Autocomplete Truths about Gender Inequality

Alex

Christopher Hunt of Ogilvy & Mather Dubai used Google autocomplete to bring attention to gender inequality in this print ad campaign for United Nations Women.

Hunt noted that the advertisements, titled Auto Complete Truth, used actual Google search autocomplete results, as queried on March 9, 2013. While different Google users in various countries may see different results, some of the autocompletes referenced in the ad showed in our own quick test (see below for the different autocomplete results for search queries for the exact term, but using "men" instead of "women.")

View the original ad page over at Behance - via Design Taxi.

Below is the result of my own men/women autocomplete comparison (searched Oct 21, 2013 from Southern California). What does yours look like?


Comments (7)

Newest 5
Newest 5 Comments

It's worth noting that although these are things people search for, it may not accurately reflect their personal opinions and beliefs.

For instance, that bit about women being silent in church can probably be explained by people researching the bible verse of a similar sentiment, 1 Cor 14:34. (Note: I used Google to find this reference but do not believe that women shouldn't speak in church.)

That being said, there is still a lot of work to be done in the area of gender equality, and I think this ad campaign will at least get people talking.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Google autocomplete is based on search queries, not search results.

I suspect it's possible to manipulate search queries, but that's much more difficult than Google bombing the search results.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
i see now that all of these jezebel articles that are here now are being written by you, alex. it's really tiresome. there are plenty of sites that deal with this social justice stuff. neatorama should be one of them.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Try looking up the term "Google bomb". Google's search results can be manipulated. It may not be the case with these searches, but it has definitely been done with many subjects in the past.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Two out of three ain't good either. One of the earliest trials of Zener cards to test for ESP showed a statistically significant result, with one subject scoring almost 100%. By chance anything is possible. If the probability of something is 1:100 then we should expect to see it one out of a hundred times. But instead we assume we should never see it. Never-the-less it is possible for someone to guess correctly on the Zener cards over several trials, enough to give the impression of genuine ESP.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Playing poker can help resolve those kinds of errors in judgement. You find yourself saying "what are the chances?" quite frequently. Thus, professional poker players assert that the only true method of winning is over time. If your chance of winning is greater than 50% you only have to have enough money to keep playing until it pays off. So, if you are going to play poker you play tables that have a buy-in value 1/10th or less than your total bankroll, and you play hands that have a 50% or greater chance to win. That way you shouldn't go broke before you start to see some winnings and over-all you should win more than you lose. But this is assuming you are capable of keeping your ego in check. You simply cannot expect to win because your hand has a 99% probability to win, you'll lose everything playing that way.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@Miss Cellania

I was referring to 2/3 being an indication of some kind of empirical fact of the cat's intellectual or visual acuity. I'm skeptical the cat even has object permamence, let alone the ability to track the hidden object over multiple transitions.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Not that I'm claiming this is much more than luck, but if you watch closely the 2nd shuffle (the one where the cat loses), the shell the cat "chose" is actually the one that originally had the pebbleorwhateveritwas underneath it. At 0:14 the shuffler slyly moves it under another shell, right before starting the shuffle. Easily missed, even by the most sharp-eyed of cats.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I will remind you of the rule we have around here: no personal attacks on other commenters. I have removed a couple of comments. Let's keep this discussion on the subject and no more name calling.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I was referring to 2/3 being an indication of some kind of empirical fact of the cat's intellectual or visual acuity. I'm skeptical the cat even has object permamence, let alone the ability to track the hidden object over multiple transitions.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@Jesss

Thanks for the link. I thought about it some more last night too. I have two cats and figured they probably have object permanence based on my experiences with them.

@Miss Cellania

Sorry for being overly critical. My mind is in the books and found I was extraordinarily critical yesterday, though I'm finding I'm fairly critical most of the time. In Philosophy criticism and argument take a different non-hostile form, and I forget that doesn't apply colloquially. The video is cute, but I guess I'm much more interested in the cognition of the cat.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Email This Post to a Friend
"Autocomplete Truths about Gender Inequality"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More