[rlmorel]

Well, they certainly wouldn't like this either:

Bill Whittle: Socialism is for Suckers-Venezuela

The truth is anathema to Leftists. To them, it is hate speech to utter it.

[SaveFerris]

[ Google executives do give much more money to Democrats than Republicans. Eric Schmidt even advised Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. ]

We can’t have people that ACTUALLY understand Socialism. It’s the new, hot thing for brain-dead Democrats.

It gets them all excited. Like how they were excited about Barack Obama. Why do I say that? The fools at Yahoo now in love with Occasional-Cortex.

[z3n]

I don’t know how google’s algorithms are written, but I can take a wild guess that it’s based (mathematically) on scoring more specific keywords against more generic categorical qualities, and then also calculating a digressive scoring for all words that are associated with them based on similarity to that quality, then they use those scores to add (or multiply by factors, or whatever they write) they number of key words for each category/quality per page/site.

But anyway, whether or not that’s close, here is where the subjectivity gets really easy for them. They can qualify a keyword like “patriotism” as scoring high in hate categories, but choose to score a keyword like “antifa” low in those categories. Then, words that tend to get grouped with each of those inherit a level of association with those qualities.

So by changing a few well targeted keywords, not only are you changing drastically how those words can affect promoting or demoting certain content, but you will also cause a spread of that effect to closely associated words and affect similar content even more.

[DuncanWaring]

Google Is Evil.

That’s all you need to know.

[ArGee]

I wonder if it would work to separate the platform from the interface accessing it. In the case of Google, have them put their data in the public domain. then they can provide searches that protect snowflakes or downgrade conservatives if they want, but a competitor can provide searches that hit you in the face with cold, hard truth.

Ditto for Twitter. Let them market their Tweet Reader that won’t let you see speech they hate, but let a competitor market an open forum.

It would work a lot like making the phone lines a commodity but letting competitive groups serve those lines to meet the needs of a group of users.

It seems like a good capitalistic approach with a small government interference to make the underling ‘thing’ a commodity.

[DiogenesLamp]

For those who want to learn about the various methods used by Google/Youtube to censor people with opinions they don't like.

https://hubpages.com/technology/The-Methods-and-Layers-of-Censorship-on-YouTube

[Bogie]

The propaganda narrative is international.

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/05/yellow-vests-rise-against-neo-liberal-king-macron/