Posted on 05/19/2015 8:55:28 AM PDT by Sean_Anthony
Google, the world’s largest search engine, is gargantuan in size and clout, but still small enough to fit in Barack Obama’s back pocket
Conservative websites like Canada Free Press (CFP) owe a debt of gratitude to plucky ‘Citizen Journalist’, news researcher cum laude, Tina Siegert of News the Media Won’t Show You.
Though some might not yet realize its full impact, all conservative websites are under Google suppression now that Google has claimed rights as the Grand Central of Internet Truth. Google will no longer drive traffic to Conservative websites. Internet traffic is what gets all websites Internet advertising. Without advertising they will go under.
Google, the world’s largest search engine, is gargantuan in size and clout, but still small enough to fit in Barack Obama’s back pocket.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
This is nothing a very large class action lawsuit wouldn’t solve.
This is proof that Obama had to take over the internet via executive action through the FCC. Right?
/s
I wonder about the philosophy of this. The trouble with “fairness lawsuits” against private entities is that at best the results can only be as fair as the courts involved, and that is increasingly a problem.
I’d sooner let private entities be as biased as they desire to, without any government interference. Now government influence buying, is another story.
On what grounds are you going to sue them? You have no “right” to google traffic. You have no contract with google to send you that traffic for a court to enforce.
Can’t use some type of discrimination suit? If you are correct, it may open the door for companies that do not discriminate.
Two funeral homes competed in the same town. One noticed that he stopped getting calls for new business.
Guess who the new switchboard operator's husband was?
With an overwhelming giant in the communications biz, considering them to be a de facto common carrier isn't unreasonable, IMO.
If they are preventing or impacting the flow of traffic - wouldn’t this be grounds for anti-trust?
You still can get at conservative web pages through Google even if they don’t sort first on terms that match both liberal and conservative web pages. So it’s not like blocking intentional attempts to call the funeral home. It would be like naming the preferred one first when asked for a list of funeral homes.
“Can’t use some type of discrimination suit?”
A search engine isn’t a “public accommodation” or “state actor”, so I doubt it.
How would it be an anti-trust issue if they are discriminating on the basis of political views? An anti-trust issue would be if, for example, they were diverting traffic away from their own competitors, to enhance their profits. Ideological discrimination is not anti-competitive, so it’s not an anti-trust issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.