8 comments

• 

  Adam Green

  10 months ago

  Sorry, Matthew, but I think you are wrong on this one. Are you assuming that the algorithm used by Google is some sort of absolutely correct result? It is the definition of bias. All search engines are biased in this way. They are based on the link pattern of the majority of the Web pages they find, and the clicks of users. If the "majority" controls the behavior, then that is inherent bias. It makes sense for a search engine like RushmoreDrive to try and attract a different user base, and then reflect their bias instead. This isn't racism, it is good business sense for a publisher. It also gives advertisers a more targeted readership. Isn't that one of the goals of publishing?
  reply
• 

  mathewi

  10 months ago

  I'm not saying Google's results are absolutely perfect, Adam -- I'm just saying I don't think they're so biased that a whole new, racially-biased search engine is necessary, that's all.
  
  And your argument about publishing makes sense, but that's not the argument that Johnny Taylor was making in the articles I've read. That's what I was responding to.
  
  In any case, thanks for the comment.
  reply
• 

  Adam Green

  10 months ago

  You are right that the "We need a black Google" pitch is a little over the top, but it makes a great headline. If RushmoreDrive makes the unilateral decision that people of a certain "race" prefer a certain item, that is silly. Race is a cultural construct and varies over a wide range of behaviors. On the other hand, the general model of trying to attract a certain demographic group, and then using their behavior to direct search engine results is a great idea. The perfect search answer surely varies from one group to another.
  reply
• 

  calamityjake

  10 months ago

  Matthew, to respond more to your tangential point than the main one:
  
  I think the idea of British results actually makes a fair amount of sense, and I wonder whether Google (or some other search site) actually does adjust its results based on the location of the user's IP. I mean, Google automatically sends me to google.ca when I'm on Canadian wifi--why shouldn't the results they give me be similarly sorted based on my location? Like I said, that seems very doable, and I wonder if anybody's already doing it (just without creating a startup that will never get much use).
  reply
• 

  mathewi

  10 months ago

  That makes a certain amount of sense to me, Jake -- location-based filtering, I mean. But that's not what we're talking about, really. RushmoreDrive is filtering based on race, and making assumptions about preferences as a result (i.e., soul food instead of "white" food, Whitney Houston, etc.). In fact, when it comes right down to it, I'm not sure I like location-based filtering either -- I like the option to search Canadian results, but it bugs me when Google forces me to go to google.ca.
  reply
• 

  calamityjake

  10 months ago

  Right, I agree that race-based search results probably don't make much
  sense, and I don't think location-based results should necessarily be
  the default, but I'm sure google keeps track of use based on location
  and could easily give users an option to search with location-biased
  results. And that would be a lot more meaningful than trying to
  acommodate the cultural diversity of an entire ethnicity.
  
  Sent from my iPod, forgive any typos.
  reply
• 

  Me

  10 months ago

  I have used RushmoreDrive.com and find it much better than Google. It's not perfect -- and no search engine is. But as a black man, I like it -- and that's the point after all, right? RushmoreDrive gives US what we want. If it doesn't work for a white man, don't use it because it wasn't made for you. WE like RushmoreDrive and it makes perfect sense to us.
  reply
• 

  Daniel Tunkelang

  10 months ago

  My 2 cents over at The Noisy Channel: http://thenoisychannel.blogspot.com/2008/08/thi...
  reply