news.volyx.in

Why has examine.com disappeared from search results? (examine.com)

750 points by cyrusshepard · 2625 days ago · 353 comments on HN

Article summary

The article discusses the disappearance of examine.com from Google search results. The reason for this disappearance is not specified in the article, but the comments suggest it may be due to Google's algorithms or content filtering systems. Examine.com is a website that provides scientific information on food and supplements. Its removal from search results has sparked a discussion on the reliability and impartiality of Google's search engine.

Main themes

  • Google search algorithm
  • content filtering
  • alternative search engines
  • monopoly and censorship
  • search result reliability

What commenters say

  • Google's algorithms may be filtering out legitimate websites, including examine.com, due to over-reliance on automated content filtering systems.
  • The prioritization of reputation over search matching in Google's algorithms can lead to relevant information being buried in search results.
  • Some argue that Google's actions are a form of censorship, particularly in the health and wellness space, where certain websites are being disproportionately affected.
  • Others believe that Google's algorithms are not perfect, but they provide generally good results for most people, and that the issue is not unique to examine.com.
  • The disappearance of examine.com from search results highlights the need for alternative search engines that can provide more accurate and unbiased results.
  • The power of Google's search engine and its potential for censorship is a concern, particularly in winner-take-all markets where one company has a significant majority of the market share.
  • Some commenters argue that examine.com's design and content may not be optimized for Google's algorithms, which could be contributing to its low search ranking.
  • There are differing opinions on whether Google's actions are a form of editorializing, with some arguing that it is a necessary step to combat misinformation, while others see it as a threat to free speech and access to information.