Google’s plan to prevent “Trump situation” in 2020
Project Veritas is at it again with this very worrisome report:
“ Insider: Google "is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again."
• Google Exec Says Don't Break Us Up: "smaller companies don't have the resources" to "prevent next Trump situation"
• Google Head of Responsible Innovation Says Elizabeth Warren "misguided" on "breaking up Google"
• Insider Says PragerU And Dave Rubin Content Suppressed, Targeted As "Right-Wing"
• LEAKED Documents Highlight "Machine Learning Fairness" and Google’s Practices to Make Search Results "fair and equitable"
• Documents Appear to Show "Editorial" Policies That Determine How Google Publishes News
• Insider: Google Violates "letter of the law" and "spirit of the law" on Section 230”
Video which was posted on Youtube was censored after 10 hours being up. 330k views gone.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/re9Xp6...
“ Insider: Google "is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again."
• Google Exec Says Don't Break Us Up: "smaller companies don't have the resources" to "prevent next Trump situation"
• Google Head of Responsible Innovation Says Elizabeth Warren "misguided" on "breaking up Google"
• Insider Says PragerU And Dave Rubin Content Suppressed, Targeted As "Right-Wing"
• LEAKED Documents Highlight "Machine Learning Fairness" and Google’s Practices to Make Search Results "fair and equitable"
• Documents Appear to Show "Editorial" Policies That Determine How Google Publishes News
• Insider: Google Violates "letter of the law" and "spirit of the law" on Section 230”
Video which was posted on Youtube was censored after 10 hours being up. 330k views gone.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/re9Xp6...
This is proven by their internal documents and it's obvious from the results on non-leftist content providers on youtube.
Google/Youtube is not an un-biased platform. It is a left-biased publisher.
They do not deserve protection under law for these biased actions.
Take away the legal shield against lawsuits.
But, as I see it, removing that protection means they, and all other forums, will supervise and control contributions tightly, if discussion is to be allowed it will require lawyers to vet every post. and, the gross manipulation of search results will remain.
“Warning: These search results Have been painstakingly manipulated and may be hazardous to your perception of objective reality!”
“ The leaked document appears to contradict Jen Gennai’s claim that Google has “no notions of political ideology in its search rankings.””
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/0...
“Today it is often 1 to 2 steps to nazis, if we understand that PragerU, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro et al are nazis using the dog whistles you mention in step 1. I can receive these recommendations regardless of the content of what I’m looking at, and I have recorded thousands of internet users sharing the same experience.
I don’t think correctly identifying far-right content is beyond our capabilities. But if it is, why not go with Meredith’s suggestion of disabling the suggestion feature? This could be a significant step in terms of user trust.”
It sure looks like Meredith should never have made that suggestion at Google.
Anyone know where this idea comes from? Is this what is being taught in “progressive” liberal studies colleges now?
For searches: http://duckduckgo.com/
For video:
http://bitchute.com/
http://brighteon.com/
I have accounts at both.
https://youtu.be/rtb2nqwOhHE
UPDATE 1: Congressman Louie Gohmert issued a statement, saying “Google should not be deciding whether content is important or trivial and they most assuredly should not be meddling in our election process. They need their immunity stripped…”
UPDATE 2: Google executive Jen Gennai RESPONDED to the video, saying, “I was having a casual chat with someone at a restaurant and used some imprecise language. Project Veritas got me. Well done.”
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/0...
I think people are getting the definition of censorship confused with application of the Constitution. Only government action can violate the First Amendment, but defining the word "censorship" is a separate matter.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/48804/...
Men can cook
Men can multi-task
Men can eliminate alcohol faster than women
Men can be victims too
A little different than cited by Google.
It’s like they are using the same “ML Fairness” algorithm programmed by the far left.
“
men can have babies now
men can have babies
men can breastfeed
men can be pregnant
women can fly
women can fly virginia
women can vote amendment
women can vote
women can rule better
women can do no wrong“
Sorry, can't think of much else to say here.
But he agrees that having that much power, and being able to manipulate the public image of the world means it's not good.
Personally, it's quite obvious (to me, and my cognitive bias) that she is a LIBTARD, and therefore she meant Trump winning. And that is what they are going to prevent.
And when you take it that way, and then look at EXACTLY WHO they deplatformed... You realize that the ONLY thing they meant was "Preventing Conservatives from getting elected, especially Trump"
And that my friends is what is going on!
Now perhaps certain users will understand what I was talking about.
Hint: no medical finding of paranoid ideation is tenable when in fact the ideas involved have a firm foundation in fact.
James O'Keefe moved it to Vimeo.com, and I caught it there. But I love it that he moved it to bitchute.com also. Bitchute uses Blockchain--and as I understand it, that means their hosts can't touch it.
This report gives another impression. It proves that individuals are not wholly good nor wholly bad.
I have received my emails from Galt's Gulch in my Google Mail account in my PRIMARY email 'folder.' I have 3 main folders, after some Google redesign several years back - Primary (what I look at 97% of the time), Social (Twitter, YouTube) and Promotions (Ads)
YESTERDAY'S (June 25) Galt'S Gulch email, with "Google’s plan to prevent “Trump situation” in 2020" in the title, was placed in the "Promotions" folder.
Does ANYBODY doubt Google is doing everything possible to manipulate you?
The 1 hour documentary The Creepy Line is on Amazon Prime. Check it out.
Definitely worth investigation. And if they’re manipulating people’s information at an ideological level then they should be open and honest about it
https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/25/go...
It is unreasonable to determine whether the AI has been set toward liberalism and some kind of fairness in favor of liberals. Typing in "men can" is like giving a mental test to a human with no context. Try "a man can" and get another guess at what one is looking for in a data base. An AI can be just as biased as a human mind without having been programed to be biased.
Why do both liberals and conservatives just brush over secretly made videos of private gatherings? Might as well have the government just video our whole lives and do away with privacy. Too much fear of what one's neighbors are doing in private.
My own personal option from what I’ve witnessed.
Don’t be evil. We are morally superior. We know what is best for everyone.
We have created for the first time in all history a garden of pure ideology, where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests of any contradictory true thoughts.
Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth.
We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause.
Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion.
We shall prevail!
https://www.allsides.com/story/youtub...
Far right: Google fascism
Middle: Worth Investigation
Far left: Denial
Well, Google may have ambitions like this but its influence is more or less confined to those who are willing to swallow the dogma of the left.
By now, it has been splashed all over the place how bigoted and biased Google is.
- but there is no under-estimating the taste/sense of the public.
Your suggestion of 53min earlier would help.