Google discriminates against conservatives and climate skeptics

Before you get into this article, let me say that I’m experiencing this sort of search engine discrimination myself.

Years ago when I would occasionally conduct a Google search for ‘ice age’, this website (iceagenow) would invariably show up on the first or second page of results. That was very heartening. 

But today it’s a far different story. I just conducted a Google search for ‘ice age’ about 10 minutes ago, and did not show up until the 14th page of results.  This for a website that has garnered more than 42 million hits. This for a website that actually has ‘ice age’ as part of its name. If you were searching for something, would you keep trudging on for 14 pages? I doubt it.


“David Wojick has written an important, perceptive article explaining how Google’s search engine algorithms so successfully exclude conservative, climate skeptic, and free market news and opinion from even specific inquiries,” writes Paul Driessen. “As David notes, during his test searches “Google never found a truly conservative (what it would call right wing) source” like Townhall or the Daily Caller. “It just doesn’t happen, and the algorithm clearly knows that, as does Google.”

“For a supposed research and educational tool that commands 92.2% of all online inquiries, this is not just reprehensible. It is downright dangerous for a free, functioning, modern democratic society and world. It is especially unacceptable when that “search engine” uses a public internet system that was built by government agencies, using taxpayer dollars, for the purpose of ensuring the free flow of information and open, robust discussion of vital policy issues.”


Google discriminates against conservatives and climate skeptics

We must understand how Google does it, why it is wrong and how it hurts America

David Wojick

Several months ago, Google quietly released a 32-page white paper, “How Google Fights Disinformation.” That sound good. The problem is that Google not only controls a whopping 92.2% of all online searches. It is a decidedly left-wing outfit, which views things like skepticism of climate alarmism, and conservative views generally, as “disinformation.” The white paper explains how Google’s search and news algorithms operate, to suppress what Google considers disinformation and wants to keep out of educational and public discussions.

The algorithms clearly favor liberal content when displaying search results. Generally speaking, they rank and present search results based on the use of so-called “authoritative sources.” The problem is, these sources are mostly “mainstream” media, which are almost entirely liberal.

Google’s algorithmic definition of “authoritative” makes liberals the voice of authority. Bigger is better, and the liberals have the most and biggest news outlets. The algorithms are very complex, but the basic idea is that the more other websites link to you, the greater your authority.

It is like saying a newspaper with more subscribers is more trustworthy than one with fewer subscribers. This actually makes no sense, but that is how it works with the news and in other domains. Popularity is not authority, but the algorithm is designed to see it that way.

This explains why the first page of search results for breaking news almost always consists of links to liberal outlets. There is absolutely no balance with conservative news sources. Given that roughly half of Americans are conservatives, Google’s liberal news bias is truly reprehensible.

In the realm of public policies affecting our energy, economy, jobs, national security, living standards and other critical issues, the suppression of alternative or skeptical voices, evidence and perspectives becomes positively dangerous for our nation and world

Last year, I documented an extreme case of this bias the arena of “dangerous manmade global warming” alarmism. My individual searches on prominent skeptics of alarmist claims revealed that Google’s “authoritative source” was an obscure website called DeSmogBlog, whose claim to fame is posting nasty negative dossiers on skeptics, including me and several colleagues.

In each search, several things immediately happened. First, Google linked to DeSmogBlog’s dossier on the skeptic, even though it might be a decade old  and/or wildly inaccurate. Indeed, sometimes this was the first entry in the search results. Second, roughly half of the results were negative attacks – which should not be surprising, since the liberal press often attacks us skeptics.

Third, skeptics are often labeled as “funded by big oil,” whereas funding of alarmists by self-interested government agencies, renewable energy companies, far-left foundations or Tom Steyer (who became a billionaire by financing Asian coal mines) was generally ignored.

In stark contrast, searching for information about prominent climate alarmists yielded nothing but praise. This too is not surprising, since Google’s liberal “authoritative” sources love alarmists.

This algorithm’s bias against skeptics is breathtaking – and it extends to the climate change debate itself. Search results on nearly all climate issues are dominated by alarmist content.

In fact, climate change seems to get special algorithmic attention. Goggle’s special category of climate webpages, hyperbolically called “Your Money or Your Life,” requires even greater “authoritative” control in searches. No matter how well reasoned, articles questioning the dominance of human factors in climate change, the near-apocalyptic effects of predicted climate change, or the value and validity of climate models are routinely ignored by Google’s algorithms.

The algorithm also ignores the fact that our jobs, economy, financial wellbeing, living standards, and freedom to travel and heat or cool our homes would be severely and negatively affected by energy proposals justified in the name of preventing human-caused cataclysmic climate change. The monumental mining and raw material demands of wind turbines, solar panels, biofuels and batteries likewise merit little mention in Google searches. Ditto for the extensive impacts of these supposed “clean, green, renewable, sustainable” technologies on lands, habitats and wildlife.

It’s safe to say that climate change is now the world’s biggest single public policy issue. And yet Google simply downgrades and thus “shadow bans” any pages that contain “demonstrably inaccurate content or debunked conspiracy theories.” That is how alarmists describe skepticism about any climate alarm or renewable energy claims. Google does not explain how its algorithm makes these intrinsically subjective determinations as to whether an article is accurate, authoritative and thus posted – or incorrect, questionable and thus consigned to oblivion.

Google’s authority-based search algorithm is also rigged to favor liberal content over virtually all conservative content; it may be especially true for climate and energy topics. This deep liberal bias is fundamentally wrong and un-American, given Google’s central role in our lives.

Google’s creators get wealthy by controlling access to information – and thus thinking, debate, public policy decisions and our future – by using a public internet system that was built by defense and other government agencies, using taxpayer dollars, for the purpose of ensuring the free flow of information and open, robust discussion of vital policy issues. It was never meant to impose liberal-progressive-leftist police state restrictions on who gets to be heard.

According to its “How we fight disinformation” white paper, Google’s separate news search feature gets special algorithmic treatment – meaning that almost all links returned on the first page are to liberal news sources. This blatant bias stands out like a sore thumb in multiple tests. In no case involving the first ten links did I get more than one link to a conservative news source. Sometimes I got none.

For example, my news search on “Biden 2020” returned the following top ten search results, in this order: CNN, the New York Times, Vice, Politico, CNN again, Fortune, Vox, Fox News, The Hill and Politico. The only actual conservative source was Fox News, in eighth position.

Of course conservative content would not be friendly to Mr. Biden. But if Google can prominently post attacks on skeptics and conservatives, why can’t it do so for attacks on Democrats?

The highest conservative content I found was one link in eight or 12 percent. About a third of my sample cases had no conservative sources whatsoever. The average of around 7% measures Google’s dramatic bias in favor of liberal sources, greatly compounding its 92.2% dominance.

The lonely conservative sources are more middle of the road, like Fox News and the Washington Examiner. Google never found or highlighted a truly conservative (what it would call “right wing”) source, like Brietbart, Townhall or the Daily Caller. It just doesn’t happen, and the algorithm clearly knows that, as does Google. As do other information and social media sites.

Of course, I’m not alone in finding or encountering this blatant viewpoint discrimination.

When coupled with the nearly complete takeover of UN, IPCC, World Bank and other global governance institutions by environmentalist and socialist forces – and their near-total exclusion of manmade climate chaos skeptics, free market-oriented economists and anyone who questions the role or impact of renewable energy – the effect on discussion, debate, education and informed decision-making is dictatorial and devastating.

No free, prosperous, modern society can survive under such conditions and restrictions. It’s time for citizens, legislators, regulators and judges to rein in and break up this imperious monopoly.

David Wojick is an independent analyst specializing in science, logic and human rights in public policy, and author of numerous articles on these topics.



34 thoughts on “Google discriminates against conservatives and climate skeptics”

  1. All part of a cunning plan which will, once the UN claims greater powers, ban all dissent on the greatest sale of snake oil ever conceived in human history!

  2. The search engine duck duck go has you on the first page. Thought you would like to know
    Best Regards
    Richard (U.K)

  3. They don’t call it Goolag for nothing. Google’s motto used to be “Don’t be evil.” That sign that used to hang around inside of Google’s buildings is gone and now they do evil.

    Here is a good meme that destroys the idea that CO2 is too high:

    CO2 is extremely low by geological standards, and in the last Ice Age maximum CO2 got so low plants stopped growing!

  4. It would seem that all websites being discriminated against by biased search algorithms, as well as outright deplatforming etc, might have a collective cause of action. In light of the “outing” of said bias by Gurgle employees, with documentation, a Class Action Suit could have merit in an appropriate Court. At least Gurgle would have to explain itself and prove there is no bias, which ought be interesting. Using DuckDuckGo and the search term “iceagenow” your site is First on the First webpage. Same for using Webcrawler. Using Dogpile, and the identical search term, your website comes up as #2 and #3 on the first page of results. 1900 Hrs, EST. 31 Aug 2019. Obviously, Gurgle’s results are filtered.

  5. I just tried it with Duckduckgo, got it on page 2, on google I got it on page 4. The first two pages on google seemed to be mainly ads for the Ice age movies. The last two I searched had many more links, less ads.

  6. I just did the search on three search engines, Google, Bing and DuckDuckGo. Both Google and Bing yielded results on the 3rd page, while DuckDuckGo was on the second page.

  7. Although this posting is specific to the climate topic, this manipulation of information is far more pervasive, insidious, and long running than most people can possibly imagine.
    The biggest single reason we proud ‘conspiracy theorists’ are so effectively marginalized is that the control, presentation, and erasure of alarming data has been occurring for eons.

  8. 1) DuckDuckGo 14th (iceagefarmer) and 16th (iceagenow)
    2) Dogpile 7th (iceagefarmer) and 9th (iceagenow)
    3) Yippy 12th
    and of course Google ….
    I quit looking after 7 pages.

    And that is why I don’t use them

  9. Some years ago, back in my seafaring days, I had an intense interest in weather but little in climate. Then one day at a friend’s house I watched both An Inconvenient Truth and The Day After Tomorrow in an afternoon. Thoroughly disgusted, I Googled “global cooling” and it led me straight to iceagenow and wattsupwiththat, which I have read faithfully ever since.

  10. Google is clearly part of the cabal that wishes to rule the world.

    Why be outraged at dogs that bark or bears that sh*t in the woods? They are simply following their nature.

  11. yup duckduckgo or another called Brave(not used but is recommended) are good browsers
    theres more around if you look
    I havent used google in 15yrs at least
    I dont like filthing up my pc using it with all its tracking and pry ware/spyware ads and trash.
    I DO use it if Im looking for a scammer company to come up on the first page, usually.on a library or other pc. or anything running linux which helps defeat them.
    funny how they allow so much real trash and filter real news and data isnt it?
    dont use gmail chrome edge etc if you dont want to be handing your life to the megacorps into control and dumbing you down.
    thunderbird mails good and free as is firefox.
    upload both and then delete the buggy microsoft crud
    edge is VERY hard to remove if youve ever opened it I warn you it will NOT delete in control panel, you need to open programs , find it and remove it manually.

  12. I have experienced the same thing, Robert. I used to appear in the first few pages if you searched “Arctic sea-ice”, for though my site is obscure some posts have received thousands of views. Now I have searched down many pages and can’t find myself at all. I am “disappeared”.

    This is folly on the part of Google, for it once was the best search engine, but now they are intentionally making it malfunction. People will catch on and seek better engines.

    I switched to Duckduckgo. Though inferior in some ways they are improving all the time.

    People can circumvent this attempt to “disappear” Robert by sharing links to his site as often as possible.

    And here is a link to my latest sea-ice post, which the new and inferior Google can’t find:

  13. I looked up Startpage but I gave up searching for Robert’s site because I kept clicking on Ice Age, the Movie, information (which is precisely what the promoters want me to do LOL).
    Feeling dismayed because I thought we are all being tracked so a climate scientist is more likely to be led to RELEVANT climate articles whereas the students might be more interested in good movies LOL. Bit of a downer if Google is giving everyone leftist newspaper articles even if their interests lie elsewhere 🙁

  14. Being aware of the bias in search engines I use duckduckgo, however in the last four months a new disturbing trend is occurring in my attempted access to sites which MAY disagree with MSM sites on a host of issues. I am being warned by my antivirus and malware programs that sites I am going to are totally unsafe. Your site which I have been accessing for over 5 years requires that I override my security features and command them to stop before I get to your site. If I had never been to your site before I would be significantly more reluctant to get here. This is starting to happen at WUWT, Jo Nova, Judith Curry,, Dr. Roy Spencer, must be a coincident. MOVE ALONG NOTHING TO SEE DANGEROUS IDEAS HERE

    • can i guess your also running windoze 8 or ten?

      I really do recommend swapping to the linux programs like MINT its pretty easy to get the hang of and works similar to win7
      with no other experience but years ago on apple and normally xp or 7 I found I could work it out pretty easily

      you dont get the intrusions telling you where to browse and what to read see or hear.

      best of all its FREE upgraded pretty often and fairly secure
      cinnamon Mint 19 has some spiffy security and backups options as well.

    • I get the unsafe security gate also with Firefox and I have to take an extra step to allow the unsafe content and Duckduckgo as search to get the website up. I use Duckduckgo even though I know DDG uses the google data search engine and the google results that DDG pulls in are already swiped clean or seriously demoted by the Google gestapo. To receive more (Google) censored results, use Gibiru as a search engine. Make sure you use the All option in the upper left corner of Gibaldi and this site iceagenow is #1 and #2 on Gibaldi. Consider Vivaldi as an alternative browser or adjunct to Firefox as Vivaldi while Chromiun is so far a less intrusive and there is little of the herding the masses into the corral of communist google utopia maniacs. Google has bought or forces out most competitors to achieve their 90% market share. Mozilla does not use chrome or chromium both designed and owned by Google so worth our support.

  15. Yep, This has been going on for years. When I put in ICE AGE NOW I get the old site (First page). This is hard for New viewers to find the current news and New Site (Big Button Here). I have it Book Marked (Till they ban that) Anyway Robert.
    Thanks for all the Great news and I go here each day to find out whats going on. Let It Snow, Let It Snow, Let I Snow.
    Love Al Gore’s Ice Breaker to cap it off.

  16. I live in the U.K use Linux Mint /firefox/ecosia search
    and got ice age now on the first page, 9th item down, above were the films and info on ice ages

  17. I would have thought that this leaves the market open for an unbiased or – god forbid eh – a right wing search engine.

  18. I use both Duck Duck Go and Startpage. Searching for “Ice age now” on Startpage brings it up as the first result.

  19. When I searched Google. com for ice age now the first listing was .info the second was .com and the third was thesmugBlog(Sic) which used ad homienim attacks like one person, co-sponsor with “Heartland etc several times” Please don’t waste your time instead accept our Divine opinion that this is a waste of your time, serf rabble, deplorable.. Do I need to add /sarc?

  20. sad but all we can do is to publicize the good ones. Keep secure in doing the right! Thanks for the information on the Brasilian fires! (sorry guys I spell it Brasil as the Brasilians do – am I not correct?

Comments are closed.