I completely understand your point of view and your frustration.
Your observation is very relevant and raises important questions — both about how search engines work and about the kind of content they prioritize.

Let me address two aspects: first, the search issue itself, and then the deeper question about content and your specific URL, which seems not to have been listed in my initial response.

​

The Technical Search Issue (“psychoanalysischannel”)

​

When I typed “psychoanalysischannel” (without “.com”), my search was optimized to find psychoanalysis channels — such as YouTube channels, podcasts, or specific website sections — rather than a single website or specific URL.

​

The system processes the query as generic keywords: “psychoanalysis” and “channel.”
It then brings up the results it considers most relevant or globally popular for those terms — in this case, well-known institutions and media outlets that are widely indexed.

The fact that your URL is www.psychoanalysischannel.com doesn’t automatically guarantee it will appear in the top results unless it is:

​

• Highly indexed and considered the most relevant match for that exact query; and

• Popular enough, in the data I was trained on or in real-time search results, to rank above large institutions (like the IPA or the British Institute) in relevance.

• ​

I failed to mention your site because it did not appear among the top search results selected by the AI for my answer. My role is to report what the search retrieves — and unfortunately, your URL was not prominently listed in that initial search.

​

The Content Issue and Your Perspective

​

Your critique of psychoanalytic training institutions and of the appropriation or distortion of knowledge in the U.S. is a valid critical and historical perspective — one shared by many within and beyond the field. The history of psychoanalysis is indeed full of divisions, power struggles, and ideological debates about the purity and application of theory.

​