taught to you. That White is boring. This is on purpose
Moving now beyond white is boring to white is bad.

Still doesn't matter because it's not the point at all. To get to the top of Google images you need to be a top story on Google. What reason does the keyword "white women + white children" have to be a top story on Google for a non-negative connotations. Truth is there really is no reason because no one cares.

People care about interesting out of the normal things. Like many of those pictures probably had tags off "white woman" "white children" "African children" because some white family probably rescued some african child from sexual slavery by adopting them. The addition of the African children tag Trumps the original search fr just white woman and white children because the story was just that popular and they also are included in the search.

>To get to the top of Google images you need to be a top story on Google
Jesus, now you're not even trying.

17/17 pictures had white woman in it.
3/17 had white woman and black man.

If you use the minus sign and "black man" and it still shows them then I will admit they are pulling some sketchy shit.

Click on the images you dumbass. They are all news stories...

If you google "Caucasian" instead of "white" couple only white couples show up. I guess they just favor political correctness over anything else

Pulling some stupid shit, you mean. Fucking with search results is like embezzling - it's not supposed to be noticed.

Any search engine would force the wrong results even when they have been explicitly requested to be filtered would give away the scam. It would be like being accused of cheating at poker, then "winning" the next big pot with five aces.

To subvert a society *the subversion needs to appear like it's normal*.

Thus when people look for "white women," the results are subtly skewed so that "normal" means "white women, along with black men." This shifts society's expectation of what it means to be a "white woman."

The same thing applies to the phrase "white women and white children," where the image dictionary of what it means to be a white woman with white children is to have a black husband and mixed race children.

The subtle social conditioning of image search (all search, really) results is they tell people what's "normal." It's like a dictionary, or a mirror. And for white people, what the mirror shows is very, very skewed...and ominously, to exactly what the results would be if one wanted to destroy the white race.

p.s. Since the push for race mixing is from the top down, of course there will also be news stories, entertainment fluff, all sorts of other things about race mixing. It's visible at the search engines, but that the problem is even more widespread just means it's that much *worse*.

Sup Forums turns Sup Forums

at least Canada has so many white people that it cancels some of it out. look up Canadian person and there is like one black person in the whole list of images

You could be right, but 9/10 times the simple logical explanation is more likely true rather than the conspiracy theory that someone is trying to brainwash and manipulate society through Google images. No doubt they manipulate some aspects for the fact that extra tags are in a specific search, I just am doubtful it's important enough that someone made it their job to brainwash white people into thinking the ideal marriage is with a black man through Google images...

Oh, right. Here's the "news story" that's the #1 search result for "white woman" (with quotes):

"White woman with black man in love stock photo"

If you're making the argument that search results are a reflection of what's being written in the media, then I'd say that says the problem of the intentional destruction of the white race is *wildly worse*.

I tend to agree that the race war is being conducted across all media, so it's not simply the search engines skewing results, it's the entire media skewing the content, which then can be claimed to "naturally" affect the search results. The search results just expose this.

(That doesn't mean the search engines aren't also skewing the results, like they intentionally suppress alternative news sites.)

You forgot
>white American family
>American inventors or white Americans inventors

Weirdly, everyone got the same results in their top 50 images except you. You must've had to scroll pretty far down or specifically search for stock images to pull this one out of your ass.

Europe wins

"american scientists"
you white pigs

Google seems to have a broader idea of what it means to be a Candian woman....

black couple:
49/50 results were a black man and a black woman

white couple:
25/50 results were a white man with a white woman

What's with the spooky skeleton on the left?

it's almost as if the sites which are redirected towards phrases and words, are paid to have their sites/images at the forefront of anyone searching those phrases/words

nahh, google is open and free and their entire business model isn't to sell links to the highest bidder for keeping their sites at the forefront of whatever word/catchphrase that's being searched..

you fags should be looking at the cucks with money who are paying to have this cancer on the front page

rather than the middleman who's just relaying his services for profits

>start mass uploading a black background with white colored font
>white writing says "Nothing"
>picture name "Black/African American accomplishments"
>????
>Profit

Extra giggles: Reveal how offended you are about this to tumblr and similar, watch it snowball.

ok, wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one who saw that...

google "inventor of peanut butter" and what do you see? George Washington Carver. Even though George Washington Carver was a worthless nigger and the actually inventor of peanut butter was some unknown Aztec person. Google even sites a huffingtonpost article that admits it. It even details the modern iteration of peanut butter can be given to other inventors. Still only George Washington Carver is highlighted by google.

Sorry Europe, looks like it's too late for you.

(Again, the search results aren't just a sign of things being manipulated at the engines. They're a sign of a widespread effort by media, which includes search engines, to racially manipulate society.)

>only real couple that aren't models
>white
what's the problem?

If you take out the racial signifier you get mostly white people. Stop being a faggot.

Pic and filename related.
Watch the algorithm get quickly fixed for this.

I'll give engines a pass on GWC, since the widespread belief (though wrong) is GWC invented peanut butter.

But if we're going to give Google a pass because they only reflect the "widespread belief" (leaving unanswered the important question of who counts in that "widespread"), then that the widespread belief is white women and children are to be paired with black men suggests a much more pervasive and dangerous problem.