This will go to trial under a new administration, ignoring for the moment that Google Search cannot be intimidated into providing favorable coverage for this one or the next IMHO.
Funny, but just the other day I saw video of a Google town hall from shortly after Trump had won in 2016.
And poor Sergey Brin, but he looked as if he was about to cry.
Then Brin went on to say in so many words that Google was going to do all it can to make sure that a Republican never wins the White House again.
Ummm. No.
Brin never once referred to Republicans that I'm aware of, nor that he would do everything in his power to see another one never won again. Not even in "so many words". Geesh, make stuff up much? You've been reading too many hard-right news sources and watching FauxNews opinion shows apparently.
Instead of "Republicans" Brin only spoke about the specific man who you too find so deeply offensive. He even briefly explained why he held that personal opinion. It's great to have a viewpoint but when you have to make stuff up to support it your argument is weak. Wasn't logic a required class for your degree?
Brin never once referred to Republicans that I'm aware of, nor that he would do everything in his power to see another one never won again. Not even in "so many words". Geesh, make stuff up much? You've been reading too many hard-right news sources and watching FauxNews opinion shows apparently.
Instead of "Republicans" Brin only spoke about the specific man who you too find so deeply offensive. He even briefly explained why he held that personal opinion. It's great to have a viewpoint but when you have to make stuff up to support it your argument is weak. Wasn't logic a required class for your degree?
So Brin doesn't like Trump, states his reasons why quite plainly in the town hall video for the entire world to see, then goes on to say Google will try to prevent his re-election, and you're just fine with that?
And to think some people say Putin stole the '16 election.
If you truly are concerned about Russian interference in our elections, then perhaps you should look closer to home, Mountain View to be specific.
Also, there have been several high-profile whistleblowers from Google in the past two years who have come forward and detailed how Google Search will push down conservative websites in order to please Brin and others on the executive team. Does that sound like fair play to you? Is that something we as a country should allow a monopolist to do?
It's funny, but when you have to rely on censorship in order to achieve your political goals, you have to wonder what they're so afraid of.
The evidence that Russia attacked our 2016 to damage Hillary and help Trump is confirmed by:
-- Every U.S. intelligence agency
-- The Mueller report
-- The latest report from the Republican led senate committee on the topic.
And, the intelligence community also verifies that they are doing a repeat performance to help Trump in this year's election.
But, Trump (along with his shill the AG), says his friend and ally Vladimir would never do such thing! So, of course we're supposed to believe the liar in chief! LOL...
So far, they have blamed a 400 pound fat boy and Ukraine for the attack (based on Russian conspiracy theories) and now... wait for it..... drum roll please.... Google did it!
....LOL.... I sure am glad you cleared that up for us!
Brin never once referred to Republicans that I'm aware of, nor that he would do everything in his power to see another one never won again. Not even in "so many words". Geesh, make stuff up much? You've been reading too many hard-right news sources and watching FauxNews opinion shows apparently.
Instead of "Republicans" Brin only spoke about the specific man who you too find so deeply offensive. He even briefly explained why he held that personal opinion. It's great to have a viewpoint but when you have to make stuff up to support it your argument is weak. Wasn't logic a required class for your degree?
So Brin doesn't like Trump, states his reasons why quite plainly in the town hall video for the entire world to see, then goes on to say Google will try to prevent his re-election, and you're just fine with that?
Also, there have been several high-profile whistleblowers from Google in the past two years who have come forward and detailed how Google Search will push down conservative websites in order to please Brin and others on the executive team. Does that sound like fair play to you? Is that something we as a country should allow a monopolist to do?
Where did you read that any of this actually happened? Seriously.
Do you have some kind of link where any leaker said Google pushes down conservative outlets and promotes liberal ones in order to please Brin? IMO you don't because they didn't.
People make so much stuff up and expect it they say it then it will become fact. Please don't, it makes you appear dishonest.
Interesting: While Trump is using his shill the AG to attack Google, his campaign is investing in it heavily. From Politico:
"In 2016, Donald Trump’s campaign
cracked the code on Facebook as a campaign tool — gaining an advantage
over Hillary Clinton that was little noticed at the time but helped
propel him to victory.
This time, the president is betting big on YouTube.
...
As Trump’s reelection effort pulled back on television advertising over the past month,
it is pouring money and staff time into Google’s video platform. The
campaign and its joint fund with the Republican National Committee have
spent over $65 million on YouTube and Google — about $30 million of it
since July.
...
Trump's YouTube channel, however, is a voluminous and unique collection
of news, campaign ads and original web shows. Negative ads like "Don't
let them ruin America" are paired with livestreamed series such as "Black Voices for Trump: Real Talk Online!" and "The Right View."
The campaign uploads and then tests hundreds of short videos of the
president speaking, while also posting news clips about things like the jobs report and the recent Serbia-Kosovo deal."
I guess he's trying to insure that his spin, lies and propaganda don't get censored.
If his alternative reality bubble gets popped he'll be in the BigHouse rather than the WhiteHouse.
Did you read your links and why the one and only guy, y3eah same person in both, claims there's probably political bias in Google Search results? Quoting: "Though he works on Google Assistant - which he insists truly does not have a bias - he said he 'just knows' how the algorithms work. "
So he "just knows". LOL. Must have been a slow news day, yet plenty enough for you eh? You obviously require a low standard of proof.
Did you read your links and why the only the one and only guy claims there's political bias in Google Search results? Quoting:
"Though he works on Google Assistant - which he insists truly does not have a bias - he said he 'just knows' how the algorithms work. " So he "just knows" Proof enough for you eh?
Apparently you missed the following:
Vorhies told the organisation: "This particular black list is showing which news sites aren't going to show up underneath the search bar when people are searching on their Android phone.
"And they are telling people that they don't have any blacklists, they don't have any political ideology, they don't have any political bias but it's really clear that they do.
"If Google wants to have political bias and if they wanna say they have political bias then that is their right as a company.
"But for them to go under oath and say that theses blacklists don't exist, well employees like me are able to just search through the internal search engine of the company and see that they do, so it is hypocritical at the least and it's perjury at the worst.
"If people don't fall in line with their editorial agenda, then their news articles get deboosted and deranked.
"And if people do fall in line with their editorial agenda, then it gets boosted to the top."
What organizations were on this supposed "blacklist"? The TV show was quite good, at least the early seasons. Your "blacklist" seems to be a mystery.
EDIT: Ah, Project Veritas! No further explanation needed from you The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is not their forte.
What organizations were on this supposed "blacklist"? The TV show was quite good, at least the early seasons. Your "blacklist" seems to be a mystery.
EDIT: Ah, Project Veritas! No further explanation needed.
Is Project Veritas not to your liking? How convenient.
So unless the whistleblowers appear on 60 Minutes, their allegations should be dismissed?
Greg Coppola has a PhD, by the way. But since he spoke with Project Veritas, he magically becomes persona non grata in your eyes?
I read the interview in its entirely. He still didn't claim as fact the things you are saying he did. I suggest you read it too.
So, not even his whistle blower blew the whistle? That's hilarious.
Plus, even his sources were of the "I heard it on the internet" type junk.
The truth is: Conservatives have been smearing Google for almost a decade because they don't lean far enough right for them. To them, that's "left wing bias".
Currently, Trump is likely mad at them (thus he sicked his attack dog on them) because they won't let him target specific voter demographics like Facebook does. So he has to blast his ads out to what amounts to the general public: he knows age and stuff but no voter preferences and such. He prefers to target and customize his propaganda to specific audiences for maximum effect.
I read the interview in its entirely. He still didn't claim as fact the things you are saying he did. I suggest you read it too.
Well thank you for reading the article, and yes, I read it myself some time ago. Here's one sentence from it:
"Coppola said there were a 'small number' of people whose jobs were dedicated to promoting certain news sites over others and that the bias is left-leaning, favoring CNN and The New York Times."
That's fairly general though, so to better corroborate my initial assertion, the one you seem to be disputing, Project Veritas captured on tape a conversation with a senior Google executive, Jen Gennai, who is head of “Responsible Innovation” at Google, a sector that monitors and evaluates the responsible implementation of Artificial Intelligence technologies.
Granted, I understand you're not a fan of Project Veritas, but to her credit Ms Gennai admitted that Project Veritas "got her", so she doesn't dispute what I'm about to quote.
And what she says below is what I was referring to when I made my initial claims earlier in the day:
“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.”
“We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’ve rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again.”
Feel free to interpret Gennai's comments however you wish. But to me the intent is pretty clear.
So, you hear what you want to hear. And you make mountains out of molehills. That's all pretty common among Trumpers.
Brin never once referred to Republicans that I'm aware of, nor that he would do everything in his power to see another one never won again. Not even in "so many words". Geesh, make stuff up much? You've been reading too many hard-right news sources and watching FauxNews opinion shows apparently.
Instead of "Republicans" Brin only spoke about the specific man who you too find so deeply offensive. He even briefly explained why he held that personal opinion. It's great to have a viewpoint but when you have to make stuff up to support it your argument is weak. Wasn't logic a required class for your degree?
So Brin doesn't like Trump, states his reasons why quite plainly in the town hall video for the entire world to see, then goes on to say Google will try to prevent his re-election, and you're just fine with that?
Also, there have been several high-profile whistleblowers from Google in the past two years who have come forward and detailed how Google Search will push down conservative websites in order to please Brin and others on the executive team. Does that sound like fair play to you? Is that something we as a country should allow a monopolist to do?
People make so much stuff up and expect it they say it then it will become fact. Please don't, it makes you appear dishonest.
That is EXACTLY what the President of your country (Trump) and Prime Minister of my country (Modi) have been doing for the last 4 and 6 years respectively. While they CANNOT fool ALL the people ALL the time, they are successful in fooling MOST of the people MOST of the times. Surprised that you are not aware of this.
Comments
Brin never once referred to Republicans that I'm aware of, nor that he would do everything in his power to see another one never won again. Not even in "so many words". Geesh, make stuff up much? You've been reading too many hard-right news sources and watching FauxNews opinion shows apparently.
Instead of "Republicans" Brin only spoke about the specific man who you too find so deeply offensive. He even briefly explained why he held that personal opinion.
It's great to have a viewpoint but when you have to make stuff up to support it your argument is weak. Wasn't logic a required class for your degree?
The evidence that Russia attacked our 2016 to damage Hillary and help Trump is confirmed by:
People make so much stuff up and expect it they say it then it will become fact. Please don't, it makes you appear dishonest.
This time, the president is betting big on YouTube.
...
As Trump’s reelection effort pulled back on television advertising over the past month, it is pouring money and staff time into Google’s video platform. The campaign and its joint fund with the Republican National Committee have spent over $65 million on YouTube and Google — about $30 million of it since July.
"Though he works on Google Assistant - which he insists truly does not have a bias - he said he 'just knows' how the algorithms work. "
So he "just knows". LOL. Must have been a slow news day, yet plenty enough for you eh? You obviously require a low standard of proof.
EDIT: Ah, Project Veritas! No further explanation needed from you
So, you hear what you want to hear. And you make mountains out of molehills. That's all pretty common among Trumpers.