Santorum does not have a “Google Problem.” He has a civil rights problem. (Originally posted on Yahoo!'s "The Signal" Blog)

The continued position of Spreading Santorum and other sites is a reflection
of what Internet users want to read about. Chris Wilson, now with us at The Signal, wrote a few months ago in Slate that Spreading Santorum's prevalence cannot simple be explained away as an organized smear campaign. In the past, links from other sites were hugely important in determining a page's position in search results; thus, an ultimately irrelevant site could do well in search results by getting a lot people to link to it. But search companies have refined their algorithms to make them much harder to play these games. For Spreading Santorum to remain this strong, despite the launch of Santorum's presidential campaign, is a sign that it's still relevant to the primary.

For curious searchers, there's plenty to read about. Consider a sampling of his positions:

Santorum has repeatedly expressed support for overturning Griswold v. Connecticut, which legalized contraceptives for married couples. In a now-famous 2003 interview with an AP reporter, he categorized same-sex relationships alongside pedophilia and bestiality–comments that ultimately inspired Savage, the founder of the "It Gets Better" campaign, to start his alternative site. Santorum attributes the Catholic Church sex scandals to the loose morals of Boston, a position he defended to a stunned George Sephanopoulos in 2005. He recently attacked Barack Obama's pro-choice views on the basis that Obama is black. He told David Gregory he would prosecute doctors who perform any abortions, even in cases of rape or incest. He believes that the Constitution should treat the cells created at conception as a life, which would in practice give them precedence over the human carrier; even Mississippi voters rejected this position in 2011.

Click Here for the Full Text.