There are 32,026 characters in the United States Constitution. 32,026 characters of ‘self-evident’ truths that formed the basis of one of the worlds most powerful nations. These days, amendments are being made 280 characters at a time.

This week, President Trump continued his quest against the tormentors of misinformation during an all-too-familiar twitter tirade:

“Google search results for “Trump News” shows only the viewing/reporting of Fake News Media. In other words, they have it RIGGED, for me & others, so that almost all stories & news is BAD. Fake CNN is prominent. Republican/Conservative & Fair Media is shut out. Illegal? 96% of… …results on “Trump News” are from National Left-Wing Media, very dangerous. Google & others are suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good. They are controlling what we can & cannot see. This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!

And this is not the first time Trump has accused the search giant of controlling his platform. The President also attacked Google for filtering out his State of the Union Address (Gizmodo has done a super job unpacking this one). Naturally, Google has refuted these cIaims. This “he-said-she-said” exchange may only serve to fill a few column inches this week and be forgotten by the next. Paying homage to one of my favourite cartoon shows, I’m going to fire up Dr Farnsworth’s What If machine and start to unpack the pandora’s box labelled “What if Trump is right?”

I’m feeling lucky

What does Google mean to you, and what does it mean to the world? Google has succeeded in dominating our online interactions. Without a search engine, we would have to know the exact URL we wanted from the off or be great a guessing. Before their dominance, it paid to have the go-to domain name (e.g. if I was picking for this, Blog.com). With SEO it now pays to know and master the algorithm. The algorithm is what makes the search engine work. It is crafted to try and predict and cater to your desires. It evolves constantly, shaped by the data fed into it by our every interaction. Imagine not knowing what spell you needed to use to perform a piece of magic. The algorithm attempts to take the gobbledygook we spout out and turns our muddy water into the vintage wine we were looking for.

When applying this logic to Trump, Google is driven by two things: the information it has access to, and the information it thinks we want access to. As a result of the President’s actions and, as admitted by him, the overwhelming quantity of bad press penned by the ‘mainstream media’ creates the perfect storm for ‘biased’ search returns. If 9 sources find a negative angle on separating children from their parents on the Mexican border and 1 source says something positive, Google would be expected to reflect this balance. To do anything else would be biased.

Don’t be evil (some of the time)

Of course, Google is a business like any other. This moral duty for impartial results returns has at least two exceptions: adverts and governments.

You will have seen the adverts yourself. The next time you google something, you will see a number of search results complemented by green text and a sign stating that this is an advert. Any company can purchase the top-spot. In simple terms, if you know what people will search for to find your website, you can select these phrases to return your advert at the top of the search result. This universally available form of advertising has become a backbone of marketing campaigns. It can edge out the competition and make sure your brand of soap appears before your competitors, for example.

The government package is only available to a select few. And by few, I mean prime ministers with indefinite reigns. Nope, not Russia, China. At the beginning of this summer, the news emerged that Google was on the cusp of a rapprochement with the socialist powerhouse. Google has not been operating in China due to the country’s strict laws on censorship. In days gone by, you could access the rest of the world through Hong Kong’s version of the search engine, but even that was eventually blocked.

In recent months, there has been growing disquiet with the current powers that be. Tensions have simmered further since the ruling party lead by Xi Jinping scrapped the term limits for the presidency. In theory, Xi may rule for as long as he sees fit. Some of the people in China are understandably unhappy with this — I would be if someone said I had to put up with Theresa May for eternity (already seems like it actually!). Public acts of descent, however, are being met with a harrowing level force. When 29-year-old Dong Yaoqiong streamed herself throwing ink on a picture of Xi Jinping earlier this summer, the young activist mysteriously disappeared. Forums on the internet have buzzed with conspiracy theories, spurred on by footage of unknown men standing outside people’s homes. Rocking the boat can be a dangerous business, with stories that may possibly make you stop and think.

Screenshots from Dong Yaoqiong’s livestream — credit: Business Insider

There are reports of Google making efforts to filter certain phrases and results from its platform for the Chinese market, as well as rumours of them tracking banned terms. Does the Don make a loud, albeit slightly misplaced, point? In his case, the unseen matrix seems to make sense. But the potential for abuse, from the perspective of total freedom across the net, is being flexed and applied.

By the Unanimous Order

Our relationship with these companies could already be seen as one of dependence. The undeniable power, which the likes of Google, Facebook et. al wields, is tantamount to a public service. They are not, however, subject to the same public scrutiny or regulation. This is not because of any evident wrong-doing. It is based on the principles of establishing and maintaining trust between the provider and the user.

Like a public service, there is a form of democracy that guides the silicon senate: shareholders. The self-interests of shareholders are the tiller that guides the ship. The company relies on users, and the data they provide, as a means of gauging their value. This is, essentially, your vote. Your choice to use, or not use, a service is your way of electing the technology of the future. But again, do we hold these companies to account in the same way we hold our traditional public figures?

This is where President Trump has continued to provide a shining example. The need for greater scrutiny and transparency, when it comes to such offices of high power, is essential to democracy. Trump is just another businessman, sitting in an office with significant power over the lives of millions. We are still playing catchup with the world of technology. Long, has it been believed that business holds such sway in government. We scrutinize over the man who sits in “the most powerful office in the world”. What if that is no longer the oval office?