Unbiased webs search results - Independence of Cyberspace

Unbiased webs search results

Two authors Eli Pariser and Andreas Ekström announce how search engines work and the way the search results are determined. The fact of the matter is that the Internet users can influence the search results or change them.

Eli Pariser claims that the Internet is important for democracy and society in general. Moreover, according to Pariser, a web is a connection of the world and people together. Additionally, he notices that Facebook and Google conduct an "invisible, algorithmic editing of the web". This means that if two people search simultaneously for the same information, they might get different results. Therefore, there are no objective search results and idea of unbiased search results is a myth.

Andreas Ekström supports this suggestion and explains that everyone can write a code and fix it. He compares two situations as an example. First situation happened with Michelle Obama. She was a victim of a racist campaign, and her face in the picture was distorted, but the results were self-cleaned. The second situation was connected with a terrorist. People made a protest to insult him in his search results and found a picture of the dog poops then file name was changed into the terrorist name. This time Google did not intervene, because the authority of a person has played a role.

Overall, I would say that Internet users should be aware of the flow of information on the Internet and they should not accept its isolation as a pure fact. On the other hand, society needs Web resources to acquaint people with new conception and perspectives. Furthermore, I believe that it will serve humanity and enhance its opportunity.

Antonija, I do not feel that your interpretation of the article is complete. Somehow, it seems that you missed out on a few elements of the discussion which may have strengthened your comparison essay. There should be some overlapping points where the writers agreed or collectively disagreed with an idea pertaining to the discussion. While the flow of the discussion seems smooth, there is a lack of transition in the presentation that should have connected the two discussion paragraphs. Maybe I need to read the original article(s) so that I can figure out where this discussion is supposed to head. As stand alone paragraphs, you presented good discussions. As a collective discussion, it feels wanting in development and discussion presentation. If the discussion had a better comparison presentation by applying some of the thoughts of one author to the example provided by the other, then perhaps there would have been more substance to the presentation and a better understanding of the given discussion points.

Thank you for your answer, this is not an article, but a video where the authors publicly speak. I can write a task.