Dr. Robert Epstein on Big Tech Censorship

[truth_seeker]

Dr. Robert Epstein on Big Tech Censorship


PragerU   |||   Published on Jul 19, 2019

 
Dr. Robert Epstein's testimony before the Senate concerning Google's search manipulation and its impact on elections.


Error 404 (Not Found)!!1

[truth_seeker]

Sen. Cruz questioned this expert vefore the Senate committee.

(FYI this guy, is an ackowledged liberal.)

 

[goatprairie]

That's nothing I didn't know....except for the ultimate numbers of votes possibly shifted. 15 million...whew!!!
I've done Google searches on a number of topics. Sometimes you'll go 8-10 pages before you find a conservative resource on the subject at hand.
Which leads to one of my observations that concerning Big Tech and the rest of the lib media, it's not the lies they tell but the truth they avoid.
The biggest sin of media outlets is not that they lie about everything. They do that, but a half-truth works just as well, maybe better than an egregious lie.
If you don't know where to look, you're likely to believe the first sources you find.  I mean, why would they lie to me? 
Well, they don't necessarily have to lie. They can tell you only one side of  the story...the side they want you to believe.

[roamer_1]

That's nothing I didn't know....except for the ultimate numbers of votes possibly shifted. 15 million...whew!!!
I've done Google searches on a number of topics. Sometimes you'll go 8-10 pages before you find a conservative resource on the subject at hand.
Which leads to one of my observations that concerning Big Tech and the rest of the lib media, it's not the lies they tell but the truth they avoid.
The biggest sin of media outlets is not that they lie about everything. They do that, but a half-truth works just as well, maybe better than an egregious lie.
If you don't know where to look, you're likely to believe the first sources you find.  I mean, why would they lie to me? 
Well, they don't necessarily have to lie. They can tell you only one side of  the story...the side they want you to believe.

There is that - But it wears thin eventually - which is what is driving the cable-cutting environment, I believe.

I used Yahoo for a homepage for decades. Spend any time there at all and you will quickly determine how liberally slanted their news is... But I tired quickly of their drama and bubblegum news, even though i stayed a long time.

And I don't know how much jacking with the search engines helps - once folks get a little savvy, they tend to segment and find what suits em - My news is rarely searched for - I will go to an aggregator. And I will probably find that aggregator through word of mouth, as it were, from like minded folks.

Like all the drama around hollywood celebrities, more air than substance, and I think its impact is waning.

[goatprairie]

There is that - But it wears thin eventually - which is what is driving the cable-cutting environment, I believe.

I used Yahoo for a homepage for decades. Spend any time there at all and you will quickly determine how liberally slanted their news is... But I tired quickly of their drama and bubblegum news, even though i stayed a long time.

And I don't know how much jacking with the search engines helps - once folks get a little savvy, they tend to segment and find what suits em - My news is rarely searched for - I will go to an aggregator. And I will probably find that aggregator through word of mouth, as it were, from like minded folks.

Like all the drama around hollywood celebrities, more air than substance, and I think its impact is waning.

I already check 10-20 conservative blogs/new sources daily, so there is actually just about nothing of importance the lib media can sneak over me.
Nevertheless, there are probably many millions of non-political people who try to get the skinny on a certain topic and get nothing  but lib lies and half-truths.
That's the evil in the whole thing.
Getting the truth is why I'm an arch-conservative. And that was in the early nineties going to the city library and reading Conservative Chronicles and National Review pre internet. No Rush Limbaugh either at the time.

[Sanguine]

Keep in mind that the group here at TBR is much better informed than the general, voting, public.  This has the potential to have a massive effect on voting results, and now.

I'm pretty sure that this was partially responsible for 0's second win. 

[mountaineer]

Dr. Epstein didn't appreciate Hillary badmouthing him on Twitter the other day, lying about the nature of his research.
He is responding via twitter (I've condensed it a bit):

Dr. Robert Epstein   @DrREpstein
@HillaryClinton  , whom I have strongly supported for many years, told blatant lies about me today. As a result, I have been subjected to widespread condemnation by mainstream media. I'm going to fight this. Stay tuned tomorrow for my first-ever twitter storm.

Dr. Robert Epstein
2:18 AM · Aug 20, 2019·

Tweet storm starting now - getting interrupted from time to time by calls from reporters... I've been caught in the middle of an exchange of tweets between 2 media titans, @HillaryClinton
 & @realDonaldTrump
. #Trump's tweet was slightly wrong. #Hillary's tweet was shameful.

#Trump tweet, point #1: I've never said that #Google deliberately "manipulated" the 2016 election, but I measured substantial pro-#Hillary bias in #Google's search results by preserving & analyzing 13,207 election-related searches & the 98,044 web pages linked to those searches.

#Trump tweet, point #2: The level of pro-#Hillary bias I found in #Google's search results - absent on #Bing & #Yahoo - was enough to convince between 2.6 & 10.4 million undecided voters to vote for Hillary. .@realDonaldTrump
 said 16 million; that's wrong.

#Trump tweet, point #3: It doesn't matter whether the bias in #Google search results was deliberate or not. Once it appeared - which it did at least 6 months before the election - it began shifting opinions & votes without people's knowledge & without leaving a paper trail.

If you want the full story about my 2016 election monitoring project, read my essay, "Taming Big Tech: The Case for Monitoring," published last year:  https://hackernoon.com/taming-big-tech-5fef0df0f00d

Now, switching to .@HillaryClinton
: This is going to hurt me to write, because I & my whole extended family have been strong supporters of the Clintons for decades. I have a framed, signed letter from #Bill on the wall near my desk. But #Hillary should be ashamed of herself.

#Hillary has long depended on #Google for both money & votes. Her largest donor in 2016 was Alphabet/Google. Her Chief Technology Officer during the campaign was Stephanie Hannon, a former Google exec. And then there's #EricSchmidt, longtime head of Google

A leaked email showed that in 2014 #Google's #EricSchmidt offered to run #Hillary's tech campaign (see pic).  In 2015, Schmidt in fact funded The Groundwork, a highly secretive tech company, the sole purpose of which was to put Clinton into office. https://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working-for-hillary-clinton-campaign/

About 96% of 2016 campaign donations from #Google employees went to #Hillary. And #ElanKriegel, Hillary's Chief Analytics Officer, credits his 2012 tech team, informally supervised by #EricSchmidt, for half of Obama's win margin: nearly 2.5 million votes. https://psmag.com/social-justice/obamas-big-data-inconclusive-results-political-campaigns-72687

#Hillary: If my work has been "debunked," why was it included in a volume just published by #Oxford U.? Why have I been invited to speak about it at prestigious venues worldwide: #Stanford U., #Yale Law School (where both you & Bill went), even our #Senate (where you served)?

Here's what Trump had tweeted:

Wow, Report Just Out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 Election! This was put out by a Clinton supporter, not a Trump Supporter! Google should be sued. My victory was even bigger than thought!

Here's Hillary's response to Trump, to which Dr. Epstein took exception:   

The debunked study you’re referring to was based on 21 undecided voters. For context that’s about half the number of people associated with your campaign who have been indicted.

[Sanguine]

Dr. Epstein didn't appreciate Hillary badmouthing him on Twitter the other day, lying about the nature of his research.
He is responding via twitter (I've condensed it a bit):Here's what Trump had tweeted:
Here's Hillary's response to Trump, to which Dr. Epstein took exception:

That's some funny stuff! Thanks for posting.

[mountaineer]

EPSTEIN: Google’s Latest Whistleblower Is Hard To Ignore
Robert Epstein
Senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology
July 30, 2019 5:30 PM ET

I’m not a huge fan of Project Veritas, a nonprofit organization that promises to expose misconduct in our society, for the simple reason that it leans far to the right. Justice is supposed to be blind; surely veritas should stand as upright as a Marine at attention. How can it be that whistleblowers only rat out liberals?

That said, no matter what your political inclinations, Veritas’ latest video, released on July 24, is revelatory. This time, no voices have been changed, no faces have been obscured, and the editing is minimal. This time, we even have a name: Greg Coppola, who has been a senior software engineer at Google since 2014 (although he has already been put on administrative leave for spilling the beans).  ...

His message? That it’s “ridiculous” to say there’s no political bias at Google. “I think everyone who supports anything other than the Democrats,” says Coppola, “anyone who’s pro-Trump or in any way deviates from what CNN and The New York Times are pushing, notices how bad it is.”   ...  Full article at Daily Caller

[bigheadfred]

I heard Google has the best Bernays sauce in town.

[Sanguine]

The truth is not political.