Google and other big tech companies are “spying” on all of us in that our personal data is the currency they use to provide services, usually free but also sometimes without consent.
With that out of the way, let’s take a look at the article which provides no real information about its claims so let’s go to the source, Dr. Robert Epstein’s study which has yet to be peer-reviewed.
We have found that between May and November 2016, search results displayed in response to a wide range of election-related search terms were, on average, biased in Mrs. Clinton’s favor in all 10 search-result positions.
This conclusion was reached after doing a study of 95 people (21 undecided), with data from a 25 day period before the election instead of the 7 months of gathered data. You can decide whether that’s an adequate sample size or proper methodology to reach the stated conclusion.
The study also ignored all gmail data because it didn’t correspond to the desired conclusion. Does that sound scientific to you?
And now for some background on Dr. Epstein:
In 2012, Epstein publicly disputed with Google Search over a security warning placed on links to his website. His website, which features mental health screening tests, was blocked for serving malware that could infect visitors to the site. Epstein emailed "Larry Page, Google's chief executive; David Drummond, Google's legal counsel; Epstein's congressman; and journalists from The New York Times , The Washington Post , Wired, and Newsweek . In it, Epstein threatened legal action if the warning concerning his website was not removed, and denied that any problems with his website existed. Several weeks later, Epstein admitted his website had been hacked, but criticized Google for tarnishing his name and not helping him find the infection.
All this to say, whether or not you believe the premise, do your own research please.