7 ms·
> insinuates the initial suspension was politically motivated, which seems hard to believe How is that hard to believe? We know for a fact Google does politica
by bufferoverflow 7y ago
> insinuates the initial suspension was politically motivated, which seems hard to believe
How is that hard to believe? We know for a fact Google does political censorship.
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/24/insider-blows-whistle-exec-reveals-google-plan-to-prevent-trump-situation-in-2020-on-hidden-cam/ https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/24/insider-blows-whis...
https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/25/breaking-new-google-document-leaked-describing-shapiro-prager-as-nazis-using-the-dogwhistles/ https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/25/breaking-new-googl...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ricI5t66cj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ricI5t66cj8
(note these are fresh links just from the last 2 days)
- mtgx 7y agoSome people still cling to the 10-year old image of "good guy Google." I used to be one of those people.
- DavidAdams 7y agoJames O'Keefe claiming something doesn't make it a fact. On the contrary, I'd be inclined to doubt the claim in that case.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoYou clearly didn't look at the links. O'Keefe is irrelevant.
- rhcom2 7y agoWith the amount he's been caught doing "selective editing" I'd say he's pretty relevant.
- slg 7y agoProject Veritas is in no way a reliable source on political issues. Both it and its founder have a long record of being exposed committing fraud.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoI understand you're trying to do character assassination. Thankfully, we have actual videos of google insiders. I also trust my own eyes, I see which political side gets banned en masse by Google, Twitter, FB and other large Silicon Valley companies. Are you going to deny this too?
- camel_Snake 7y agoOoh, I think I know. Is ISIS the political party of which you speak?
- dang 7y agoPlease don't take HN threads further into flamewar. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- SolaceQuantum 7y agoCan you provide a different citation than a publication known to generate fabricated claims bolstered by fabricated evidence? (I'm serious and taking you in good faith here for the record.)
- bufferoverflow 7y agoCan you even name a publication that has not fabricated stuff? I'm not aware of any.
- SolaceQuantum 7y agoThat's not my responsibity; I'm not making any claims.
- ctdonath 7y agoProject Veritas has a long record of collecting large sums in judgement against those who make such libelous accusations without proof.
- fooey 7y agoVeritas is tabloid propaganda. They have less than zero credibility.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoYou realize the rightwingers say the same about CNN, NYT, and other "reputable" sources? They are all dirty, on all sides. Thankfully, we have videos, so we don't have to rely on anybody's reputation.
- BryantD 7y agoNope, reputation is definitely still important. As it turns out, you can edit videos to produce a desired effect/impression -- just saying "it's a video" doesn't really establish objective truth. Since O'Keefe paid $100,000 to settle a lawsuit centered around edited video designed to make ACORN look bad, it's pretty reasonable to treat his videos with skepticism.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoAs I said, they all have horrible reputation to me - I've seen major lies in all major news sources. They all editorialize to fit their agenda. Left or right wing, all bad. But since you're the one claiming these particular videos are somehow edited, present your evidence. The burden of proof is on you.
- BryantD 7y agoThat's interesting. Where exactly did I say these particular videos were edited? I only have one comment in this thread, should be pretty easy to point it out. In the event that you realize you read something into my words that wasn't there, I would politely invite you to ask whether or not that reflects on your priors regarding all major news sources.
- myko 7y agoThis says more about the rightwingers that say that than it does CNN, NYT, WaPo, Bloomberg, etc. - there is a reason the rightwing in this country has embraced Trumpism, and it isn't because truth is a guiding principle of their movement.
- sj3k 7y agoThe media analysis skills of folks on HN continue to astound. What makes you think project veritas is a credible source? Im serious.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoThe video recording. Are you gonna claim they are fake?
- dralley 7y agoYes, because he's literally done exactly that many times, and lost lawsuits over it.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoOk, prove that they are fake.
- dralley 7y agoDo your own research, it's not like documentation of his bullshit is hard to find.
- moultano 7y agoI work at Google on ranking algorithms for Search. I'm aware of everything that controls how web pages are ranked. If I ever encountered a system that was designed to alter the results for political reasons, I would resign.
- word-reader 7y agoJust as an example: a controversial political figure's popular website is buried on page 5 of Google results (underneath a mountain of criticism) when you search for his name, despite being in the top 3 results of page 1 for all of Qwant, DDG, Bing, Mojeek, and Yandex. Obviously, the website is being downranked for being full of "conspiracy theories and fake news" (I wouldn't completely disagree that it is). But who decided all this? Is this not "political"?
- moultano 7y agoI'd be happy to pass it along to debug if you have a specific query in mind. In the cases of this I've seen in the past, there's been a specific actionable bug that we were able to fix. (Lots of other search engines use each other as backends, so don't be too surprised when they return consistent results.)
- word-reader 7y agoI think DDG and Qwant basically use Bing as a backend, potentially augmenting with their own crawlers. Yandex and Mojeek use all their own stuff, as far as I can tell. The query is "alex jones". At least put the garbage website at the bottom of page 1 where most people who aren't already looking for it still won't click it, page 5 is just lacking in subtlety.
- moultano 7y agoThanks, I'll pass it along.
- bhk 7y ago
- dralley 7y agoProject Veritas has utterly shattered their credibility so many time, that they should not be used as a source even if what they say is true. They edit videos, not even deceptively, but in a way that makes the people featured in the video make them look like they're saying something completely different. Not just clipping but also reordering the clips
- myko 7y agoProject Veritas was created by a known liar and manipulator. Anyone falling for their schtick needs to learn how to be less gullible.