The people writing the search algorithms decide, just like they decide what a "good" algorithm is.

I would bet you $50 that DDG was handled/requested a blocklist of domains from a spooky US/UK govt associate and did not unilaterally create it themselves.

Your assertion is not falsifiable, but I would otherwise take the other side of that bet.

Sure it is. We can ask @yegg about their methodology

Its exactly what happened to Qwant so it's not far fetched.

I kinda doubt the US govt cares about DDG.

Also, the US/UK gov is not an entirely unreasonable starting point for a list. There are also lots of academic researchers, media, etc. Better to apply some standards than none at all. I'm sure whatever list they have is not perfect, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have one.

That is most likely what happened and the naivety around it is annoying.

It seems more naive to think search algorithms are ever "unbiased". The whole point is to find something by ranking them and applying a bias.

... are you saying Russian disinformation does not have obvious indicators of SEO manipulation? That would be a pretty big change for them.

Yes

... Unless your "indicator" is "deviates from the Washington narrative", which is totally ridiculous.

I don't know what you're basing that last sentence on. Disinformation is infamous for leveraging black-hat SEO techniques. CF for example https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/disinformation-o...