Bing versus Google. Bias against skeptic groups?

Sherlock

Muse
Sherlock
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
676
Location
Salem, Oregon
Over the past year I've been attempting to track search engines primarily driven by Bing (and in conjunction with Yahoo), and Google (in conjunction with AOL).

Generally I believe there may be an unintended bias on the part of one of these systems --- I'll let you decide which --- that certainly appears to favor multiple listings on the first page from an assortment of intuitives, psychics, paranormal blogs, psychic detectives (including Sunny Dawn Johnston, Sylvia Browne, Noreen Renier, Laurie McQuary, Pam Coronado) over critical reviews and groups including JREF, various CSI regional affiliates, an international skeptics groups.

In addition one of these search engine platforms seems significantly longer in posting up-to-date critical paranormal news versus "press releases" and TV appearance updates issued by proponents of the paranormal.

I notice even when certain web sites are getting up to five times the traffic over a period of 6 months one of these search engine platforms seems to favor the "originator" of the topic --- in favor of the paranormal blog or participant. Anyone have a comment?
 
I can't remember very clearly, but soon after Bing was announced I became concerned about this type of thing after reading an article about Bing and fake medicine. I am searching for that article as I can not remember the nature of the criticism.
 
Bing is a search engine.....ho ho ha ha :D Ohh wait you are serious
 
There can be unintentional biases in search algorithms. And in other factors such as advertising for homeopathy when you search for homeopathy information.

EDIT: Oh. I understand now.

Well, I think the criticism in that article I mentioned was that the information provided in the 'decision engine' (as they call it) side of things could be biased towards the fake medicine. But I still haven't found it.

Trying out Bing myself, I haven't found that specific criticism I mentioned to be true.
 
Last edited:
Often even a generic search like "psychic detective investigators" shows some interesting differences in equalized content across the first 4-5 pages of listings. And the listings of one search engine often lean several years behind the other when using certain terms and vice-versa. As an example its tough to believe the video game 'Psychic Detectives' which was out in 1994 on the 3DO platform --- anyone remember that! --- often pops up on the first page of searches related to psychic detectives on Bing, and not until the 8th or 9th page of listings on Google in similar related searches. On the other hand a particular paranormal proponent in Australia seems to have a wider platform of older listings --- some years back --- across Google than likewise on Bing.
 
Last edited:
There is a phenomenon called SEO poisoning (Search Engine Optimization poisoning) which potentially could be affecting Bing's search results in certain manner that MS doesn't care about or is aware of and is trying to correct the issues.

It happens to Google as well, but they seem to be more aggressive about fixing it.

I do not have data to back up these assertions at this time, so take it as you will.
 
Isn't Bing supposed to show the most popular searches first? And don't most people who are computer-savvy default to Google anyway? Maybe what Bing is telling us is that people who aren't internet-savvy enough to switch back to Google are also the same people who believe in psychics and like to play bad video games.

As for Bing, I never used it and removed every sign of it shortly after I removed my new computer from the box. I hate it when manufacturers plug their own proprietary brands instead of letting me choose my own.
 
Bing versus Google: A bias of one toward the paranormal?

Given the last few responses there does seem to be a note of valid criticism at Bing. Any JREF or CSI members out there that use Bing and find it equally open to critics of the paranormal? A quick check of the major psychics and psychic detectives does seem to suggest many have registered sites using Bing / MSN over Google. Hhhhmmmmmm.
 
For those who would like to examine a side-by-side comparison between a search on Google versus Bing, you can try (among others) http://bingle.nu/

Again, some interesting and significant push towards paranormal sites by one over the other in some searches. Is this client based motivation rather than bias?
 
I think it's more due to Bing being a lousy search engine then any conspiracy and/or deliberate bias.
 
Gotta go with your response, dudalb. With our technology today a machine cannot discriminate between "the truth" and "the dumbest, but most popular, **** on the market."

Search engines have always been extremely stupid. and their results only tell you who some folks who aren't stupid might be found.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom