I’ve been on a kick lately, tracking down biased news stories. Why? I like to read. I like to know what’s going on in the world and I like to form my own opinions on subjects. I’m reading a little about the CIA right now. Fascinating stories about how it was formed, the new types of warfare the CIA developed, psychological warfare, disinformation campaigns and other types of foreign influence. I’ve also read about the CIA’s role in the Bay of Pigs Fiasco and Iran Contra.
I’m reading The Dirty Tricks Department by John Lisle, and supplementing with some web searches to sites like brittanica.com.
From Amazon: Following this life-changing encounter, Lovell became the head of a secret group of scientists who developed dirty tricks for the OSS, the precursor to the CIA. Their inventions included Bat Bombs, suicide pills, fighting knives, silent pistols, and camouflaged explosives. Moreover, they forged documents for undercover agents, plotted the assassination of foreign leaders, and performed truth drug experiments on unsuspecting subjects.
Anyway, the point being, there is quite a bit of fascinating information about our country’s history and current events, that we need to be aware of, and understand in order for us to form our own opinions.
While the Bay of Pigs Fiasco is not a proud moment for our country, I can’t imagine what it would have been like for President Kennedy to be put into a situation where he was balancing a potential war with the Soviet Union; trying to keep the peace, while trying to prevent Soviet nuclear weapons from being installed in Cuba. As our President, he was on the hook to make a decision, and none of his choices were good.
Important for us to understand.
Biased News
This is why I’m so worked up about biased news. It’s injecting a perspective into stories, which are often our only source of information on a particular subject. And these stories influence our thinking.
Which brings me to today’s story about Google. I wrote a little about Google in Can We Trust The News? Google controls much of what we can find on the internet and decides how things are prioritized. Kinda frightening.
Google Search
Today’s article, again courtesy of allsides is What to Know About Misleading Google Ads for Political Campaigns.
I’ve mentioned that I use DuckDuckGo for search because I find it less biased, and it promises not to track me. But most of the world uses Google (over 90% of search). Read some fun facts here from semrush.com.
For those who don’t like to click, here’s an important one Top-ranking Google search results see a 22.4% click-through rate.
As we all know, we tend to click on the first, second or third item that appears in search. I don’t even know why Google has pagination. I don’t think anyone has ever clicked to go to page 2. Maybe a feature they could remove.
Ads
We also may be partially aware that the first few items that show up are ads. This is OK if we’re looking for a coffee maker, but can be problematic if we’re looking for some quick facts on a topic.
Let’s get back to the article and see an example.
Example
We all know Google earns money by advertising. Google gets paid for ads that show up in search. Again, this is OK in the coffee maker example. We may find a deal. But, in the example called out in the article, the Harris campaign has paid for ads to show in Google search, however, per Google, and I’m quoting allsides here:
Most of the ads say “Paid for by Harris for President.” But some lacked that label.
A technical glitch in Google’s Ad Library made some ads appear without disclosures Google requires, a company spokesperson told Axios.
Below you’ll see the examples provided in the article.
Allsides Commentary
My Thoughts
The first ad clearly says sponsored and paid for by… The link to APNEWS could be a little misleading and make us think this is a news story.
The second, while labeled as sponsored, seems like news from time.com, a trusted source for many.
There are 2 separate issues at play in my opinion. Google and Facebook (Alphabet and Meta) need to be held to a higher standard. It is not OK for glitches to get out there that influence what we can see. I’ll take the high road and take them at their word that these are glitches. Better testing folks. And maybe some financial penalties for glitches.
The broader question about the role these tech companies play in our lives is, to me, a bit of a gray area. Google has a policy that allows them to prioritize ads and Google is part of Alphabet which is a public company that makes money by selling ads. On the other hand, Google could be said to have a monopoly on search based on owning 91% of search. Google has a lot of control over what we see and how we see it.
I like that stories like today’s on Google, and yesterday’s on Zuckerberg/Meta/Facebook are getting traction on both right leaning and left leaning media sites. It is important for all of us to understand the role that tech companies play in filtering and prioritizing what we see.
I’m an optimist and I believe we’ll get better. After all, the internet is fairly new and we’re still trying to figure out how best to manage it. Are Alphabet, Amazon and Meta monopolies? How much influence do they have on what we read and what we buy? Should the government play a role?
What do you think? Post your comments below.