Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought conservatives approved of letting corporations do as they please. What’s the problem?
I wanna know that too.
After all, there were corporations that wanted Trump to win, and I don't recall any Trump supporters complaining about their support of numerous PACs, contributions to ad campaigns, and whatever else they do.
There are alternative search engines, and I use one of them myself. (I despise google, and use nothing with their name on it.) Absolutely no one stops people from developing their own search engines, and no one stops people from using them.
Epstein's criticism of Google in the case of being pro-Hillary may be very true. But she still lost the election, so Google's manipulation didn't influence the outcome of the election, did it?
Did you listen to the linked testimony I provided? Epstein flat out says that Google's manipulation and influence led to 2.6 additional votes for Hillary Clinton. The claim isn't that actual votes were altered but that Google is able to manipulate voters and therefore votes towards a candidate and away from a candidate through the information it highlights and censors.
The linked video is only about 6 minutes long but well worth a listen as he makes some claims that are very disturbing...or at least they should be to those that are constantly harping on and on about election interference and criticizing the president for supposedly doing nothing to stop it.
I consider myself more of a Libertarian than a conservative so I'm totally against the government passing laws that dictate how Google or any other company must operate their own business. As long as they aren't committing fraud or breaking other major laws, they should be free to operate as they please.
Having said that, I do think they clearly qualify as a monopoly and for that reason alone they should be broken up.
Did you listen to the linked testimony I provided? Epstein flat out says that Google's manipulation and influence led to 2.6 additional votes for Hillary Clinton. The claim isn't that actual votes were altered but that Google is able to manipulate voters and therefore votes towards a candidate and away from a candidate through the information it highlights and censors.
Right. Because anyone can put an exact number on the votes that people would have cast had they not seen a particular ad or series of ads or a particular opinion piece or series of opinion pieces. (BTW, I believe you omitted a word there.)
Frankly, you make Epstein sound like he's more all-knowing and powerful than google.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by retiredcop111
The greatest threat to our democracy is not Russia. It is our own MSM. Remember Minka? "it's our job to tell people what to think"! The MSM are in bed with the democrats. The biggest collusion of all time is the Democrats and the media conspiring against the American public!
Remember FOX News admitting it was entertainment, NOT news or would you prefer continuing to look at only one side of the story as you do here?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by 205
And just in case you missed it in the video of the professor's testimony I linked, the professor confirmed that Google's manipulation of voters resulted in 2.6 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 that wouldn't have been cast for her had it not been for Google's pro-Hillary/anti-Trump manipulation. The professor also testified to having proof that Google and FB aggressively manipulated voters in 2018 so it's clear how effective their influence can be.
The liberal professor said as bad as their manipulation of voters was in 2016 and 2018, it will pale in comparison to the level of manipulation they're planning for 2020. Even though the professor is a proud Liberal who wants Democrats to win he above all wants fair U.S. elections and is alarmed at Google, Facebook, and big tech's ability to manipulate and influence elections on an unimaginable scale.
After all, there were corporations that wanted Trump to win, and I don't recall any Trump supporters complaining about their support of numerous PACs, contributions to ad campaigns, and whatever else they do.
There are alternative search engines, and I use one of them myself. (I despise google, and use nothing with their name on it.) Absolutely no one stops people from developing their own search engines, and no one stops people from using them.
I have zero problem with Google spending as much money in support of Hillary or any other Democrat as they please. Doing so is their constitutional right and isn't against the law so let them have at it.
Having said that, I do have a problem with a company being able to manipulate INFORMATION ITSELF. There are unquestionably major corporations and PACS that are very powerful and influential but no other company that I know of has the power to control what information the public sees and doesn't see and as a result the power to manipulate the public the way Google does.
The implications of using that kind of power and control in nefarious ways is very dangerous. Google literally has the power to manipulate, gaslight, and radicalize voters and constituents for and against this politician or that politician, this group of people and that group of people, this political movement and that political movement, etc in any way they are fit or to further their own agenda.
I know people for good reason are concerned about the influence billionaires and mega rich corporations have to influence politics with their dark money contributions but consider an even scarier combination....dark money and dark information...or perhaps better worded as the ability to manipulate information and hide the truth. Google's nearly unmatched wealth and their near monopoly on access to information on the internet is an incredibly dangerous combination and an incredible amount of power and influence for o e company to have.
If knowledge is power and massive wealth is power then Google literally has the ability to manipulate and control vast parts of the world. Does anyone think that much power in the hands of a single company is a good idea?
I have zero problem with Google spending as much money in support of Hillary or any other Democrat as they please. Doing so is their constitutional right and isn't against the law so let them have at it.
Having said that, I do have a problem with a company being able to manipulate INFORMATION ITSELF. There are unquestionably major corporations and PACS that are very powerful and influential but no other company that I know of has the power to control what information the public sees and doesn't see and as a result the power to manipulate the public the way Google does.
The implications of using that kind of power and control in nefarious ways is very dangerous. Google literally has the power to manipulate, gaslight, and radicalize voters and constituents for and against this politician or that politician, this group of people and that group of people, this political movement and that political movement, etc in any way they are fit or to further their own agenda.
I know people for good reason are concerned about the influence billionaires and mega rich corporations have to influence politics with their dark money contributions but consider an even scarier combination....dark money and dark information...or perhaps better worded as the ability to manipulate information and hide the truth. Google's nearly unmatched wealth and their near monopoly on access to information on the internet is an incredibly dangerous combination and an incredible amount of power and influence for o e company to have.
If knowledge is power and massive wealth is power then Google literally has the ability to manipulate and control vast parts of the world. Does anyone think that much power in the hands of a single company is a good idea?
No, it isn't.
But I'd be more receptive to these arguments if the people making them were also up in arms about and urging the breakup of, say, big oil companies. They're not. Which leads me to wonder why they think Google is more of a problem than Exxon. I have my suspicions...
I have zero problem with Google spending as much money in support of Hillary or any other Democrat as they please. Doing so is their constitutional right and isn't against the law so let them have at it.
Having said that, I do have a problem with a company being able to manipulate INFORMATION ITSELF. There are unquestionably major corporations and PACS that are very powerful and influential but no other company that I know of has the power to control what information the public sees and doesn't see and as a result the power to manipulate the public the way Google does.
The implications of using that kind of power and control in nefarious ways is very dangerous. Google literally has the power to manipulate, gaslight, and radicalize voters and constituents for and against this politician or that politician, this group of people and that group of people, this political movement and that political movement, etc in any way they are fit or to further their own agenda.
I know people for good reason are concerned about the influence billionaires and mega rich corporations have to influence politics with their dark money contributions but consider an even scarier combination....dark money and dark information...or perhaps better worded as the ability to manipulate information and hide the truth. Google's nearly unmatched wealth and their near monopoly on access to information on the internet is an incredibly dangerous combination and an incredible amount of power and influence for o e company to have.
If knowledge is power and massive wealth is power then Google literally has the ability to manipulate and control vast parts of the world. Does anyone think that much power in the hands of a single company is a good idea?
Google doesn't have the power to control what information the public sees and doesn't see. It's a major source of information, but it's not the only source of information, and people can and DO seek out other sources of information. And the market is open to other search engines.
I'm not in favor of monopolies. I think the government should rightfully legislate against monopolies. And I applaud you for posting about your concerns. But I don't see what's stopping other search engines from starting up and gaining a foothold in the market.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Liberal Biased Google wants Trump to lose in 2020, former engineer for tech giant says: 'That's their agenda'
