Google Mocks Christ on Christmas Eve

Confederate Yankee ^ | December 24, 2005

[george76]

While trying to find a nativity image for my last post before Christmas, I did an search for "baby jesus" on Google.

This is the result.

Notice that the top search result is for a sex toy that mocks Jesus.

Other results on this search results page have more link traffic.

A quick review of page's code shows no HTML meta information that should give it a favorable ranking.

The page itself has a raw relevance ranking (search word divided by total words) of less than five percent.

The only conclusion I can draw is that this page position ranking was done manually by a Google staffer.

Google's message to the Faithful seems obvious:

"Merry Christmas, a******s."

[jra]

Google was never 'hacked'.

The people who did what you describe manipulated the way Google finds/displays results to do what they wanted, but Google was not hacked.

What Google did (or more specifically, did NOT do) was change their methods just to combat the hits from ONE specific search, and they were right.

Anybody that gets bent out of shape because of Google hits needs to get a freaking life.

[george76]

I am just the messenger.

The author of the article is not me.

[mcg1969]

Weak.

[struwwelpeter]

It's not too good on the Russian Google, either :-(

[jra]

My apologies, sir...

I read the post as a vanity from someone with a hair trigger.

Sorry, and Merry Christmas.

[AntiGuv]

It's the #8 result on a Yahoo search, and it's well-known that each search engine has a unique algorithm, or else they would all return precisely the same results..

[george76]

No problem and Merry Christmas to you.

[AntiGuv]

BTY, MSN search brings up some rather interesting high-placed results. I think you should add them to rant list.

[Ichneumon]

Garbage. Google is one of the most liberal biased, anti-conservative, Bush hating search engines I have ever used. The Bush bashing garbage I see on Google that is posted as "News" is beyond astounding. Google is jus pathetic in it's liberal bias.

Google doesn't write or select the articles in its "News" tab. You're just seeing the anti-Bush bias of the MSM itself, which Google indexes.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

First of all you should do a search for a picture in google images not webpages

Its like the difference of typing whitehouse .com and white house .gov

.com gives you a porno site and .gov gives you the government

Pornographers and other such scum will stop at nothing to flood you with garbage !

[El Conservador]

It's googlebombing.

Do not blame Google.

[EveningStar]

I got similar results with MSN search.

[EveningStar]

I agree. I heard this explained on the Dennis Prager show the other day. They also bombed MSN Search.

[george76]

I am the messenger.

The author of the story is not me.

I am not blaming Google.

[mcg1969]

In the future, you might consider registering a bit of skepticism in your comment following a posted article if you don't want us to think you actually agree with it. Because frankly, that is the natural assumption around here.

[reasonisfaith]

Your post is quite valuable. The fact that you would have the guts to bring a question to a forum like this is heartening.

Google is now a major part of the world of information trafficking, and we know very well of the bias embedded in that world. Not to mention the creeping growth of leftist tendencies within large corporations.

Keep monitoring. This forum will continue to shed light on such questions.

[AntiGuv]

It's #1 on AOL Search too. Clearly this malevolent Google employee gets around...

[FreedomCalls]

I am the messenger. The author of the story is not me.

It's also not news or activism. There is a blog forum for these type posts.

[NJ_gent]

Heh, from someone who knows a thing or two about how Google works, I can assure you that not only are you completely wrong, but you come off sounding like a stark raving moonbat. It's a software engine that compiles its content and rankings based on a number of completely automated algorithms. Google's only popular because it finds what people actually want to find when they use it to search. Can it be manipulated? Like anything else, of course! Can you get the top search for "miserable failure" to link to President Bush's biography? Sure. Can you get the second result to link to Michael Moore's website? Yup. Can you get a search for "french military victories" to link to a parody site mocking the French? Sure can. It's not biased software; it's human manipulation through difficult and time-consuming trial and error.

When the day comes that software engines develop political slants, we'll have far greater problems than which side of the political spectrum the software chooses.