The results of our online searches give us the information we need to form our perspectives and make decisions about the world. In her book “Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism,” Safia Umoja Noble unveils the algorithms that decide what information we see are not the neutral mediators we assume they are; search algorithms reinforce the ideas of advertisements, creators and the users that pay for their existence, giving space for racism to stay prevalent in digital society.
In this podcast, Wayne State journalism students Andy Jeffrey and Natalie Davies discuss how Noble presents the ways search engines reinforce racism and how it impacts our perspectives. One of the most notable ideas in the book is the influence of capitalism on the internet and how people with the most money and privilege have the power to control the narrative about everyone else. The internet has all the space in the world for different ideas from different people, but the paid and belief-affirming content that keeps people using a site will always be curated at the top of the page. Search engines are businesses. They prioritize the spread of the ideas that generate the most money, even if those ideas are harmful.
Noble emphasizes, it’s not just the algorithm’s fault, but also the humans behind it. Noble’s book focuses specifically on discrimination against Black people and women in search suggestions and results. Noble enumerates examples of Google auto filling searches with racist stereotypes and results of similar searches with different races and genders that produce completely different content. She calls this technological readlining, as algorithms create and perpetuate inequities towards marginalized groups.
Listen in to the podcast above and check out the links below for more discussion of “Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism” by Safia Umoja Noble.
More resources on this topic:
Why algorithms can be racist and sexist, Vox
U.S. Government addresses algorithmic discrimination
Other reviews:
London School of Economics and Political Science Review
Natalie Davies 