Slashdot Mirror
Trump Accuses Google of Rigging Search Results To Favor 'Bad' News About Him (cnet.com)
President Donald Trump says Google search results for "Trump News" show only negative coverage about him. From a report: The results present "only the viewing/reporting of Fake New (sic) Media," the president tweeted early Tuesday. He said it's a "very serious situation" that "will be addressed!" "In other words, they have it RIGGED, for me & others, so that almost all stories & news is BAD. Fake CNN is prominent. Republican/Conservative & Fair Media is shut out. Illegal? 96% of ... " he wrote in the first of two tweets at 5:24 a.m. ET. Update: White House probes Google after Trump accuses it of bias.
Evolution, global warming, the facts about Trump... All these aspects of reality that mainstream media is willing to embrace, conservative media largely rejects. The result of these processes is that, to the conservative eye, reality appears to have a liberal bias. Is it such a bad thing that Google reflects that reality?
tax evasion, money laundering, obstruction of justice to start...look at all the folks who have flipped. its the entire list of folks who buried his bodies.
Well... He was elected by the majority of the electoral college... As defined in the Constitution.
Am in London, have traveled through 63 countries and 42 of US states (+DC & PR); Iâ(TM)m less afraid for my safety here than many places, and Iâ(TM)ve had more dicey situations in the US (once in a mall during shooting for instance) than almost anywhere else.
Aside from war zones, the world is in general reasonably safe. The US isnâ(TM)t as developed in that regard as those who live there and never leave would think.
Trump has improved the trends, with both a rising labor participation rate
Nope. It's been flat since two years before Trump took office.
and low unemployment numbers.
Low unemployment numbers which continue the trend started a decade ago under Obama.
But, I truly do thank you for illustrating the issue: Trump's rhetoric is at odds with reality, and his supporters would rather believe him than their own lying eyes.
You asked, you get: https://www.conservapedia.com/...
Extract:
https://www.conservapedia.com/...
"The Second Law of Thermodynamics disproves the atheistic Theory of Evolution and Theory of Relativity, both of which deny a fundamental uncertainty to the physical world that leads to increasing disorder."
Mild stuff.
Let's try https://www.conservapedia.com/...
"Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist?"
You can read the rest yourself.
How about https://www.conservapedia.com/...
"Gun control is a term used by liberals when advocating unconstitutional laws designed to disarm people by restricting the lawful purchase, ownership, or carrying of guns, under the guise of "public safety." Studies show that increasing lawful access to guns results in less crime,[1] but, despite the fact that gun ownership is a Constitutional right, Leftists push gun control because it increases the dependency of voters on government for protection while disarming citizens from any self-defense against violent crime or tyranny such as genocide. "
Why not https://www.conservapedia.com/...
"The theory of evolution does not permit the existence of any counterexamples." which leads to counterexample #1 "Evolution cannot explain artistic beauty, such as brilliant autumn foliage and the staggering array of beautiful marine fish, which originated before any human to view them. "
His stuff on homosexuality is hilarious too. He really gets hung up on it. Honestly there's more common sense in encylopedia dramatica than this.
As a brit I love and sometimes (ok, regularly) even admire you yanks but you do extremes frightningly well.
Hate Trump? Guess that means Trump 2020
ANTIFA and other hate-driven, violent Leftist groups should be prosecuted under campaign finance laws for providing material support to the Trump campaign and Republicans in the mid-terms. They've done orders of magnitude more to expand and solidify Republican/Trump support than many millions of dollars' worth of cross-platform advertising could possibly hope to accomplish.
In my experience, none of the negative things said about Trump are false. Most of them quote something he just said, then demonstrate why it is a lie in a completely factual way. Maybe if Trump didn't do so many detestable things, news organizations would have less ammunition.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Obama ... caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs...
Not according to fact check:
https://www.factcheck.org/2017...
Obama never claimed what you claim he did.
He promised to wind down the war in Iraq and focus on the war against Al Queda. He accomplished this.
He promised to end the indiscriminate drone killings of civilians and low level fighters that was endemic during the bush years (the Bush admin actually fired a hellfire at a guy because he was tall and people deferred to him, seriously, this action killed a high level tribal member not affiliated with the Taliban and caused them to ally with the Taliban) and to use more aggressive targeted drone strikes against the al queda and Taliban leadership, something he was lambasted on the right for during the campaign. He was in fact immensely successful in this, the leadership of both groups was forced to break all communication and their war effort and coordination fell off a cliff for a number of years because they were forced into hiding and unable to communicate except through hand delivered couriers. These targeted strike were about 100X more effective than the Bush's indiscriminate attacks were and the anger in Pakistan about the Bush drone attacks largely faded because of it which allowed the drone program to continue.
Obama talked about the NSA and did change his mind once he had access to the intelligence. I don't consider that a broken promise, I consider that an example of willing to admit you were wrong.
Obama oversaw that biggest cut to federal spending in a LONG time when he signed the bill that authorized the sequester. The vast bulk of the debt accumulated during the Obama administration was the debt created by Bush. Two unfunded wars and an economy in a tailspin. Within 1 year Obama was able to bottom out the recession. Job growth began almost immediately afterward and proceeded until the end of his term.
Handed wall street and corporations vast amounts of money? Really, when did Obama do this? And this in comparison to Trump who just gave the average corporation, millionaire and billionaire a 20% tax cut? Seriously, that's your talking point?
As stated before the Job losses were in place when Obama took office, peak losses were in the first quarter of the Obama administration (after growing consecutively for the past 8 quarters) and began to grow net jobs within his first term. Frankly an amazing achievement given the depths of the great recession with 10-20% of the population unemployed.
The healthcare reform Obama "saddled" us with provided insurance to millions of uninsured and arrested the price increases. Prior to the passage of the ACA health costs were increasing at 20% a year for the past 2 decades. Cost growth was in the single digits when he left office even with the number of retiree's growing every year. It's also point out Obamacare was in fact a proposal created by the Heritage foundation (Koch) created as an alternative proposal during the attempt by President Clinton to reform the healthcare system. It IS the conservative plan.
You have no memory for history.
Obama was an inexperienced community organizer who got elected because he promised to end America's wars, targeted killings, and NSA spying, and because his opponents were war mongers and imbeciles.
He was a senator, he was working towards getting out of 2 major wars he inherited. Targeted killings are the best option out of the crap shoot of terrible options in war. See Dresden Bombing or the Battle of Verdun for examples of what all out war is about. Then come back and complain about targeted killings.
Obama ... massively added to the federal debt, handed vast amounts of money to Wall St and corporations
You do realize that was only completing what was started under Bush and Republicans, right? And started because Bush and Republicans deregulated wall st to the point that they needed the bailout.
, caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs,
Again, Bush and Republicans. You do recall how much Bush was considered the worst president ever? How I miss those times.
and saddled us with healthcare reform that by its own architects was unworkable.
Actually, it is workable, if you take it to its conclusion: single payer. I'm not sure any of the architects were forward thinking enough to realize the end game though, so I'll give you this one.
Are you describing Trump?
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
What rubbish. The 2007 recession and resulting financial crisis caused millions to lose their jobs, and turned large deficits--thanks to the tax cuts passed by the GOP--into gargantuan deficits. The trends for both of the labor force participation rates you cite (thanks for including the 2008-2009 data in your second set), as well as for the unemployment rate, were fully in place before he took office. And as for the Affordable Care Act, it was so unworkable that it dropped the uninsured rate by a third from March 2010 to Nov. 2016.
Oh, maybe... because of the 2008 recession, which was caused by the financial crisis meltdown? The crisis which became widely public in late summer/early fall of 2008, while he was still in the process of actually getting elected? He didn't actually take office until 2009... This has been a standard part of the republican playbook since the 80's... Either run up massive debt and ignore fiscal responsibilities just before leaving office, so that when democrats are elected, it "appears" as if it was all their fault, and then they have to spend time recovering...
I'm not blaming Obama for the financial crises (other progressives are responsible for that). What Obama did was to turn what should have been a normal recovery into a long and drawn out stagnant economy that kept millions who lost their jobs from regaining their jobs.
That is not at all what you originally said, and what you're saying is still false. The 2007 recession and financial crisis was not a normal recession, and there was never going to be a normal recovery. There was too much damage, and it was spread too widely. The GOP capture of the House in 2010, and complete intransigence in the Senate (check how often the filibuster was invoked after 2010) was what stymied the recovery. After the Democrats passed the ARRA in 2009 there was no further opportunity to improve the economy, thanks to Republican dogma.
As for ACA, it's easy to cover more people in the short term if you borrow to pay for it; that's not sustainable. It's the lack of sustainability and financial responsibility that makes the ACA so crappy.
In 2010 the CBO estimated that the 10-year cost of ACA reforms would be $940B, and that taxes and cost reductions would yield revenue of $1044T. Since then overall costs have come under projections, and have been below pre-ACA estimations. In other words, the ACA has saved the federal government money vs. doing nothing.
#1 link on Google News right now: "Trump slams Google search as rigged -- but it's not: CNN". That is a fairly hostile title
You apparently have your own private definition of "hostile". Did you read the article? (I doubt it.)
The central point in that article is: "Google's most fundamental interest is returning search results that users find helpful, because that's how it gets them to come back. It does that, in part, by prioritizing results from trusted news outlets with large audiences." The headline summarizes the thesis, the article supports it.
By the way, Google personalizes all news results according to what its algorithms say you are interested in, and you don't need to be logged into gmail for Google to get an accurate read on who you are. Google fed you that article at the top of your new page because you frequently search for and click through to similar content.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
What's more the fact that london now has a higher crime rate and murder than NYC is further proof you are wrong.
Fucking moron.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-...
It was slightly above in Febuary and less every other month this year and the yearly rate is well under half.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Nothing fishy or "biased" about that.It would be biased if those stories did *not* appear in the search engine.
Besides which, Dirty Donald has a long history of lashing out with accusations and conspiracy theories whenever he's pushed into a corner. As happened last week for example,
How? Well, the logical conclusion of Mr. Cohen's testimony seemed to be that Dirty Donald had personally ordered Mr. Cohen to commit a federal crime.
Combined with the conviction of Mr. Manafort olus the news that Mr. Allen Weisselberg (Dirty Donald's longtime financial man) was about to testify against him. Ouch.
That's the kind of stuff that could even get a sitting president in deep trouble. My guess is that it made Dirty Donald nervous. Very nervous.
And what does Dirty Donald do when people make him nervous? Well, he tries to divert attention from his predicament by changing the subject and he lashes out against people with all kinds of accusations. We saw him do both.
As to trying to change the subject, he suddenly started talking about a preliminary draft agreement with Mexico and desperately tried to pass of what he had achieved (a few minor adjustments to the existing NAFTA treaty) as a major win.Plus he was quite desperate to call it something other than "NAFTA-plus-a-few-minor-adjustments".Considering his base, he may well get away with that.
As to lashing out, he always picks whoever he thinks he can sufficiently muddy the water against. The media. Search engines. Institutions. Mrs. Clinton. Illegal immigrants. The Government. Anything really. As long as it resonates sufficiently with his base to provide a target for a good smear campaign. In this case that would be Google.
As regards explanations for his coverage this explanation looks much simpler than any conspiracy theory about who met whom how often three to four years ago. It's all based on known facts about Dirty Donald's behaviour. As reported in the media.
Small wonder he hates the media that consistently put his grotesque and puerile antics on display.
Does he really have any credibility left? Apart from his diehard fan-base that is?