Paid healthcare.gov site advertisement (sometimes) when googling obamacare

[feralkid]

I didn't change the title, it was changed for me. If I'd been asked, I would have.

Thread title edited for accuracy. Sentence #2 in the quoted article is false (if you care to check as I and others in the thread did.) Thus, this thread is apparently nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor which has been demonstrated to be incorrect. -Admin DrPizza




Do you agree that your thread is unsubstantiated rumor as well?

 

[spidey07]

Thread title edited for accuracy. Sentence #2 in the quoted article is false (if you care to check as I and others in the thread did.) Thus, this thread is apparently nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor which has been demonstrated to be incorrect. -Admin DrPizza




Do you agree that your thread is unsubstantiated rumor as well?

Not a rumor. They changed it and the results were reproducible yesterday. Now eat crow. This has been a very familiar tactic by the Obama administration - do something so outrageous to control the message (Alinsky tactics yet again), but when people find out about it and the REAL outrage hits they pull it. You need to pay attention to this fucker (obama), he's sneaky. Thankfully the internet and The People are exposing him.

 

[Lanyap]

Thread title edited for accuracy. Sentence #2 in the quoted article is false (if you care to check as I and others in the thread did.) Thus, this thread is apparently nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor which has been demonstrated to be incorrect. -Admin DrPizza




Do you agree that your thread is unsubstantiated rumor as well?

The articles are/were accurate. Take your blinders off. The paid for advert at Bing is still working. The thread title should be recorrected to make it accurate.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has bought a Google advertisement to steer people searching for "ObamaCare" to a page that is customized to detect searchers' locations and steer them both to local health insurance information and to a list of "what's in the law for you."

"We are using a bunch of search term to help point people to HealthCare.gov. Part of our online efforts to help get accurate information to people about the new law (i.e. also use Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webcasts)," an HHS official confirmed by e-mail.

The ad buy represents a kind of recognition that the Administration has, to a degree, lost a battle over defining its terms, and that "ObamaCare" -- coined and used largely by detractors of the plan -- is in wide circulation. A search for the term on Google yields 2.5 million results.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1210/HHS_buys_ObamaCare.html#

 

[JD50]

How are people on a tech forum this fucking stupid? Google results can change by the minute, just because you get certain results today doesn't mean you would've gotten the same results yesterday when the article was written.

 

[JD50]

To altar searches no. They may have bought AD space from googles ad vendor.


One of the biggest complaints we have from the public is we don’t inform them enough or make the information easy to find. I have no problem buying legal AD space in the public. Now if they were paying to altar search info then yes that would be wrong.
When it came out Bush’s white house was spending money at first I did not have a problem, till I found out it was buying opinions not AD space.
My group spent several thousand on job listing Ads with a newspaper in the last month. We did not altar any search or info, just bought what anybody else can.

I agree, if it's just ad space I have no problem with it. I would have a problem with them paying to alter search results.

 

[boomerang]

This forum is politics and news. And folks, you are for certain seeing politics in this thread.

 

[manimal]

Dr Pizza for admin of the year!!


sidenote:

I read on the internets that fema is setting up camps to house patriot gun ownerz...true story...

 

[Hacp]

Lol, Obama canceled the ads after the article and some dumbasses fell for his trick. Just check bing to see Obama's sleight of hand.

 

[Hacp]

Bingo. From the original article:


Kudos to Boomerang for changing the title, but apparently the article was accurate when first reported and the Obama administration either didn't like what Sebelius was doing, or more probably wasn't aware of it, and either way didn't want the bad press. Meh either way. As evil (and wasteful spending) goes, this is a hair on a wart, not that big a deal. (Haven't personally verified Bing and Yahoo! as I don't particularly care either way.)

Its amazing what Obama supporters believe. To them, he is infallible and incapable of tricking them by pulling an ad like this. All hail King Obama.

 

[JD50]

Thread title edited for accuracy. Sentence #2 in the quoted article is false (if you care to check as I and others in the thread did.) Thus, this thread is apparently nothing more than unsubstantiated rumor which has been demonstrated to be incorrect. -Admin DrPizza

Really? You and others checked the google results for 'obamacare' on January 3rd? Bullshit.

 

[her209]

Not a rumor. They changed it and the results were reproducible yesterday. Now eat crow. This has been a very familiar tactic by the Obama administration - do something so outrageous to control the message (Alinsky tactics yet again), but when people find out about it and the REAL outrage hits they pull it. You need to pay attention to this fucker (obama), he's sneaky. Thankfully the internet and The People are exposing him.

So where's the screen cap?

 

[IBMer]

Really? You and others checked the google results for 'obamacare' on January 3rd? Bullshit.

I did, the top result was a Wikipedia article and the government site wasn't even on the first page. What was on the page that you consider altering results, was an AD. No results were modified.

 

[JD50]

So where's the screen cap?

I'd like to see that as well. Although, from the update in the article, it appears that they were probably talking about the Ad which does come up first in bing and yahoo. Probably a poor piece of journalism.

 

[JD50]

I did, the top result was a Wikipedia article and the government site wasn't even on the first page. What was on the page that you consider altering results, was an AD. No results were modified.

You google'd 'obamacare' the day before this thread was posted and you not only remember the results, but you also remember which ad's were being displayed? Wow, I believe you just about as much as I believe Spidey.

 

[IBMer]

You google'd 'obamacare' the day before this thread was posted and you not only remember the results, but you also remember which ad's were being displayed? Wow, I believe you just about as much as I believe Spidey.

Yes because remembering 1 ad and 2 results is extremely hard.

 

[JD50]

Yes because remembering 1 ad and 2 results is extremely hard.

Oh give me a fucking break. Then why don't you list everything you googled on Jan. 3rd, which ads were displayed and the top 3 results of each search? You're full of shit and so is Spidey. No one here googled Obamacare THE DAY BEFORE this thread was posted and remembers the exact results.

 

[JD50]

So where's the screen cap?

Don't forget to ask IBMer or the other folks with similar claims.

 

[her209]

Don't forget to ask IBMer or the other folks with similar claims.

Its already been posted in this thread but don't let facts get in the way of your faux outrage.

 

[JD50]

Its already been posted in this thread but don't let facts get in the way of your faux outrage.

Date of the article - Jan. 3
Date of post with screen cap - Jan 4

You realize that google search results can change over the course of a day don't you?

 

[William Gaatjes]

How are people on a tech forum this fucking stupid? Google results can change by the minute, just because you get certain results today doesn't mean you would've gotten the same results yesterday when the article was written.

The story was about google, hence we all tested it at google.
And since google supposed to be independent, it is all the more worse. Google still has teh magix.

That is the trick, because of the payment, the search algorithm of google does not change the order of shown pages, obamacare should be the first to show always. Hence the payment. However, if the order of results is not fixed for an infinite period of time, but where obamacare.gov is only set as 1st result once, you are definitely right. It is highly probable people will also visit other pages.

But there is something fox news forgot, because of the amount of people typing obamacare, the search algorithm of google is going to alter the order of shown pages anyway with exception of the 1st result. At least, that makes sense to me...

 

[her209]

Date of the article - Jan. 3
Date of post with screen cap - Jan 4

You realize that google search results can change over the course of a day don't you?

Easily proven with a screen cap which the "article" conveniently didn't provide.

 

[JD50]

The story was about google, hence we all tested it at google.
And since google supposed to be independent, it is all the more worse. Google still has teh magix.

That is the trick, because of the payment, the search algorithm of google does not change the order of shown pages, obamacare should be the first to show always. Hence the payment. However, if the order of results is not fixed for an infinite period of time, but where obamacare.gov is only set as 1 result once, you are definitely right. It is highly probable people will also visit other pages.

But there is something fox news forgot, because of the amount of people typing obamacare, the search algorithm of google is going to alter the the order of shown pages anyway.

Yes, that's my point. I was surprised that people on a tech forum didn't know more about technology than fox news. People like her202 STILL think that google search results can't change over 24 hours.

Here is what I think happened. The article was talking about the ad, not the actual search results, which he mentions in the update with regards to the ad showing up in yahoo and bing. The person that wrote the article is obviously too stupid to actually get a screenshot of the search result showing up for him, which any competent person would do when making such a claim. Like I said, poor journalism and completely misunderstanding the way google works.

My issue is with people calling the OP a liar and even going so far as to change the thread title because they get different google search results an entire day after the article was written. Again, misunderstanding the way google works.

 

[JD50]

Easily proven with a screen cap which the "article" conveniently didn't provide.

Wait, you just said that the Jan. 4 screenshot was proof that the writer of the article was lying. What happened?

Even the person that posted the screen cap noted that the results could have changed, nice try though.

 

[her209]

Wait, you just said that the Jan. 4 screenshot was proof that the writer of the article was lying. What happened?

Sure it can. But I don't have any evidence that it did. Do you have any?

 

[JD50]

Sure it can. But I don't have any evidence that it did. Do you have any?

Google search results are not static, they change. It's possible to get difference search results for the same thing over a span of 24 hours. I'm surprised that you didn't know this.

And I already stated my position, reading is fundamental.