4 ms·
The issue comes in with propaganda itself not being black and white. There's inherently a estimation of whether something is propaganda or not, and it's often c
by core-utility 5y ago
The issue comes in with propaganda itself not being black and white. There's inherently a estimation of whether something is propaganda or not, and it's often changing and based on limited information or a "sniff test".
- nojito 5y agoPropaganda with regards to DGG's reasoning is actually black and white.
- missedthecue 5y agoOnce you open the door, where does it stop? I think that's the question, not whether Russian propaganda is propaganda or not.
- awb 5y ago
- jsnodlin 5y ago
- Eddy_Viscosity2 5y agoThe same can be said of spam filtering in email. Who decides what is spam? I actually want a search engine to not show me garbage results, and propaganda is garbage results.
- missedthecue 5y agoSpam I feel has a very clear definition. Unsolicited emails from accounts and websites you don't know. What about propaganda? Is VOA propaganda? Are white house press releases propaganda? Every news service has a bias, some stronger than others. There is no clear line as to where propaganda ends allowable information begins.
- DyslexicAtheist 5y agowhat is being de-ranked isn't so called propaganda but outright disinformation. note the difference between disinfo and misinfo where the former is being spread intentionally the latter because the audience didn't know it was wrong. What DDG does the right thing by saying we will not put lies on the front-page of our results. It would be impossible to filter out most propaganda - at least not the effective kind. Using the word propaganda makes these measures sound unjustified. It's better to call it what it is: deranking lies from the top search results.