Connect with us

Tech

Court Rules That Google Can Legally Manipulate Searches to Influence Political Results

Big Brother can reign as long as it is nominally private, a court rules.

Published

on

Google Ben Shapiro nazi

A court has ruled that Google has the right to legally manipulate searches in order to cause electoral interference and influence political results, rebuking a legal challenge from Democrat Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard.

Gabbard sued the tech giant after Google bottled up her campaign as it was rising following a strong performance in a presidential debate. She alleged that they denied her a crucial advertisement buy that damaged her campaign’s chances, and she also pointed out in her lawsuit that Google has manipulated their search results to help dictate political outcomes in the past.

“Since at least June 2019, Google has used its control over online political speech to silence Tulsi Gabbard, a candidate millions of Americans want to hear from. With this lawsuit, Tulsi seeks to stop Google from further intermeddling in the 2020 United States Presidential Election,” her lawsuit stated.

Trending: VIDEO: Chinese Factory Worker Caught Contaminating Hundreds of Medical Face Masks

“Google plays favorites, with no warning, no transparency, and no accountability. Google’s arbitrary and capricious treatment of Gabbard’s campaign should raise concerns for policymakers everywhere about the company’s ability to use its dominance to impact political discourse,” it added.

take our poll - story continues below

Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump?

  • Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Google made the excuse that their censorship of Gabbard’s campaign was just their automated systems protecting their customers from potential fraud.

“We have automated systems that flag unusual activity on all advertiser accounts—including large spending changes—in order to prevent fraud and protect our customers,” a Google spokesperson said in an email to Ars Technica.

“In this case, our system triggered a suspension and the account was reinstated shortly thereafter. We are proud to offer ad products that help campaigns connect directly with voters, and we do so without bias toward any party or political ideology,” they added.

Judge Stephen Victor Wilson, who was appointed to the bench by former President Ronald Reagan, threw her lawsuit out in an edict he issued last week, essentially proclaiming that Google has carte blanche to manipulate political outcomes and election results, and there isn’t anything the government can do stop them.

“Google does not hold primaries, it does not select candidates, and it does not prevent anyone from running for office or voting in elections,” Wilson wrote. “To the extent Google regulates anything, it regulates its own private speech and platform.”

“Google’s self-regulation, even of topics that may be of public concern, does not implicate the First Amendment,” he added.

Of course, Google is far from a private entity. They, along with other monolithic tech firms, rely on special government protections from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to protect their monopoly over the free marketplace. This federal judge is happy to allow Google to benefit from government favor while manipulating elections and waging war against free speech.

Ars Technica notes that the federal courts have consistently ruled in favor of Google’s right to censor in recent months:

Last month, a federal appeals court in California rejected a similar lawsuit from conservative pundit Dennis Prager. Alt-right social media platform Gab unsuccessfully sued Google in 2017. Last year a federal court rejected a lawsuit against Google by conservative legal group Freedom Watch.

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Have a hot tip for Big League Politics?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.

Tech

Facebook Censors Project Veritas Video, Keeping Coronavirus Hysteria in High Gear

Big Brother is ramping up due to coronavirus.

Published

on

Facebook is reportedly throwing a Project Veritas video off of their monolithic social media platform because the video contains information about coronavirus that is unapproved by the political and media establishment.

CNN reporter Oliver Darcy reported that Facebook would be removing the Veritas video from their platform because of nebulous and unspecified policy violations. Veritas founder James O’Keefe blamed Darcy for allegedly being a snitch and attempting to get his video removed from social media platforms.

O’Keefe also blasted New York Times reporter Andrew Jacobs for his moral preening in criticizing his coronavirus reporting.

The controversial video published by Veritas shows O’Keefe talking with boots on the ground at coronavirus testing sites. He talked to Army personnel and health care workers who claimed the pandemic is not as bad as the media and government officials are purporting it to be.

Certain transcripts from the Veritas video can be seen here:

James O’Keefe: “What about the situation itself. Is it as bad as–the media is saying? The whole pandemic?”
New York Army National Guardsman: “Oh no. It’s the flu!”
O’Keefe: “That’s all it is?”
Guardsman: “It’s the flu.”

O’Keefe: “Is it as bad as they’re saying, this pandemic? Everyone’s freaking out. Is it bad, is it overblown by the media, what is it like?”
Medical worker: “Is it what?”
O’Keefe: “Is the media accurately reporting or is it as bad as people are saying?”
Medical worker: “No.”
O’Keefe: “It’s not as bad as the—”
Medical worker: “It’s precautionary.”
O’Keefe: “The media is making it out bigger?”
Medical worker: “Yes.”

O’Keefe’s video has garnered controversy because it goes against the narrative of fear and hysteria that has been pushed by the fake news media, government bureaucrats and official expert class.

“The rollout of our findings does not endorse COVID-19 behavior one way or another, nor do we encourage others. Our goal is to inform the public and allow the public to make judgments on the issues,” O’Keefe said. “Emotionally driven, knee-jerk reactions journalists are the last thing the public should be subjected to in a time of crisis.”

“I realize this will probably upset some, but Project Veritas goes to the front lines to get unfiltered, raw information, to the public. We’re not here to project a narrative or even to draw a conclusion—we don’t even know who the villains are, if any,” O’Keefe added.

Despite Facebook’s reported censorship of the Veritas video, there are no plans for Twitter and YouTube to remove the content from their platforms at the present time.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending