12

Google’s plan to prevent “Trump situation” in 2020

Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago to News
53 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

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...

All Comments

  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago
    Big Google!

    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!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Just over a month ago, Google had been putting these in my spam folder.
    Definitely worth investigation. And if they’re manipulating people’s information at an ideological level then they should be open and honest about it
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by BostonTEA 5 years, 10 months ago
    YOU CAN NOT MAKE THIS UP....
    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.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    They also might be afraid of the solutions someone is offering at the time. But that does not alter the facts. And in point of fact, Messrs. Schmidt, Brin and Page (the CEO and co-founders of Google) are the Three Monkeys, with an Ellsworth Monckton Toohey somewhere in the background as the organ grinder.

    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.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That was my post and you are right. Certain users are not flexible in their thinking even when facts are presented to bolster claims. I called them factoid intolerant.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    “Today it is often 1 to 2 steps to nazis.”

    Anyone know where this idea comes from? Is this what is being taught in “progressive” liberal studies colleges now?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The Email says,

    “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.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    “ BREAKING: New Google Document Leaked Describing Shapiro, Prager, as ‘nazis using the dogwhistles’

    “ 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...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    My wife had it all figured out a long time ago. When I went on my first business trip to China in '99, she made it very clear: "I'm not doing ANY of that! You're hiring a lawn service!". Never stopped the service and I like it that way. See? That's why I love her, she always has great ideas!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hey. did we actually see Alex (Sec of DHHS) on Laura Ingraham's show crying about 'no money'. If they weren't paying the top six folks at their FQHC's $103,000/year and the next five $50/hour, down to clerks at $20/hour...they'd be able to buy babies and children blankets and toothbrushes at the Border.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by lrshultis 5 years, 10 months ago
    The Daily Caller, conservative leaning, would like to see the unedited video of the google exec before believing the Project Veritas's, conservative leaning, hooded interviewee.

    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.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Don't get carried away. We can't do 'everything'. I told you guys the weed eater is too heavy for me to handle. However, my John Deer mower is my baby.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    When I was about five, daddy took me with him every where he went. The only thing of interest in our refinery town was the local saloon. When we got home, mother asked where we went and it is reported I responded, 'daddy told me not to tell you!' I ate peanuts, learned to play shuffleboard and drank beer out of a saucer! My father was my hero.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This is no back room. This is a covert expansive collusion of networked “trust and safety” political activists plotting on how best to manipulate the information that those on the internet request so that it significantly influences the results of next election using any means necessary.
    My own personal option from what I’ve witnessed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Joseph23006 5 years, 10 months ago
    No corporation should have the power to be the arbiter of which candidate is suitable to be President. This would be one occasion I agree with Elizabeth Warren. We don't need a 'core' group as in "Atlas Shrugged" met to make policy in the back room.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CaptainKirk 5 years, 10 months ago
    Scott Adams is incredible good in his analysis. He is a BIT TOO FAIR in saying her statements were vague enough as to be cognitive bias to say she meant electing trump, or something else.

    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!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Kittyhawk 5 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree. Someone may, for example, censor themselves around children if they're prone to using colorful language. "Self-censorship" is even a word, and it's hard to argue that government is always involved in that.

    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.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 5 years, 10 months ago
    This is what I was talking about, in the thread about Senator Hawley's measure to add conditions to Google's (and others') Section 230 exemption(s).

    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.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo