Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Google and the Abortion Program

Getting mothers to kill their children is kicking against the pricks, Google has discovered.

Internet Hacking Photo Illustrations
(Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Apparently, Google’s algorithm is sometimes pro-life, at least when it comes to poorer mothers. According to a recent report in the Guardian, mothers searching for information about abortion clinics received different results depending on their financial background. While the top results for the wealthier users directed them to abortion providers, the top results for poorer users were for pregnancy resource centers. 

This discovery led to representatives of the abortion industry charging Google with spreading misinformation and deliberately inhibiting poorer mothers from aborting their children. Furthermore, they accuse pregnancy resource centers of fraud for claiming to help pregnant mothers by means other than abortion. Evidently, the extra scroll on the search results would critically delay poor mothers who only have so much time to abort their babies, particularly in red states that restrict abortion to the first weeks of pregnancy.


Of course, all of this is part and parcel of the abortion industry’s campaign to vilify pregnancy centers and encourage pro-abortion terrorism. With last year’s reversal of Roe v. Wade, abortion providers have gone on the offensive against potential competitors who threaten their bottom line. And while the rhetoric of pro-abortionists speaks of empowering women, no one should see this language as anything other than a fig leaf covering up their driving concern: maximizing profit.

There is more to the story than a simple discrepancy in search results, though. The idea that Google somehow favors pregnancy centers over abortion clinics is patently absurd. Google has actively boosted search results for abortion providers while pushing down those for pregnancy centers or removing them altogether. There is little reason to think that Google and other Big Tech platforms still don’t do this. As the “Twitter Files” demonstrated, all it takes is one moderately influential leftist or FBI agent to have conservatives and pro-life organizations censored.

Since this human bias is the case, that means Google’s algorithm—which is based on the information it has collected on billions of users—has determined on its own that poorer mothers are seeking help for their pregnancies, not abortions. Contrary to the pro-abortion narrative of abortions liberating women from the supposed evils of motherhood, Google’s algorithm suggests that abortion is seen as an escape for women who have been made afraid of motherhood. Even though, the algorithm implies, most of these working class mothers don’t want abortions, the abortion industry is demanding Google to manipulate them into getting abortions anyway.

In many ways, this is only the online equivalent of what abortion providers do in the physical world. Planned Parenthood and others make a point of establishing their clinics in poor areas, usually minority neighborhoods. Consequently, it isn’t white affluent yuppies who shout their abortions making use of their service, but instead poor black women who are pushed into it: A recent study shows that 60 percent of mothers who aborted their children were pressured into it.

While money can explain much of the reason abortion providers employ these tactics, it doesn’t fully account for why they specifically target poorer mothers and why abortion supporters who don’t stand to make any money seem fine with this. In any other context, using fear, intimidation, and censorship against a vulnerable group of people is considered exploitation. The only reason any person could accept it in this case is because they believe at some level that poor women shouldn’t have children. 


Of course, this lines up nicely with the original intentions of the Planned Parenthood founder and enthusiastic eugenicist Margaret Sanger. And whatever excuses and deflections the pro-abortion crowd wants to make, the drive to eliminate undesirables clearly remains one of the main motivations for wanting to kill the unborn. For some, abortion might be more of a feminist issue, but for others, abortion is clearly a matter of social engineering. 

And this is why they attack pregnancy resources centers (both literally and figuratively) and prey on poor mothers. 

Unfortunately for abortionists, Google’s algorithm didn’t get the memo and did its job producing results based on the actual needs of the user, not the agenda of the abortion industry. No doubt, the programmers at Big Tech are looking for ways to change this without compromising the quality of their search engines. However, the two things are incompatible. The numbers going into Google’s search algorithm don’t lie. No one needs an abortion, nor do most mothers even want an abortion; they need and desire support for their pregnancy and motherhood

Pro-lifers should take heart at this, and continue their fight. Their opponents do not mean well, nor do they approach the issue in good faith. What they want is evil, and they will employ any tactic to achieve their ends. Altering search results to mislead desperate mothers may only be one small example of this, but it reveals something big about what’s really motivating the abortion industry and its allies.