peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysis

PDF Publication Title:

peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysis ( peek-into-discursive-construction-google-search-algorithm-cr )

Previous Page View | Next Page View | Return to Search List

Text from PDF Page: 036

Yet, this rendering of Google as servant may also be used as justification for something yet unknown. I will come back to this possibility at the end of this subchapter and try to understand what that something could be. Secondly, while content wise the user is occasionally represented as having control, its linguistic representation renders the user as passive, since generally “we” or “Google” is the active actor, while the user is the beneficiary: “We . . . give you tools to control the types of data we collect and use” (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) “We . . . put you in control” (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) “We have . . . tools that help you control how Google works for you” (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) Again, the user is a passive actor, while Google is the active actor. Thereby, the content of what Google claims (putting the user in control) is contradicted by its linguistic form. Thus, while on the surface level the user is empowered, covertly, the user is disempowered. Thirdly, even when the user is the active agent in a sentence, often the user’s agency is related to, or enabled by, the use of Google’s products: Using our translation tools, people can discover content... (“Ten Things We Know to Be True” 2015) the actions you take using our services... (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) When you use our services (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) what you create using our services (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) With our Ads Settings tools, you can control ads (“Answers about Privacy and Security” 2015) It seems that while linguistically the user is an active agent, its agency is mitigated by the content of Google’s articulations, which stress users’ dependence on Google’s products. Additionally, when the user is the agent in an active sentence, often the user’s agency is rendered by negation: “you don’t have to consider” (“Ten Things We Know to Be True” 2015) “you don’t need to be” (“Ten Things We Know to Be True” 2015) Even if you don’t know exactly what you’re looking for... (“Ten Things We Know to Be True” 2015) While the user is an active agent in these sentences, his or her influence or actions are described in terms of what the user does not (need to) do, stressing the not taking of actions. In other words: while generally activated social actors “make things happen” (Baker and Ellece 2011, 88), presenting users’ actions in negating form undermines the activation of users. While the above examples show that the user is discursively constructed as disempowered actor, either linguistically or substantively, the user is sometimes put in power, both 36

PDF Image | peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysis

PDF Search Title:

peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysis

Original File Name Searched:

thesis-google-search-algotithm.pdf

DIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing

Cruise Ship Reviews | Luxury Resort | Jet | Yacht | and Travel Tech More Info

Cruising Review Topics and Articles More Info

Software based on Filemaker for the travel industry More Info

The Burgenstock Resort: Reviews on CruisingReview website... More Info

Resort Reviews: World Class resorts... More Info

The Riffelalp Resort: Reviews on CruisingReview website... More Info

CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@cruisingreview.com (Standard Web Page)