News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

(LifeSiteNews) — Google appears to be attempting to deter searches on “election fraud” by using auto-fill suggestions unrelated to elections.

Upon typing “election fr” or “election “fra” into Google’s search engine, instead of auto-suggesting phrases that begin with “election,” as would be typical, Google primarily suggests variations of “ejection fraction.”

After typing in “election frau” or “election fraud,” Google’s auto-filled suggestions disappear entirely, another unusual occurrence.

Ordinarily, during a Google search, suggestions are automatically listed to complete the already-typed letters with words, phrases or sentences understood to be commonly searched spin-offs of what has already been typed.

This is clearly seen, for example, when one types in “election gu,” which Google then suggests can be completed with “election guide 2022,” or “election guidelines sample,” “election guy,” etc.

Google’s above-noted auto-completions “ejection fraction” would theoretically ordinarily be because searches on “election fraud” are so rare as to be virtually nonexistent.

This seems not to be the case, since many Americans have recently openly shared their belief that fraud affected some of the results of this month’s midterm elections, such as in the case of Arizona’s gubernatorial race.

Indeed, a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted during and after the 2022 U.S. midterm elections found that 57 percent of the U.S. “likely voters” surveyed said they think it is likely that cheating affected election outcomes, including 30 percent who believe that it is “very likely.”

An alternative explanation is that Google is manually attempting to suppress searches on “election fraud.” This appears to be corroborated by the auto completion of other search engines when typing in the first letters of “election fraud.”

The private search engine Startpage lists “election fraud” as the first auto-suggested completion of “election f”:

Microsoft’s Bing search engine, which ranks second to Google in popularity, with 15 percent of U.S. online searches, auto-fills “election fra” with variations of “election france” and “election francaise.” These suggestions persist at “election frau,” with only a couple of suggestions including mention of election fraud, and not for the U.S. 2022 midterms.

This is not the first time evidence of Google’s biased interest in election outcomes has emerged. Democratic Party voter Robert Epstein recently shared in an interview that empirical research shows Google affected the outcome of the 2016 and 2020 elections in favor of Democrats. Epstein also said he believes the tech giant “has its digital thumb on the scale” of the current midterms.

A 2016 Hillary Clinton supporter, Epstein in 2012 discovered what he calls the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME), which describes a change in consumer and voting preferences through search engines, as WND reported in an interview story in 2018. His first scientific paper on SEME was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2015. SEME, he noted, also has been replicated by a research team at one of the Max Planck Institutes in Germany.

In 2016, his team recorded 13,000 searches on Google, Bing and Yahoo, and found that Google – and not the others – was generating results in Hillary Clinton’s favor through its search algorithm. He estimated the impact was from 2.6 million to as many 10.4 million votes shifted to the Democratic candidate without anyone knowing.

Epstein emphasizes that not only does such a system of social engineering exist, there’s evidence Google is intentionally deploying it.

In July 2019, for example, a senior software engineer at Google admitted the company is not politically neutral and that it manipulates search algorithms “to do what we want them to do.”

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

10 Comments

    Loading...