Google Suggests Washington Post Is Anti-Semitic?

h/t to commenter Joeb for bringing this up. I do recall seeing it the first time and scratching my head, but I was busy running two blogs and moved on.

In a Washington Post item on the House's apology for slavery, the Washington Post had this to say (though they waited two graphs to point out Cohen is running against a black in the primary.

The resolution, which passed on a voice vote late in the day, was sponsored by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), a white Jew who represents a majority-black district in Memphis. Cohen tried unsuccessfully to join the Congressional Black Caucus this year.

Commenter Joeb found the wording crass, as did and do I, simply given common usage, so I went to Google and simply Googled the word "Jew." Before they present any results, the top link is this below. So, in this world of Political Correctness run amok ... how is it that the Washington Post gets away with using what is quite often considered a slur against Jews? And are they one of the sites Google is warning searchers about? Hmm.

Offensive Search Results

An explanation of our search results.

If you recently used Google to search for the word "Jew," you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We'd like to explain why you're seeing these results when you conduct this search.

A site's ranking in Google's search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for "Jew" brings up one such unexpected result.

If you use Google to search for "Judaism," "Jewish" or "Jewish people," the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for "Jew" different? One reason is that the word "Jew" is often used in an anti-Semitic context. Jewish organizations are more likely to use the word "Jewish" when talking about members of their faith. The word has become somewhat charged linguistically, as noted on websites devoted to Jewish topics such as these:

http://shakti.trincoll.edu/~mendele/vol01/vol01.174
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah081500.asp

Someone searching for information on Jewish people would be more likely to enter terms like "Judaism," "Jewish people," or "Jews" than the single word "Jew." In fact, prior to this incident, the word "Jew" only appeared about once in every 10 million search queries. Now it's likely that the great majority of searches on Google for "Jew" are by people who have heard about this issue and want to see the results for themselves.

Comments

[SacTownMan]

They should have said "pandering" white jew!

So who owns Google?

[IslamoLlama]

So who owns Google?

Clearly a pack of liberal elitists. Clearly.

So, what are we on now? Post three of Dan's "I will not apologize for slavery!" morality crusade? Why can't guys like you be front and center on the McCain campaign, Dan? My god, having your face and all these quotes plastered across every major tv network in the country would warm my heart.

[SacTownMan]

Slightly off topic but I doubt the MSM or our troll friends will bring this little item up:

"The 2nd Quarter Gross Domestic Product numbers came out Thursday morning and the economy continued to grow, this time at a stronger pace than last quarter - 1.9 percent."

Not only have we not had the two consecutive quarters of negative growth needed to signal a recession we haven't had even "one" quarter of negative growth.

Don't expect this to make the news though. The Democrats political dialogue of gloom and doom on the economy can't be questioned. George Soros would not allow it!

This totally screws with one of their favorite talking points about America being in a recession.

GWB announces lifting the White House ban on off-shore drilling and the price of oil drops like a rock!

Bush should call an emergency session of congress and make these lazy shits accountable. Imagine if the "worst congress in history" were made to stay in session to deal with the energy crisis instead of taking the upcoming 6 week break. If they ended the off shore drilling ban they have in place you would see another huge drop in the price of a barrel of oil overnight.

The Republicans voted overwhelmingly yesterday to stay in session joined by 17 democrats but the rest of the "do nothing" Dems couldn't be bothered.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/07/its-vacation-time-house-adjourns.html

Heck those bitter, clingy voters will never notice!

And more importantly we couldn't have Barry on record as voting against lifting the off-shore ban prior to the election. Ah hell the "great uniter" would most likely just vote his favorite cop out "present" either way. The Democratic strategy of "waiting it out" until the election can't be derailed.

Maybe the Botox queen will be too busy hyping the worst book on Amazon (#899) ranked book about saving the world as the world's most powerful woman:(just a couple of heartbeats from POTUS).

http://www.amazon.com/Know-Your-Power-Americas-Daughters/dp/0385525869

[Fred Beloit]

"AP Plays Fast and Loose With Jobless Numbers
The Associated Press is misleading its readers when reporting on job losses.
July 31, 2008 - by Tom Blumer"

It seems an AP reporter is hyping job losses that don't really exist.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/ap-plays-fast-and-loose-with-jobless-numbers/

BTW I just returned from spending a few days in Dothan, Alabama, another bustling and prosperous Alabama community. Funny how Alabama just happens to be going in a very different direction from the economic disaster Obama and supporters tell us is going on in the rest of the country.

[seekeronos]

"--- So who owns Google?

Clearly a pack of liberal elitists. Clearly. ---"

Well, a whole pile of stockholders actually own Google. Along with a number of especially wealthy original owners, most of who tend to be liberals.

There was a whole big stink about a year or two ago about how Google favoured liberal-biased web sites over conservatives sites.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Well, a whole pile of stockholders actually own Google. Along with a number of especially wealthy original owners, most of who tend to be liberals. --"

I believe the technical term for them is "class traitors". But yes, the original owners have demonstrated their extensive liberal bias by... uh... um... doing that thing... that liberals do. I think they drink a lot of Starbucks. Or something. Freak'n liberals.

"-- There was a whole big stink about a year or two ago about how Google favoured liberal-biased web sites over conservatives sites. --"

Yes. I believe the stink was coming from the conservative side of the internet. There was a great deal of fainting and crying and foot stomping in between tirades at Universities, the MSM, lawyers, the northeast, gays, blacks, people who drink coffee, and the French - all of whom were guilty of "liberal bias".

[dixww]

http://uuejjs.createblog.com/blog/entry.php?id=16903
http://sooosos.createblog.com/blog/entry.php?id=16910
http://lilllii.createblog.com/blog/entry.php?id=16913

[seekeronos]

Google's Liberal Bias in 2006 ... straight from the horse's mouth:

www.google.com/search?q=google+liberal+bias&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[vbmqy]

http://yoyoyo.blogscotland.co.uk/3425295/
http://hoohoho.blogireland.co.uk/3425253/
http://hoohoho.blogireland.co.uk/3425266/