Google search for coronavirus returns results from the UN World Health Organization, rather than from the federal Center for Decease Control, as one would expect in Texas, USA. Continue reading Google Prefers Bad Sources for Pandemics Info
Recursive Censorship – Google, Facebook, or Twitter censor, ban, or otherwise prevent delivery of a message criticizing an earlier ban or another act of censorship by one of them.
Collusive Censorship – Google, Facebook, and/or Twitter collude with each other to censor, ban, or otherwise restrict the same speech or speaker in what looks like a criminal collusive monopolization. Continue reading Recursive Collusive Censorship by Big Tech
COVFEFE – Google deleted this word from its Arabic-English dictionary after President Trump used it in his tweet on May 31, 2017. The original translation of this word (more accurately rendered in English as “cov fe’fe”) was “I will stand up“.
Trump used it in a tweet “Despite constant negative press covfefe“, when he came back from Saudi Arabia. Few hours later, he tweeted “Who can figure out the true meaning of “covfefe” ??? Enjoy!” Continue reading How Google Creates Alternative Reality
In early 2018, Google and Microsoft developed a novel technique of manipulating search results. This technique relies less on in-house craftsmanship and more on coordination with outside leftist activists. Its purpose is to hide facts and opinions supporting conservative positions even when the query terms clearly indicate that the user is searching for these particular facts and/or opinions. An example is
Spygate, nearly missing from Google
Spygate was a campaign of spying on and sabotaging Trump’s presidential campaign. Spygate was spearheaded by Obama appointees and Hillary’s associates in the DOJ, FBI, CIA, State Department, National Security Council, and other swamp strongholds. However, a Google search (performed using a browser in a clean state) returns the following results:
Supporters of Big Tech impunity pulled a quick one on us. They say that as conservatives and libertarians, we are against government interference with private businesses, so we should leave Big Tech alone. This argument is disingenuous. As conservatives and libertarians, we tend to be against laws, regulations, and government policies that interfere with private businesses. But the existing laws, regulations, and policies that restrain, constrain, endanger, and otherwise interfere with private businesses must be enforced on Big Tech just as they are enforced on other businesses. If government tells a small bakery owner that he cannot select customers, the government must tell the same to Google, Facebook, and Twitter, just billions of times stronger.
We also support enforcement of valid contracts (rather than fictitious ones, like social media Terms of Service), and prosecution of corporations for fraud and deceptive advertising. This said, Big Tech (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Netflix) are not real private corporations, but state actors, illegal monopolies, and illegal agents of foreign governments. Continue reading How Obamanet Created “Masters of the Universe”
2019-02-15 Update. Breitbart: This Is What ‘Election Interference’ Actually Looks Like (2018-08-20)
“The purge of the right on social media was once a slow trickle, with high-profile bans happening only occasionally, and then subsiding. With just three months until the midterm elections, the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley have turned online censorship into a cascade.” Continue reading “Masters of the Universe” ban Alex Jones and other Dissidents
“McKew is a former Podesta Group “specialist” and the CEO of Fianna Strategies. Up until the election of Donald Trump, she served as a registered foreign agent for opposition parties in Georgia and Moldova.
Having lost her foreign clients after the 2016 election, she has since refashioned herself as a Russian disinformation expert and a go-to source for media on Trump-Russia conspiracy theories. McKew has even testified before a congressional committee.
Yet like an amateur, she was just duped by a Twitter bot on a politically charged incident.”
Jan 23, 2019
(2019-01-24 update) Silicon Valley oligarchs might be not aware of specifics of the dirty social media operations they fund and organize (New Knowledge, fake Russian bots, fake conservatives etc.), but the general intent is undeniable. The same radical Netroots Nation conference, funded by Facebook, Google, and radical “usual suspects,” also taught progressives trolling. From the panel’s description:
TROLLING FOR JUSTICE: HOW CHEEKY, PROVOCATIVE CAMPAIGNS CAN LEAD TO PROGRESSIVE VICTORIES
TROLLING. The panel will discuss trolling as a tactic to educate new audiences, hit hard at the opposition, and generate opportunities that convert people to action. This panel will focus on how bold, cheeky, and deliberately provocative campaigns can be leveraged to not just egg on the opposition, but tell a story that leads to progressive wins.
On that occasion, Facebook and Google also advanced their business interests through radical politics. Another panel was devoted to preserving Obamanet, which had granted them their current stranglehold over the internet: NET NEUTRALITY AND THE FIGHT TO REGAIN IT
Google’s suppression of “undesirable” speech went beyond conservative, Republican, and scientific opinions. Google also muzzled opinions in order to promote its products, eliminate potential competition, and manipulate (inflate) its stock price, including the suppression of
- Information and medical research about the harm inflicted on children by its services
- Mainstream (i.e., not coming from the left) criticism of its business model that would pierce its stock bubble
In its attempts to suppress conservative and Republican speech, as well as scientific, cyber-security, and medical research and information, Google went far beyond banning, de-ranking, and demonetizing content in its own search results, YouTube, and other platforms. Google also
- Developed and deployed an ad blocker, designed to selectively block ads on pro-Trump political websites. The targeted websites include Breitbart, American Thinker, and DailyCaller, and the scientific website WattsUpWithThat. The move was so insidious that even its victims missed the motive behind such an illogical and self-harming act by a company that depends on ads for almost all of its revenues.
- Persecuted conservative employees for their political views, in violation of California laws, resulting in a chilling effect on the speech of other Google employees and the employees of its actual and potential partners and vendors. Google managers compiled and disseminated lists of conservative employees. See James Damore lawsuit against Google.
Contrary to popular assumptions, Google, Facebook, and Twitter are likely not protected by Section 230 for hiding, de-ranking, and banning conservative, pro-Trump, climate realism and other “adversary” content. Section 230 provides protection to them only for: Continue reading Google Ad Blocker and Suppression of Non-Political Speech
Google AdWords doesn’t allow bidding on certain words and phrase, except if an exception is requested and granted. Guess which word was disallowed among the following:
Fentanyl, improvised explosive device, IED, car bomb, jihad, rifle, RPG-7?
Rifle was disallowed, even in the phrase national rifle association! All other keywords above were allowed and approved.
See the screenshots in Google-Adwords-rifle-vs-fentany.pdf
The funniest part of the Google CEO Sundar Pichai testimony before the House Judiciary Committee was when Representative Lieu (D-CA) said that Google and other for-profit corporations have First Amendment rights—after Democrats were denying, protesting, and suppressing such rights for decades and had a derangement syndrome over Citizens United. Soon, they might figure out that bakers refusing to make cakes for a “gay marriage” ritual have First Amendments rights too.
Google does have First Amendment rights and exercise them on its corporate blogs, by speaking to the media, placing ads on the sites of third parties and its own site, and in many other ways. But Google Search, YouTube, and most other resources are services, not speech. They are not different from auto repair or accounting. This is how Google has been marketing them, and this is how users understand them. Continue reading Democrats Claim Suppression of Conservatives is Google’s Right
The following screenshots are examples of anti-conservative bias in the Google search engine:
The screenshot of Alexa info shows that Google sends to Vox 37% of its outside traffic, but only 12% to Breitbart. In the absence of intentional anti-conservative bias, both numbers would likely be close. Continue reading Google Google Pants on Fire
Google tends to push Wikipedia results to the top and to use them in snippets despite Wikipedia being unreliable, untrustworthy, biased, and unpredictable. This is not naivete but a ruthless anti-competitive strategy. Wikipedia is owned by Wikimedia, a typical San Francisco nonprofit foundation, to which Google and its top officers donated millions of dollars. But most of its income is apparently derived from small donations by visitors, mostly referred by Google. The business relations between Google and Wikimedia go both ways. Continue reading Google Uses Wikipedia to Suppress Competition
Earlier, Google banned my SHFi AdWords account. After overcoming some obstacles, I created a personal account, intended to support Ted Cruz and Republicans. Google refused to display my messages and links with a message “Disapproved: Election advertising in the United States.” Continue reading Google, Twitter Suppress Conservative Voice in Election
GFT censors not only conservatives, but other dissidents from the EU left and anti-Trump narratives, as well as their own adversaries.
Twitter subjected to Quality Filter Discrimination (QFD shadowban) not only expected targets, such as @cernovich, but also Trump Republicans, a walking away liberal Brandon Straka (@usminority), and even Adam Carter (@with_integrity). Adam Carter is one of the leading researchers who refuted Hillary’s conspiracy theory that Russia had been behind the leaks of the 2016 election campaign. This conspiracy theory has been built on false claims by CrowdStrike, in which Google is a major investor. The QFD shadowbans were observed on Twitter from July 23 to 24. Continue reading Censorship by GOOG,FB, TWTR is Alive and Well
Update. A Google team, working under SVP Urs Hölzle of WWF, refused to implement a feature improving Google Cloud security necessary to bid on military contracts (according to Bloomberg). Earlier, Google announced it would not work with the US military on Artificial Intelligence projects. But this feature is not related to AI. Thus, Google refuses to aid the US military at all. Meanwhile, Google services (including Google Maps and Google AI) are available to terrorist organizations and hostile armed forces worldwide. In 2013, Google’s Chairman Eric Schmidt visited North Korea where he aided the North Korean military. Continue reading Google Aided North Korean Military, Spurns Pentagon
Big Tech is the new Big Tobacco!
In fact, it is much worse. Big Tech has committed much worse fraud on its consumers than the Big Tobacco has been accused. Worse, Big Tech funded groups intimidating its opponents, and even lawmakers and government officials. Big Tech also uses its control of the communications line to silence its critics.
Jun 4, 2018 – Google (GOOG, GOOGL), Facebook (FB), and Twitter (TWTR) use their internet gatekeepers’ positions to manipulate (inflate) their stock prices. Continue reading Big Tech is the new Big Tobacco, plus …
Google has interfered in the US Senate Elections on behalf of democrat Doug Jones, possibly on demand from a European government or political party. I know Google does such things because some of my AdWords messages were banned by Google in the U.S. after I had expanded targeting to the EU.
I know only a small part of this interference: on December 4, Google banned my paid message running on Google Adwords sites in Alabama. Below are the renderings of the message by Google Adwords.
This is a notice that you provide ad revenue to an organization or group that seems to attempt a violent and armed overthrow of the government, and recruits, indoctrinates, and trains mentally ill persons to carry it out. Similar activity might have been behind the murder attempt against Steve Scalise and other Republican Congressmen, committed by mentally ill James Hodgkinson in 2017. Continue reading Google Ads on a Terrorist and Violent Revolutionary Site
Update. The controlling legal precedent seems to be the following quote from the Supreme Court Decision:
“To determine whether an actor’s conduct possesses “sufficient communicative elements to bring the First Amendment into play,” the Supreme Court has asked whether “[a]n intent to convey a particularized message was present and [whether] the likelihood was great that the message would be understood by those who viewed it.””
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 404 (1989) (quoting Spence v. Washington, 418 U.S. 405, 410-11 (1974) (per curiam)).
When Google eliminates climate realist or conservative websites from its top search results, the “message” is certainly not understood by those who view it. Further, this is the main purpose of this conduct – to suppress speech without other people understanding that. Google also flatly denies that it conveys any message in its search results. It claims impartiality and attempts to provide “the most useful and relevant” search results. Thus, intentional distortion of the search results by Google does not even bring the First Amendment into play. It is really fraud, not speech.
Google Search is a commercial service that Google provides to its users. Google must provide this service in good faith and in accordance with other applicable laws. Google search is service, not “speech.” Continue reading Google Search Fraud
I read the testimonies of Google, Facebook, and Twitter executives before the Senate Commerce Committee on Combating the Spread of Extremist Propaganda (January 17, 2018), and I would advise you not to trust them very much. Under the pretext of fighting “extremist propaganda” (a vague term, probably selected to conceal partisan differences on what constitutes extremist propaganda) Google and Twitter suppress speech dissenting from leftist orthodoxy. For example, Google has demonetized some PragerU videos on a range of topics and is being sued by them. I have been banned from Google AdWords and Twitter Ads for speech opposing climate alarmism.
The suppression of conservative websites in Google organic search results has been documented many times. Continue reading Google and Twitter Censor non-Leftist Views Under Pretext of “Extremist Propaganda”
Final update: Google has permanently banned me from AdWords:
“We’ve confirmed that your account is in violation of our AdWords policies. Since this decision is final, the account will not be reinstated. Please avoid creating additional AdWords accounts, as they will be subjected to the same suspension.
Our support team will not be able to give you any more specifics on the suspension.”
(Updated on January 9 after the initial publication on January 8.)
Google suspended my Adwords account two days ago. Continue reading Google Has Suspended My Adwords Account
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft (GFTM) and other companies that started as platforms or service providers and became content vendors are American companies subject to all U.S laws. Their directors and executives are American citizens and residents, and owe loyalty to the U.S. That stands true even if they derive most of their income from abroad. Continue reading US Tech Companies Must Remain Loyal
In 2015, in a vote along partisan lines, the FCC reclassified the Internet to be a telecommunication service subject to Title II of the 1934 Communications Act (the infamous FCC-15-24 Obamanet order). This was done under the pretext of net neutrality, but had nothing to do with net neutrality. Google participated in the preparation of this order, was fully aware of it, did not object. Rumor has it that Eric Schmidt personally wrote parts of the order, and broadened it. Then Google took full advantage of this reclassification and ignored its obligations stemming from it. Continue reading Google Liability under Title II
My report documenting censorship of climate realists (climate skeptics) by Google, Microsoft LinkedIn, Twitter, and Reddit in paid delivery (ads) is published in WUWT.