Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks Microsoft

DuckDuckGo's Down-Ranking of Russian Disinformation Caused by Microsoft's Bing (rawstory.com) 115

Posted by EditorDavid from the Bing-goes-the-internet dept.
Slashdot reader nickwinlund77 quotes the New York Times (also quoted here): DuckDuckGo has little control over its search results because they are provided by Microsoft's Bing, which announced that it would follow the European Union's order to restrict access to the Russian state news agencies RT and Sputnik. But the criticism from the far right was directed at DuckDuckGo. The conservative website Breitbart said DuckDuckGo was "adopting the censorship policies" of Big Tech. In social media channels devoted to conspiracy theories, users vowed to switch to alternatives like the Russian search engine Yandex....

In a statement, Kamyl Bazbaz, the vice president of communications for DuckDuckGo, said that the affected sites were engaged in "active disinformation campaigns," meaning they were similar to other low-quality websites already penalized by search algorithms. "This isn't censorship, it's just search rankings," he said....

The company also announced this month that it would pause its relationship with Yandex, the Russian search engine, which was providing certain links for results in Russia and Turkey.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DuckDuckGo's Down-Ranking of Russian Disinformation Caused by Microsoft's Bing More

DuckDuckGo's Down-Ranking of Russian Disinformation Caused by Microsoft's Bing

Comments Filter:

  • Search Engine Doing it's Job (Score:3)

    by Ksevio ( 865461 ) on Saturday March 12, 2022 @04:38PM (#62351735) Homepage

    Seems like the search engine was just doing its job by promoting accurate information over inaccurate information. Maybe they could add a flag "fake" or something that people could check if they want to see made up stuff

    • If you want Western propaganda, use western search engines. If you want Russian propaganda or other non western state propaganda, use their search engines.

    • And you know how to accurately and precisely discern between the two?

    • Search engines have no knowledge of, or way to measure accuracy. You mistake popularity with accuracy

      News websites frequently arrive on top when searching for about anything; there is no such thing as an accurate news website.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Ksevio ( 865461 )

        The job of a search engine is to provide the best results for a search. Most often that's results that are accurate. Popularity is also a factor, but in this case they're pushing accuracy over popularity. Some news websites are more reputable than others and as such can be viewed as more accurate. I don't know why you would say "there is no such thing as an accurate news website" - of course there's such thing as an accurate news website. If the website is accurately reporting the news (as a reputable

        • The job of a search engine is to provide the best results for a search. Most often that's results that are accurate.

          As said news articles come on top; news is only accurate until it happens to be an article about that one field one is a genuine expert in oneself. Then, it is suddenly flagrantly and obviously inaccurate.

          “best”, much as with Facebook, is what keeps the user engaged to view more advertisements, not what is most useful to him. The commercial incentive of these websites is to keep users on them for as long as possible. — This means having them try multiple candidates till they meet the right

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Ksevio ( 865461 )

            “best”, much as with Facebook, is what keeps the user engaged to view more advertisements, not what is most useful to him. The commercial incentive of these websites is to keep users on them for as long as possible. — This means having them try multiple candidates till they meet the right o

            It's different for search engines as if the user is consistently not getting good results, they'll go to an alternative. That's not as easy with a social network which requires the user to convince all their friends to move too.

            “reputable” is a word used by people to mean news outlets that ideologically agree with them, and people come to very different conclusions on what is “reputable” depending on their own ideologies.

            It may be, but it's also a word used to mean they have a reputation for accurate reporting and can be trusted. Some people may not like the reporting of a news organization but it could still be reputable because they research their stories well, properly fact check, and present th

            • It may be, but it's also a word used to mean they have a reputation for accurate reporting and can be trusted.

              They enjoy such a reputation with people with similar ideologies; such a reputation tends to disappear when asking people of very different ideologies. — All of them are right that the opposing newspapers are full of nonsense; all of them are wrong when they believe the newspapers that feed them the ideology they wish to hear is accurate.

              There is absolutely no incentive for newspapers to be ac

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Ksevio ( 865461 )

                I can see you don't trust any sources so in my view you're unable to properly discern truth from fiction. Hopefully you can work on that or you'll just end up spreading more propaganda and conspiracy theories.

                • No, I'm perfectly capable of discerning it; that is why I do not trust news because I've discerned that all news websites are laden with inaccuracies.

                  Clearly you can't, if you still haven't figured this out.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by Ksevio ( 865461 )

                    I've discerned that all news websites are laden with inaccuracies.

                    I guess I'm just better at determining levels of trust in a source rather than viewing it in black and white.

                    • When it happens every single time when one happens to be knowledgeable on the subject, coupled with the fact that they have no incentive nor legal obligation to tell the truth, a man can draw his patterns and conclusions.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by Ksevio ( 865461 )

                      So in your view, every single site is the same, regardless of their staff or history. In every single subject they all have the same percentage of statements that are true? That's an astounding view!

                    • No, in my view, every single news site and article is completely inaccurate and unreliable.

                      Some may be more unreliable than others, but all are so unreliable that they are useless as a source of information in a situation where obtaining the truth is paramount.

                      No businessman who stakes a substantial capital on the veracity of something would ever use a news website and assume it's contents as truthful to decide his investment in the knowledge that he would stand to loose substantially if the information pro

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by Ksevio ( 865461 )

                      Ok, I just looked on Google News and grabbed one of the top sites: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/1... [cnbc.com] (sorry if this is illegal content in your country).

                      Are you saying this article is completely inaccurate? Can you point to sources which dispute any part of it?

    • Thatâ(TM)s not itâ(TM)s job. Itâ(TM)s job is too show the best match for the phrase entered. Duck duck go have just revealed that they will determine ranking and results based on politics. Another site to add the pile of garbage.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Ksevio ( 865461 )

        Well I guess most people would want the search engine to retrieve accurate information. Some people might want it to show garbage, but I guess they should find a search engine with a less advanced algorithm. Definitely going to get a lot more spam that way

  • Why exactly should we care what Breitbart says again?

    • Because they mostly controlled all the information Trump got, and Trump controls the minds of the majority of Republican legislators and governors.

      • I think Trump lost enthusiasm for Breitbart after his fallout with Bannon. In the waning days, he seemed to oscillate away from OANN as well, and went back to hanging off Fox's every word. Mike Lindell, Master of Pillows and Insurrection, surely is not a Breitbart man.

  • Personally I thought DuckDuckGo was not just useful for not being tracked, but also free from manipulation of results... I do agree there's not much DDG can do about the results they get, but I think it's fair to criticize them for approving of manipulated results, rather than just broadcasting what is being manipulated and saying "sorry we can't change this".

    The problem I always see with labeling sits as "misinformation" is that often the people doing the labeling have very little fact to base that label o

    • Quote: "Personally I thought DuckDuckGo was [...] also free from manipulation of results..."

      LOL (with proper capitals) Do you know what an "algorithm" is?

      There's NEVER EVER any algorithm for a search that is "free from manipulation of results". That's why there are thousand of different algorithms because each and every one of them are tweaked to ponderate which results to show you first.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by kmoser ( 1469707 )
        This. Whether the algorithm is 100% automated, or involves significant human input, it's still an algorithm and is subject to bias. Also, let's not forget that "criticism from the far right" is usually baseless whining, and need not be responded to.

        • And when the American conservatives go to a Russian web site for their news, then you know we're in Bizarro world.

      • LOL (with proper capitals) Do you know what an "algorithm" is?

        Yes, do you know what manipulation in question is happening here? It's Bing taking the results from that algorithm, and manually altering results.

        LOL indeed.

      • DuckDuckGo was about hiding tracking, not really about having a better search algorithm. It goes though other search engines usually.

      • "Manipulation" ultimately comes from the Latin manus, meaning "hand." There is a legitimate distinction to be drawn between letting the BackRub-style [stanford.edu] page-ranking algorithm discover (and encode) biases naturally present in the data, and adding tweaks to it with the conscious intent of producing certain results. It is also not unreasonable to call the difference between these two conditions "manipulation," as it fits with the etymology of the word and its many cognates, like "manual." In practice there's alw

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by splutty ( 43475 )

      I was going to reply to this, and then saw who posted it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by decep ( 137319 )

      "manipulation of results" has such a negative connotation. In reality, it is de-manipulation of results. The misinformation campaigns are targeted, SEO-optimized efforts designed to increase their own rankings in the search engine results--the very definition of manipulation.

      Modern search engine algorithms are not designed to show the most relevant results to a person's search, but to show the most relevant results to a persons *interest*. The algorithms tend to bring click-bait to the foreground.

      • In reality, it is de-manipulation of results.

        I partially agree, however read what I said again as it still applies - the "de-manipualtion" that is being applied is selectively all pro-Russia content, even though for sure some results that are pro-Ukraine are being manipulated, and also misleading and should theoretically be de-manipulated as well...

        My argument is that since they cannot tell what is truly being manipulated, and cannot evenly correct this manipulation, they should just let results stand as t

    • If we want to get a "well-rounded perspective" of what's going on in world affairs, perhaps just reading/watching a wide range of English language news services from around the world, intended for international audiences, would help. Last time I looked, Britain, China, Iran, Russia, & Qatar, for example, had them. China's English language news reporting content looked shockingly similar to GB News - a privately funded right-wing extreme nationalist video news websites in the UK. There's also independent

      • Ever since I learned Japanese, I have to say it has been enlightening how different reports in Japanese about Japan are to reports in English about Japan, even from websites such as Japantimes in English.

        Simply learning a new language often exposes one to a very different view.

        • Yes, here, I get a very different perspective on world affairs - They make my country of origin's culture seem pretty inhumane (Seems to be prevalent among Anglophone cultures in general?). Also, it never ceases to astonish me how anyone can live in a country for any length of time & not learn the language & culture. "Ex-pats" who refuse to at least learn the language have such skewed, often hostile & derogatory, views of the country & culture that they live in. If it's so bad, why are they

    • I tried using DuckDuckGo at one point as I was tired of the filter on sex-based content and giving me politics when I searched for data, but alas it did the same as other search engines.

      There was a time when so-called “incel” websites were surprisingly hard to find on about any search engine as well, but that has been reverted now it sees. — Can I not simply want to see what it is actually like on those boards out of curiosity without moral guardians telling me I cannot be exposed to it, w

    • I would really love to see some of this Ukrainian propaganda you're so desperate to oppose. Is it the report from Médicens sans frontières [msf.org] about Mariupol being turned into a smouldering crater that you consider to be based on "very little fact," or the IAEA worrying about the health of Chernobyl [iaea.org]'s facilities and people?

      Russian dictators have always suffered from their delusions not being compatible with reality, and have used disinformation to bridge the gap. That's why the English words "prop

  • You can tell yourself, "This isn't censorship, it's just search rankings", but we all know that if something disappears past page 1 of the search rankings, it's as good as gone for almost all searchers. It's like saying that particular books aren't censored if they're required to be kept under the counter of the book seller where no one will ever look for them.

    While it's true that the first page of hits is a scarce resource and some thought must be given to what ends up on the first page, any algorithm wei

    • For instance, right now, many consider it to be "misinformation" to say that Putin's goal is not world conquest or permanent occupation of Ukraine, but rather: (1) to keep NATO out of Ukraine and Ukraine out of NATO, (2) to obtain Crimea for Russia, (3) to obtain independence for the republics in Donbas. Putin has said these were his goals *before* the invasion, and these are the cease-fire conditions that Russia is currently offering. In order to understand how to bring the war to a conclusion, we actually

    • Irrelevant. In what alternate universe do live where it is acceptable for one nation to dictate to another who they may ally or trade with and to carve out pieces for themselves?

      Or... do you imagine for a second that the US would or should tolerate Canada:
      1) Ordering it to leave the WTO and commit to never re-joining?
      2) Unilaterally deciding they like the looks of Maine, stealing it, and declaring it to be part of Canada now and forever?
      3) Unilaterally deciding that Florida and Georgia shouldn't be part of

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Ksevio ( 865461 )

        I dunno, we might be willing to sacrifice Georgia in exchange for them taking Florida. We're keeping Maine though!

    • In order to understand how to bring the war to a conclusion, we actually have to *listen* to the other side. Instead, we are banned from hearing the Russian side of the story, and we're told that Putin is an irrational actor [.. blah blah blah ...]

      Ukraine already tried the "listen to Putin, give him what he wants" strategy - giving up on Crimea and the break away republics and going to a cease fire. Then he starts demanding more and kind of gets it with a special agreement he knew couldn't be accepted. Eventually the suggestion "listen to Putin and then we can come to a settlement" becomes literal misinformation. A lie. And that's what your "I'm reasonable" post is exactly. To claim that the Ukranians are unreasonable to fight is just a lie. When

  • On March 9, Gabriel Weinberg CEO & Founder of DuckDuckGo Tweeted this:

    Like so many others I am sickened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the gigantic humanitarian crisis it continues to create. #StandWithUkraine

    At DuckDuckGo, we've been rolling out search updates that down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation.

    That is straight from the horse's mouth. I didn't hear the news from Breitbart or any "far right sources." I don't know what sort of disinformation campaign I was subjected to, given that this tweet of DuckDuckGo's CEO was retweeted by the official DuckDuckGo Twitter account directly which is how I found out about it. If this move was caused by Microsoft and Bing, and they wanted people to know that, they could have led with that and

    • They can't say "Microsoft rolled out an update to us" because then they look like a reseller or a middleman for Big Tech, and their whole shtick is trying to differentiate themselves from Big Tech. It would contradict their marketing entirely. And it may not even have been a conscious attempt to mislead. People shit out social media posts with no self-reflection or thought, other than a surface-level "How does this make me look?"... Particularly on Twitter. The platform is the shallowest of the mainstream s

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by EdZep ( 114198 )

      Bingo. Since conservatives were one of DuckDuckGo's biggest user groups, it looks like damage control is now underway.

  • You need to change it to: "criticism from the FAR RIGHT"...it's much more scary.

  • I posted this comment the other day about cspan. [slashdot.org]

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?... [c-span.org] Link provided as information

    Here's what I find odd. Every other speaker except the Russian one Vasily Nebenzya presenting evidence has closed captions. I don't know if this is how it usually is, but looking at other UN videos covered by CSPAN it appears not. Most guest speakers have full CC included. Why is this any different? I can't really just toss guessing out there, but it is odd.

    That being said, I ended up listen

    • Scare quotes around the word "research" was your biggest slip up. The rhetoric of the conspiracy theorist is fascinating. You tried so hard to sound reasonable but it just didn't work. Like how you started out with a few citations, or how you implied motive without assigning it. The bit about how it's not a "Trump v. Biden" thing in an attempt to make yourself sound like a non-partisan was a nice touch, too. I mean, you might even be a non-partisan. But you clearly follow the broken logic of a conspiracy th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by t0qer ( 230538 )

        Coming from a guy who gives advice on how to escape vi in his sig.

        oo - add a new line
        d right arrow - delete what's to the right
        d22 right arrow - delete 22 characters to the right
        dd - delete the next line

        EZ...

        >I think you genuinely believe this bullshit so I'll give you a bit of advice: Sometimes things are as simple as they seem.

        That's precious, coming from someone scared to learn vi, something useful as it's on all unix type systems. No, nothing is ever as simple as it seems. Here's some advice because

    • There is equipment and pathogens that are being "researched" the same way things were being researched in Wuhan. You would think after Covid, we would have learned our lesson.

      We did. When people who don't understand shit start talking about wuhan we stop listening. Good day, sir.

  • the conservative website Breitbart said DuckDuckGo was "adopting the censorship policies" of Big Tech.

    Er, well ... by using Bing for results, they kind of literally are.

    Whether they should is a separate question. But nobody is disputing that they are.

    • No, nothing is being censored. It is being downranked for being lower quality information sources. Which is exactly what search engines are supposed to do.

  • "So, I will say what I know we all say and I will say over and over again, the United States stands firmly with the Ukrainian people in defense of the NATO Alliance"
    -- Kamala Harris, today at DNC general session.

  • The CEO of DDG posted on Twitter that DDG was itself down ranking information. He said NOTHING about MS Bing.

    EditorDavid should at least go on this thread and acknowledge the bullshit fake news from the NYT that he has effectively promoted.

  • Has anyone thought that our western governments might be lying to us & spreading harmful misinformation too? When I say governments, I mostly mean our extremist elected officials supported by extremist media.

    • If you can see all sides, and wildly differing views then they probably are not ... ..or at least not very effectively

      If you are in China then you could easily prove that nothing happened in 1989 in Tiananmen Square at all ... .. here we can see what happened, but also people arguing the opposite

      • And most people aren't aware of how much they're being manipulated by their beloved media. How many people think that the US invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc., were wars of aggression - The primary war crime that the Nazis were convicted of at Nuremberg?

  • I recently started using DDG, because of brand recognition after Google started to be be really really slow for days in a row. I found no degradation of search results for stayed with it, but I had no idea it was just a rebranding of Bing.

    Clearly after all this unethical bullshit the CEO is pulling their is no reason to stick with this particular middleman, so are their actually any good alternative search engines?

  • NYT claims that DDG was criticized by the "far right." In actual fact, they were criticized by the far left, left, moderates, right, and not the far right. Breitbart is not far right. Far right is parties like KKK.

    On twitter, the NYT author defended himself by saying that just because he said they were criticized by the "far right," it doesn't mean they were criticized "only" by the far right. So, he knows that he was basically lying.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

      You are mistaken. KKK was created by and continues to be run by the Democrats and the left. Go ahead, don't believe me. Look up Senator Byrd, a Democrat who died recently. Look at his history, how Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden spoke at his funeral and what did they say? Biden is on record using the N word repeatedly in the senate and not that long ago. Look up the KKK. The fact that no one Republican owned a slave prior to the civil war. The crime act of 1993 where Hillary called young black men crime preda

    • "Breitbart is not far right" - ROFL!

  • The only reason I don't use DuckDuckGo is it's search results are poor ... now I know why

  • Should just write a new search engine for themselves... I'm sure the far-right would appreciate a complete fake-news-universe search engine that provide them nothing but confirmation BIAS... Only problem in running such a place would be the infighting between the people claiming it is the jews that are running the show, the people claiming it is the gays, and the people claiming it is aliens... Maybe a compromise? Jewish gay aliens?

Slashdot Top Deals

Heisenberg may have been here.

Close