WSJ reporter compares Google v Reddit search results

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 3 янв 2025

Комментарии • 13

  • @Sp7ce
    @Sp7ce 6 месяцев назад +1

    I feel like she added nothing to this discussion. He covered it all by himself with better insight

    • @SigFigNewton
      @SigFigNewton 6 месяцев назад

      U kidding?

    • @SigFigNewton
      @SigFigNewton 6 месяцев назад

      I feel like he added nothing and she covered it all with more insight

  • @SueUTube
    @SueUTube 6 месяцев назад +2

    Reddit results - Trump is bad
    Google results - Trump is really bad

    • @SigFigNewton
      @SigFigNewton 6 месяцев назад +1

      I dunno on my experience it’s just as hard to avoid anti Biden content

    • @SigFigNewton
      @SigFigNewton 6 месяцев назад

      A democracy where people only ever vote for the same two parties leads to the vast majority of political propaganda being “the other side is dumb, corrupt, and actually dangerous,” rather than “our party supports these policies and here’s why”

    • @SigFigNewton
      @SigFigNewton 6 месяцев назад +1

      So, you know. Ranked choice voting.

    • @mogshot
      @mogshot 6 месяцев назад

      if it quacks like a duck and acts like a duck then Trump must really be bad.

  • @Here---Now
    @Here---Now 6 месяцев назад

    Great job, nice voices!

  • @Ciborium
    @Ciborium 6 месяцев назад

    Google search says you should eat two small rocks every day because someone on Reddit said you should eat two small rocks every day.

    • @mogshot
      @mogshot 6 месяцев назад +1

      Just like my downvote of your comment You miss the point. the consensus of users is what helps not conflate bad answers as they can be peer-reviewed. Better answers rise. If you refuse and just take the first answer you're already stupid without looking into doing your own due-diligence.