There should be a search engine that is exactly the same as any other, with the sole exception that it blocks MSM news articles in the results.

submitted by Ponderer from (self.whatever)

That is all.

Imagine how much higher-quality your search results would be without clickbait or obvious propaganda littering the first few pages.

all 10 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]LarrySwinger2 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Add "-msn.com" to the query.

[–]Ponderer[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Thanks, that's a good idea!

The only thing is that you'd need a very long string of those to exclude all MSM sites, and you'd need to add it every time you make a search. It's a good strategy to use for now, definitely. I just wish there was a site that did it automatically.

[–]LarrySwinger2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

A userscript could be written that includes the list automatically. You could also go the whitelist route of only including the domains that you want to search. See this page. It'd take time to build a comprehensive list of domains you care about, but you'll get much better results.

[–]Ponderer[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks for the advice! Something like this would make the Internet a lot better, like going back to 10 years ago when search results were actually relevant and true most of the time.

[–]LarrySwinger2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes. It's terrible that we're regressing, and I feel like Google should be forced to share the secret sauce that's in their algorithms. If you do make a custom search engine, feel free to share it here. Perhaps we could make it a collaborative project. (Although I wouldn't partake, because jewgle blocks Tor requests.)

[–]russianhomo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

A userscript could be written that includes the list automatically.

yeah, it is called censorship, which is what you are trying to avoid..

the problem is that the children at this site do not know how to sit down in a "think tank" fashion and to draw up a proper definition of what the real problem is...

instead, these kids are just running around in circles and throwing darts at an imaginary problem...

the problem will never be solved this way..

nice try, mr swinger.

[–]HiddenFox 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're not coming to my birthday party! >:-(

[–]russianhomo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

i was worrying about that.. i am sure glad we cleared that up.

now i can take that clown suit back to walmart, ffs.

[–]GST893 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

But where would all the shills get their bullshit sources from?

[–]russianhomo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

i am curious if cockroaches masturbate.. should i search on google or bing? I DO NOT WANT ANY MORE FAKED NEWS. OR WAS THAT "FAKE NUDES"? FAKE NEWDDS.. YEAH, THATS IT.