Connect with us

Tech

Report: Google Wanted to Bury Conservative News Sites in Search Results

Published

on

According to a Daily Caller report, Google engineers conspired about whether the company should bury search results of prominent conservative news websites.

“Communications obtained by TheDCNF show that internal Google discussions went beyond expressing remorse over Clinton’s loss to actually discussing ways Google could prevent Trump from winning again,” the report said.

Daily Caller obtained posts from Google engineer Scott Byer in which he wanted to make Google the arbiter of truth in media, and disparaged conservative media outlets as “opinion blogs.”

Trending: Judge Amy Coney Barrett Recently Approved Democrat COVID-19 Lockdown Policies

“This was an election of false equivalencies, and Google, sadly, had a hand in it,” Byer said on Nov. 9. 2016, the day after President Donald J. Trump’s historic triumph over Hillary R. Clinton.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • 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.

“I think we have a responsibility to expose the quality and truthfulness of sources – because not doing so hides real information under loud noises,” he reportedly said. “Beyond that, let’s concentrate on teaching critical thinking. A little bit of that would go a long way. Let’s make sure that we reverse things in four years – demographics will be on our side.”

Engineer Uri Dekel’s response was a bit more tempered, though he still referred to conservatives as “deplorable,” a word added the lexicon of every leftist in 2016 thanks to remarks made by Clinton.

“Thinking that Breitbart, Drudge, etc. are not ‘legitimate news sources’ is contrary to the beliefs of a major portion of our user base is partially what got us to this mess. MSNBC is not more legit than Drudge just because Rachel Maddow may be more educated / less deplorable / closer to our views, than, say Sean Hannity,” Dekel said, replying to Byer.

“I follow a lot of right wing folks on social networks you could tell something was brewing. We laughed off Drudge’s Instant Polls and all that stuff, but in the end, people go to those sources because they believe that the media doesn’t do it’s job. I’m a Hillary supporter and let’s admit it, the media avoided dealing with the hard questions and issues, which didn’t pay off. By ranking ‘legitimacy’ you’ll just introduce more conspiracy theories,” he said.

Byer, who really hates Breitbart, disagreed.

“Too many times, Breitbart is just echoing a demonstrably made up story,” he said without providing examples.

Google engineer Mike Brauwerman had another suggestion.

“What I believe we can do, technically, that avoids the accusations of conspiracy or bias from people who ultimately have a right and obligation to decide what they want to believe, is to get better at displaying the ‘ripples’ and copy-pasta, to trace information to its source, to link to critiques of those sources, and let people decide what sources they believe,” he said. “Give people a comprehensive but effectively summarized view of the information, not context-free rage-inducing sound-bytes.

David Besbris, Google’s vice president of engineering also added to the conversation.

“We’re working on providing users with context around stories so that they can know the bigger picture,” he said. “We can play a role in providing the full story and educate them about all sides. This doesn’t have to be filtering and can be useful to everyone.”

How comforting to know that the platform by which nearly the entire world receives information has a far-left bias.

According to the report, Google denied ever manipulating any search results.

Tech

ORWELLIAN: Twitter Censors Big League Politics Article About Joe Biden Attacking 17-Year-Old Kyle Rittenhouse

Big Tech does not want the truth to get out.

Published

on

Twitter has censored a Big League Politics article detailing a statement made by the Joe Biden campaign attacking 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot two communists dead and shot another in the bicep in Kenosha, Wisc. and faces murder charges as a result.

The monolithic social media platform informed the BLP Twitter account on Wednesday that they are censoring a nearly 3-week-old article titled, “Joe Biden Smears American Hero Kyle Rittenhouse,” claiming that it glorifies violence.

The notice can be seen here:

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • 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.

Twitter is not the only platform to censor BLP articles in an attempt to suppress the truth from the masses. Facebook also has BLP in their cross hairs, using a truth commission of fake news hacks to serve as their so-called fact checkers.

Facebook once tried to censor content published by BLP to expose the bizarre and unexplained circumstances surrounding the mysterious death of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein in a Manhattan jail cell:

Facebook’s new ministry of truth, led by disreputable fact checking operations like Lead Stories, has been initiated to stifle independent voices on the social media giant, but they have been caught and forced to backtrack after trying to suppress news about camera malfunctions near Jeffrey Epstein’s cell during his mysterious death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City last month.

“There were no media reports that a camera monitoring Epstein’s cell area malfunctioned in the hours before the accused sex traffickers death on Saturday August 10, 2019,” claimed Duke, the 26-year veteran of CNN who co-founded Lead Stories, in a blatant deception within the bogus fact check of the story that initially broke on Big League Politics.

Duke’s analysis was false because Big League Politics referenced a media report by digital media specialist Michael Coudrey that he initially refused to acknowledge in his phony fact check.

The phony fact checkers also targeted another BLP article to suppress the truth about Democrat tyrants in Virginia usurping unlawful authority against the 1st Amendment of the Constitution:

Last week, Big League Politics reported on a bill introduced in the Virginia legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against government officials.

Virginia House Bill 1627 was introduced by Democrat Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne to protect government officials from so-called harassment caused by “indecent language” transmitted over a “computer or computer network.”

The full language reads as follows: “If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”

The legislation applies the above provision directly to “the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”

Because of the intentionally nebulous and vague nature of the terminology in the legislation, the legislation constitutes a blanket ban of criticism on public officials. A judge, likely appointed by the government officials in question, would determine what constitutes harassment as well as what constitutes “obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language.”

In short, the egregiously unconstitutional bill would make free speech dependent on rulings by biased government appointees, and cause a chilling effect on those who wish to speak out against public officials. This is the type of intolerable act that the Founding Fathers waged a revolutionary war to put to an end.

The Orwellian truth commission set up by Facebook found fault with the report and took measures to prevent it from being disseminated widely on the platform. They had their hired goons at Politifact flag the story as fake news in order to restrict the story from being shared and prevent social media users from knowing the truth about what is happening in Virginia.

Politifact claims that the legislation “spells out criminal penalties for harassment of or threats made to certain state officials. It does not affect ordinary free speech.” This is an assessment that is at best embarrassingly naive, but more likely the cognizant disinformation from a guilty and complicit agent of Big Brother.

The Orwellian push by Silicon Valley corporations is intensifying before the election. They must lose their Section 230 subsidies under the federal government for their heinous and anti-American business practices against free speech.

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


Trending