There's always time to listen the truth, because it's better than to forget when it implies benefits, making friends with questionable behaviors. The most known search engines of today are taking paths that cannot be seen as respectful with freedom of speech. If it's called "search engine", theoretically it finds content without subjective marginalization. It should be different a "search engine" from a magazine that finds selected pages for showing a particular content. The problem is how today, search engines could be as clear as Bing in this assertion, taken from Bing.com
Why is My Site Not in the Index?
Your site does not meet the quality threshold required by Bing: Bing likes unique, quality content. [...]
The definition of quality, or establishing "quality thresholds", seems disproportionate in terms of rationality. Like in the music, some like different. Is it better Listz than U2? Well, you decide. Subjective discrimination could damage the work and be unfair with the competition. It's really inconceivable how search engines are allowed, legally, to do this. Economies that try to favor local businesses and reject others aren't strange. Multiple factors, like to say that it doesn't meet our quality threshold if it criticizes the search engine or it's not politically inclined to the same side.
Another lamentable reality is how you find for some term and the number of results is "X". After being interested on them, you discover that it is X divided by L. Sometimes "L" is large and it deceives trying to provide the sensation that the search engine is more efficient that what really is or what their policies are, ready to create subjective appreciations of quality.
But the algorithms that some search engines use aren't particularly, or say technically, of enormous quality. They are being fooled day after day. You could discover this for instance finding information about applications with a generic name, that are constantly being upgraded. So, the first page of results could include pages from several years ago as the algorithm gives them visibility. Those results aren't relevant, as they point to an unused version of the program. For instance "Firefox RAM consumption", a joke nowadays, Google provides pages from 2013, 2014 and even before. This is a non smart algorithm, with all due respect, and even if they change it, the problem is using it since decades ago and also, sadly, without too many critics from the public.
We recommend to staying away from pornography, and never to give a single currency unit to this business, and create legal bans to protect especially children or young people. There are international laws to protect children from pornography, and those who show them pornography are considered delinquents. Several search engines are those pornography promoters that don't ask for age. You could test it by yourself, even with filters, and the default configuration speaks by itself.
This is a road that needs to have more policemen and controls, quickly.