This is a pretty pointless and contentless article. As others have pointed out, it's attacking a strawman, so the point isn't even relevant. But even if it wer

This is a pretty pointless and contentless article. As others have pointed out, it's attacking a strawman, so the point isn't even relevant. But even if it were, what's the conclusion? There's a graph of people's trust in media, and some quotes from DDG's marketing—neither of which seem relevant to the central point. > are filter bubbles really the problem here? Danny Sullivan [...] argues fairly persuasively that they’re not because even DuckDuckGo users see different results. What is this sentence? Argues conclusively what? If anything, it supports the thesis that they exist (by this article's awkward definition), since they also pervade even DDG.