One of America's leading authorities on technology and telecom policy, Motley is a writer, television and radio commentator, political and policy strategist, lecturer, debater, activist, and policy advisor to The Heartland Institute.
Latest posts by Seton Motley (see all)
- Localities Shouldn’t Be Dictating (Inter-)National Policy - July 17, 2019
- We Are Surrounded By Intellectual Property – Until We Aren’t - July 13, 2019
- A ‘Drain The Swamp’ Test: Will The Trump Admin Reward Amazon’s Killer Cronyism? - July 11, 2019
This is huge news – but it is hardly surprising.
And by “cozying up” – we mean warping their search results to hide Clinton’s decades of scandals and scandalous behavior.
Last year, Wired magazine warned us about the election-manipulating power of Google:
Google’s Search Algorithm Could Steal the Presidency: “‘We estimate, based on win margins in national elections around the world,’ says Robert Epstein, a psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and one of the study’s authors, ‘that Google could determine the outcome of upwards of 25 percent of all national elections.’”
So the goods on Google delivered by SourceFed and their host/writer Matt Lieberman – are devastatingly awful. As chronicled in their recently released stand-up video with visual aides. We will lean heavily on excerpted transcripts therefrom – because what they’ve done is so beautiful and terrible. Here we go:
There’s an inherent trust that when you Google something, you are seeing the actual factual answer to your query or question. Based at least in part on the results of what other people are actually searching for.
In the case of Hillary Clinton – who clinched the Democratic nomination – we know for a fact that that is not the case….SourceFed has discovered that Google has been actively altering search recommendations in favor of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
So quietly that we were unable to see it for what it was until today (SourceFed posted their video on June 9).
When we type – “Hillary Clinton cri” – into Google, the site’s auto-complete function shows three potential searches: “Hillary Clinton crime reform,” “Hillary Clinton crisis” and “Hillary Clinton Crime Bill 1994.”
However, when you type the same term – “Hillary Clinton cri” – into Google’s competitors Bing and Yahoo, you get very different results. Focusing on whether or not Hillary Clinton has ever committed a crime.
It’s like if you put three people into a room that’s on fire – and two out of the three people yell “Fire!” And the third person yells “I’m in a room.’”
That’s…odd. The video then demonstrates that there aren’t even enough Google user searches for “Hillary Clinton crime reform” for Google to graph – using Google’s own “Trends” function. So why is that their #1 auto-complete suggestion? There are plenty of Google “Hillary Clinton crime” searches on “Trends” – but Google doesn’t offer up that auto-possibility. Hmmmm….
When you type – “Hillary Clinton ind” – into Bing or Yahoo, there are plenty of indictment-based recommendations. When you type it into Google, the top two recommendations are “Hillary Clinton Indiana” and “Hillary Clinton India.”….
When we entered them both into “Trends,” people were searching for “Hillary Clinton indictment” eight times more often than “Hillary Clinton India.”
Yet Google auto-offers us “India” – and not “indictment.”
The intention is clear: Google is burying potential searches for terms that could have hurt Hillary Clinton in the primary elections over the past several months by limiting recommendations on their site.
For comparison, we searched for negative terms that have been associated in the media with Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump on all three sites. Specifically, – “Bernie Sanders soc” – for socialist and – “Donald Trump rac” – for racist or racism. This time, Google matched the recommendations of Bing and Yahoo. No visible tampering.
Google’s bias here is undeniable.
Indeed it is. Just as it is and has been with now-President Obama – since before he was President Obama.
Getting in on the Democrat administration ground floor is a Google-Schmidt crony-business model.
There are a stunning number of links between Google and (Clinton’s) campaign, and they all stem to one person in particular. Eric Schmidt, the Executive Chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, Inc. and former CEO of Google – is also a major funder of “The Groundwork.”
Which is, according to sources acquired by Wired, an investment by Schmidt to ensure that Hillary Clinton has the technological and engineering prowess to win the election….They are one of the Clinton campaign’s priciest outside contractors….
So Eric Schmidt – the former head of Google who is chairman of their parent company – funds a data analysis company that works for the Hillary campaign. Whose chief technology officer Stephanie Hannon – is a former Google executive….
(These connections) showcase a man (Schmidt) who has a clear and vested interest in how our country is run – and is actively funding one candidate to run it, while the company he advises is warping search results in her favor.
Why does that sort of preemptive investment sound familiar?
Because it is familiar.
So Eric Schmidt and his Google are doing their very best to rig the election for Clinton – in the hopes of delivering themselves another crony president.
So as to continue to reap for another four (or eight) years the ridiculous regulatory favoritism they have been so generously delivered these last eight.
Big Government, Big Business – and scratch-my-back cronyism on steroids between the two.
Welcome to 21st Century America.