Live data from Hacker News

Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

twitter.com

91–100 of 290 posts

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#91
Far from unique to BoJo. This is a wildly successful strategy, which also explains the outrageous and obvious lying (e.g. in front of dozens of press saying "there's no press here"). It's not new. Many of the internet era populists currently so successful have used it. Trump was the first time I saw it, but perhaps it goes back further.

Each and every time he lies, misremembers and drops in a search term he makes it harder to disprove as both sides get reported. The original story and the the reports of the use of the lie. Both in the respected media, not just a random blogspot. Frequently they're both running at the same time.

With Trump the Democrats and media spent to much time "fact checking" to see the strategy. Ours have done no better with BoJo, despite seeing it played out so successfully in the US.

It completely burns the post-war expectation that politicians be honest, and plays all sides as effectively.

I'd love to know where it really originated.

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#92

The most worrying for me? Even after countless updates to their algorithms, breakthrough AI and ML, breaking hundred of thousands of legit website each time, Google is still dumb enough to be tricked by such a simplistic tactics :-( Or is Google biased toward "official" speech (even from a really-not-trustable source) like Twitter is when it will allow BS from a President (because it's an official account so not subj…

Was it "tricked" or does it just prioritize recent news articles? If media stop reporting about "model scandal" and start reporting about "model of restraint", and Google assumes you're interested in most recent news stories (seems reasonable to me), then it's doing the correct thing. (Feel free to blame the media instead for dropping an important story, but then I feel the same thing about Epstein scandal...)

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#93

Hmm, you sure about this? I just googled "boris johnson model" and got nothing but results about affairs and Jennifer Arcuri.

Nobody can be sure about this except google itself, because google gives different results for each user or location. I get all the affairs as well, but I don't matter to BJ as I'm not a UK citizen and won't vote.

Just for fun, I connected through a VPN (private internet access) and googled via a fresh firefox private window and the majority of the results are about his relationship with Jennifer Arcuri. A couple of results at the bottom of the page are about his "model of restraint" quote, that's it!

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#95
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing that got me was the bus thing was "spiritually" true. The UK does send a fortune to the EU, and the EU will not spend it on the NHS. At best they may use it to resurface a road in the UK in some town no one has ever heard of along with a "eu project" propoganda badge. But the spirit of the message held water, even if it wasnt technically true during tuesday of the second easter of a red moon.

It isn't "spiritually" true. It is factually true to the extent that the High Court ruled 350m was approximately the correct gross figure. Indeed some say that figure is conservative because it was based on projections from an official figure dated from 2014 that put the gross at closer to 450m. I'm guessing 2014 was high because of financial bailouts still being paid into the EU coffers. From the ruling statement: “…

Isn't it strange that any and all seemingly pro-Brexit posts here are being downvoted.

What you posted is factually correct. From observation, HN has turned into just another Slashdot, unfortunately. I came here to escape from Slashdot's obvious liberal-biased bubble, but the infestation has happened here too. No doubt this post will be downvoted into oblivion as well, including the other replie(s) I've made on this topic. :(

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#96

My pals cracked this one back in June! https://parall.ax/blog/view/3301/boris-johnson-the-unlikely-...

Plugging a mate's blog or not, this is much more interesting and informative than ' omg the world is so corrupt' & some guy tweeting speculation.

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#97

Wouldn't this require him to know how he is going to be quoted in advance? Should everyone be so readily accepting that this is some genius level of foresight?

It's hardly genius and it's hardly coming from Boris. His press team will have told him to drop in particular words or phrases repeatedly - if we hear it once, he has probably said it multiple times.

Is there evidence of this happening though?

It just seems like this is a screenshot with some comments on it, and a lot of assumptions.

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#99

Far from unique to BoJo. This is a wildly successful strategy, which also explains the outrageous and obvious lying (e.g. in front of dozens of press saying "there's no press here"). It's not new. Many of the internet era populists currently so successful have used it. Trump was the first time I saw it, but perhaps it goes back further. Each and every time he lies, misremembers and drops in a search term he makes it…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

Re: Boris Johnson uses search terms in interviews to hide negative articles?

#100
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DuckDuckGo is Bing without the tracking. Bing is generally a very good search engine, to be fair.

Does Bing shows better respect to search operators, than Google's attitude - "i already know what you want" ?

Not really (at least, not via DDG). Just like Google, it now frequently ignores or changes key words unless you quote them, and sometimes seems to ignore quoted words, as Google seems to. Both search engines have become quite frustrating (I primarily use DDG, and falling back on Google is hit and miss).
Post reply on HN