Google has become an “increasing invisible information infrastructure” that “organizes the world's information,” simultaneously shaping and organizing users through “ubiquitous googling” with keywords as a daily habit of new media. However, there is limited knowledge about how Google ranks information, intervenes, and the veracity of its search results. How can they be captured, analyzed, and understood in regard to search ecosystems? This article addresses these questions through a digital ethnography with a group of students as an “experiment in living” that investigates whether individuals receive so-called “personalized” search results with the keyword “mink.” The method of screenshotting makes permanent the top results, which can then be compared, offering a “partial perspective” as “situated knowledge.” Building on previous empirical search studies using screenshotting, an analysis demonstrates that similar search results are obtained due to Google's recent tendency for “social relevance” and not individual “user relevance.” Students were sorted and grouped into categories of others “like them,” in this case dependent on a static university Internet Protocol address. This educational intervention contributes to screenshotting literature and feminist STS by introducing a method that empowers citizen agency, thereby contributing to developing strategies for generating more democratic, inclusive, and healthier information ecosystems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Renée Ridgway (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: