Google and Facebook Owners Uncovered Tricking Billions of Consumers With Internet “Rigging”!
Google, Facebook and Twitter owners have been exposed, by their own staff, doing things that some consider to be a violation of the public trust. They have been caught tricking the public using public information services.
Why is Google Censoring Search Terms to Hide Elizabeth Warren’s Past Scandals?
Why is Google Censoring The Search Term “Elizabeth Warren Native American” & More?
By Chris Menahan, InformationLiberation
Why is Google actively censoring relevant search terms for Elizabeth Warren to hide her past scandals?
Reddit user Chief_Ballout discovered yesterday the popular search term “Elizabeth Warren Native American” is no longer being Auto-Completed during a Google search.
Click to expand [Via r/the_donald]
Here’s a collection of the most popular search terms for Elizabeth Warren in 2012 from an article titled, “Elizabeth Warren’s Google problem.”
All the terms are negative, the article noted this could hurt Warren’s reputation, yet it appears Google quietly fixed this little “problem” for her.
Warren’s old, relevant, and highly embarrassing auto-complete results from 2012.
The issue is absolutely not one of search volume.
A search for “Elizabeth Warren na” shows the following results:
Navient is the first auto-completed term, yet it doesn’t even register on Google Trends.
“Elizabeth Warren Native American” on the other hand does register and is actually spiking like crazy.
It’s also the second recommended auto-complete term on Bing.
Google can pick up spiking terms and auto-complete them within hours, yet here we get nothing.
This evidence is clear: these highly relevant, heavily searched terms are being actively censored as though they’re recommendations for illegal content or illicit pornography.
Warren is currently attacking Trump daily on Twitter and it’s being suggested she could be Hillary’s pick for Vice President.
Google’s censorship is absolutely scandalous and could potentially influence the election.
instead of asking why confront them at every turn and start boycotting them. google like all other companies only understand profit and when it stops they will change. want to get their attention? hit em in the wallet it works every time
Hey, just like Twitter.
Which is funny because Randi Harper and Zoe Quinn, both known to have connections with twitter staff, went to Google a year ago and now Google censors the same way twitter does.
By David McCabe –
Contractors who worked as “curators” for Facebook’s trending topics section, which can bring significant attention to news stories, regularly didn’t include stories trending among political conservatives, according to a Monday report from Gizmodo.
A former curator told Gizmodo that when he or she would log on, they would see that topics popular with conservatives were not included on the list. The contractor, a conservative, speculated that the person running the list “didn’t recognize the news topic” or was biased against a conservative figure involved.
The person said that Lois Lerner, the Internal Revenue Service official who has been a in the crosshairs of Republicans for allegedly targeting conservative groups; the Drudge Report; and Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wis.), who ran for president last year, were among the topics not included on the list.
The “Trending” section appears on the right side of Facebook’s home page, next to the News Feed. Gizmodo has reported in the past that the topics are selected by human curators based on a Facebook-generated algorithm of the stories being discussed and shared by users.
Another former curator told Gizmodo that if a story originated on a conservative news website, curators would look for a link to the story from a neutral outlet.
Gizmodo reported that it could not determine whether curators took the same steps for stories from liberal news outlets. A Facebook spokesperson did not immediately offer an on-the-record comment.
Curators also told the blog that the people running the “Trending” feature could insert a topic into the list even if it was not among the most-discussed topics on Facebook.
The story is likely to cause a headache for the mammoth social network. Facebook has always insisted that its platform is politically neutral when critics have speculated that it could use its power over the flow of information to influence users.
That claim has come under increased scrutiny in light of two recent stories.
Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg criticized “fearful voices calling for building walls” in a shot a Donald Trump, now the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, during a conference last month.
Gizmodo later reported that a Facebook employee had submitted a question for a discussion with Zuckerberg asking what responsibility the company had to “prevent President Trump in 2017.”
Facebook is already involved in electoral politics, but insists it does so in a neutral way. The company has sponsored lounges at different presidential debates and regularly reminds users to vote. It also does outreach to political campaigns to get them to use the company’s products. The company has also attracted its fair share of political advertising. A team of employees sells ads to campaigns up and down the ballot as Facebook seeks to capture some of the money poured into political advertising.
Google can drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser. … different results pages, just as one can on Google’s search engine.
He believes that Google search results have a huge impact on users’ opinions. Robert Epstein, a senior research psychologist at the American …
Rick Santorum has a Santorum problem, in that the top Google results when you search his name are not about the man himself, but rather about a dirty sexual …
Posts about fictional “PollyHop” does what Google actually did do to rig election results written by Public Wiki Authors.