3 ms·

There is a massive difference between ranking stuff based on relevance and not getting RT articles when... searching for RT. (They rolled back the block pretty

There is a massive difference between ranking stuff based on relevance and not getting RT articles when... searching for RT. (They rolled back the block pretty quickly, so they seem to agree with that too) You are basically arguing for a slippery slope argument. Because they already need some editorial control to filter spam and obviously irrelevant material does not mean that every type of filtering/block listing is ok. I personally totally get how it can be offputting to people if a search engine starts hiding websites while openly saying that they do it for a political reason. Downranking would be fine, but blocking a news source (as bad as RT is at being that) that isn't spammy or playing with SEO is just different. Yes, I know, everything is political and all. But that's the point! Blocking RT was obviously more so about politics than filtering fake news or trash results.

lisasays 4y ago
It pretty much was just about fake news and trash results, actually. RT really is pure garbage, by its very intent and purpose. I do agree that blocking RT outright was overreach and somewhat silly. However, I imagine it comes more from a gut feeling of disgust and "this is bullshit" then than some ultraelitist, "gotta protect the unwashed masses from harmful ideas that may bring the global order into question" motive that people in this thread seem to want DDG to have.
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  Yes, but they could've just blacklisted or downranked it based on already existing rules about fake news. But they instead went ahead and basically created a rule for Russian content specifically. I don't even doubt DDGs intentions, but that's the thing... in most cases, people who want to suppress or filter out speech/news/etc usually have good intentions because as you said they genuinely think it is harmful content. That's the whole issue! And it's why it's usually such a thorny debate.

lisasays 4y ago

It pretty much was just about fake news and trash results, actually. RT really is pure garbage, by its very intent and purpose. I do agree that blocking RT outright was overreach and somewhat silly. However, I imagine it comes more from a gut feeling of disgust and "this is bullshit" then than some ultraelitist, "gotta protect the unwashed masses from harmful ideas that may bring the global order into question" motive that people in this thread seem to want DDG to have.

mardifoufs 4y ago
Yes, but they could've just blacklisted or downranked it based on already existing rules about fake news. But they instead went ahead and basically created a rule for Russian content specifically. I don't even doubt DDGs intentions, but that's the thing... in most cases, people who want to suppress or filter out speech/news/etc usually have good intentions because as you said they genuinely think it is harmful content. That's the whole issue! And it's why it's usually such a thorny debate.