Google Subverting Election for Hillary: Stump TRUMP


In 2014 Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook using his social media platform ran a number of experiments on its users emotions. The social media giant that allows narcissists the canvas they desire to paint their lives to others by sharing even the most mundane and trivial aspects of their lives has admitted that it manipulated the information posted in almost 700 000 of its users newsfeed and found that it could make people feel more positive or negative trough a process called emotional contagion more interestingly during the 2010 midterm elections in the U.S the company ran an experiment to see if facebook could encourage people to vote, they did this by offering test subjects an I voted button at the top of their newsfeeds while the control group got no prompt to vote. What they found was that peer preassure works and that people that got the prompt were 0.39% more likely to vote. While this may seem like a minuscule number researchers think that this experiment resulted in
340 000 votes that would not have otherwise been cast. And given the scandal this year of facebook being implicated for bias in terms of newsfeed and trending topics being more tilted towards the left as well as the company’s stated goals in helping politicians like Angela Merkel crack down on freedom of conscience and speech it’s not too much of a stretch to entertain the idea that Facebook could help swing close elections for their preferred candidate using electronic manipulation In fact social media and other internet giants are now on the forefront of how many people receive their information. The days of newspapers and TV dominating the distribution of information have long since passed. In fact most of the mainstream news networks do not even feign objectivity and to a greater or lesser degree they have become partisan channels playing to their base. MSNBC along with CNN in the US but also taxpayer-funded stations like the CBC and canada and the
BBC in the UK are hopelessly partisan and prattle on for the politics of the
centre-left to the extreme left. Whilst fox news in the US generally but not being
as consistent as its rivals punts for the centre-right politically, while
regional news channels like Al Jazeera and RT seem to provide somewhat fair
coverage so long as it has nothing to do with the Arab world or Islam in the case
of the former or Russia her leader and internal politics in the case of the
latter. However while cable news networks sink invariably into irrelevancy and
their partisan chills become ever so glaring and they lose whatever
credibility they once had again the Giants of the internet are stepping in
and are now shaping not only the ideas but also the narrative of the voting
public in much of the Western world and this is especially concerning in the
elections of the world’s remaining superpower, the United States. In
2014 google overtook goldman sachs in terms of campaign contributions to
American politicians with most analysts pointing to privacy concerns and
internet search monopoly issues as the reason, in fact in December 2015 concerns about
the Internet giant’s influence in Washington began to spill out into the
public domain. The uk’s Guardian newspaper ran a story on how Google
enlisted members of the US Congress that it had bankrolled during the last
election cycle to fight a six billion dollar antitrust case brought against it
by the EU, a case that could potentially dissect and decimate the US tech company business in Europe. The coordinated effort by senators and members of the
House of Representatives as well as by a congressional committee formed part of a
sophisticated multimillion-pound lobbying drive in Brussels which google
has significantly ramped up as it fends off challenges to its dominance in
Europe. Capitol Hill’s aggressive intervention in Brussels came as the European Parliament prepared to vote through a resolution in November 2014
that called on EU policymakers to consider breaking up
Google’s online business in to separate companies. Republican and Democratic
senators and congressmen many of whom have received significant campaign
donations from google totalling hundreds of thousands of dollars, leaned on
parliament in a series of similar and in some cases identical letter sent to
key MEPs. Moreover Julian Assange of WikiLeaks whilst speaking at a recent
symposium stated that Google was directly engaged with the presidential
campaign of Hillary Clinton through google itself and via a google funded
startup called groundwork he went on to say that once hillary clinton becomes
president key google personnel will be placed in positions around the Clinton
administration. He also pointed out the fact that Google
was in bed with the Obama administration and that it is the company that has
visited the White House more than any other, averaging once a week over the
last four years. While the US Congress Senate and the executive being owned by their corporate backers is not really a news flash for most, the real problem
then arises, when the corporation’s not only by the politicians they helped
elect but outright subvert the electoral process. Enter Robert Epstein an
american psychologist professor, author, and journalist writing in Time magazine
he has criticised google as a fundamentally deceptive business model
but more seriously he has alleged that Google could rig the 2016 presidential
election and that search engine manipulation was a serious threat to the
democratic system of government. He went on perhaps the most effective way to wield political influence in today’s high-tech world is to donate money to a
candidate and then use technology to make sure he or she wins. The technology guarantees the win and the donations guarantantees allegiance which google has certainly tapped into in recent years with the Obama administration in a 2014 peer-reviewed paper Epstein investigated and confirmed that search rankings
favorite one candidate can quickly convince undecided voters to vote for
that candidate as much as eighty percent of voters in some demographic groups in another article released in
September 2016 he focused on his latest research that shows that search engines
could also shift votes and change opinions with another powerful tool
autocomplete basically this is it when searching for information using google
with regards to mrs. Clinton the autocomplete will and would almost
invariably generate positive only suggestions this occurred even though bing and yahoo
search is provided both positive and negative suggestions using the same
terms while during the primary season suggestions for both Bernie Sanders and
Donald Trump Google’s auto complete yielded negative suggestions Epstein along with his associates at the
American behavior research and Technology a non-profit non-partisan
organization based in the San Diego area are still immersed in their ongoing
investigation however they have learned there is a clear bias in Google’s auto
complete for mrs. Clinton their findings were verified by using proxy service to
ensure that the information that Google has on a vast majority of Americans was
not tailored to them specifically it was very difficult to google unlike bing and
yahoo to suggest negative search terms about mrs. Clinton. Where it becomes most
glaring is to compare what people are actually searching for and what Google
suggests. Hillary Clinton is awesome versus Hillary the liar as you can see people are searching for Hillary the liar but not awesome Hillary, but google
will suggest to you the ladder, but most damning of all of googles tinkering comes when we search for crooked Trump’s nickname for the scandal-plagued
politician. Google transverses google suggestions and again for bing and yahoo, you get the picture this is not a coincidence. Google is even attempting to cover up
Hillary’s recent health problems or even or even something as simple as searching for when is the election do you notice anything? Google’s Eric
Schmidt has already publicly backed Hillary Clinton in the hopes of growing
the company’s influence in Washington and exploit that pay-for-play system of
government many have accused mrs. Clinton of running through her
Clinton Foundation whilst she was Secretary of State. Now returning to
Epstein’s 2014 paper on search engine manipulation and swinging elections he
believes that search engine suggestion tinkering only increases the effect. If
you can surreptitiously nudge people by generating positive search
results whilst at the same time masking negative search suggestions you can in
his words direct people’s searches one way or another just as surely as if they
were dogs on a leash and you can use this subtle form of influence not just
to alter people’s views about candidates, but on anything in fact autocomplete may
have become a tool not for directing people searches but in fact to influence
not only choices and beliefs but the very thoughts we think oh and in terms
of full disclosure the author of the study Robert Epstein identifies as a
political moderate and support Hillary Clinton for president he just believes
that large-scale manipulations by a private company renders democracy
meaningless thanks for watching please consider
subscribing and I’d also like to draw your attention to the great channel of
forest bloom he’s got some awesome content and you will not be disappointed

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *