Slashdot Mirror
Google Debunks Trump's Claim It Censored His State of the Union Address (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: President Donald Trump intensified his criticism of Google today, posting a native video of unknown origin to his Twitter account this afternoon claiming the search giant stopped promoting the State of the Union (SOTU) address on its homepage after he took office. It turns out the video he posted is not only misleading, but also contains what appears to be a fake screenshot of the Google homepage on the day in question. It has since been viewed more than 1.5 million times. In a statement given to The Verge, a Google spokesperson clarifies that the company promoted neither former President Barack Obama nor Trump's inaugural SOTU addresses in 2009 and 2017, respectively. That's because they were not technically State of the Union addresses, but "addresses to a joint session" of Congress, a tradition set back in 1993 so that new presidents didn't have to immediately deliver SOTU addresses after holding office for just a few weeks. Google resumed promoting Obama's SOTU address in 2010 and continued to do so through 2016, as he held office for all six of those years.
With regards to the 2018 SOTU, Google says it did in fact promote it on its homepage. "On January 30th 2018, we highlighted the livestream of President Trump's State of the Union on the google.com homepage," reads Google's statement. "We have historically not promoted the first address to Congress by a new President, which is not a State of the Union address. As a result, we didn't include a promotion on google.com for this address in either 2009 or 2017."
With regards to the 2018 SOTU, Google says it did in fact promote it on its homepage. "On January 30th 2018, we highlighted the livestream of President Trump's State of the Union on the google.com homepage," reads Google's statement. "We have historically not promoted the first address to Congress by a new President, which is not a State of the Union address. As a result, we didn't include a promotion on google.com for this address in either 2009 or 2017."
How can anyone respect, admire, follow, or in any way support this overfed cesspool of ignorance and corruption defies science.
And how exactly is reason or evidence meant to convince religious right-wing voters of anything?
for defamation? This guy is straight out lying about the company and other companies and using fake screen shots?
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Just not in the way many conservatives think.
Trump wages war daily against the bedrock values that made Western Civilization great. Generally Western Civilization has considered dishonesty, hypocrisy, infidelity, deceit, corruption, narcissism, bullyism as negative character attributes. Trump revels in these daily. Trump as someone has recently noted has embarrassed us in front of our children. The Evangelical Christians cheer him on.
He's beating them at their own game. Not a good thing certainly.
Trump learned how journalists "be a force for change." Say whatever you want, then quietly redact (or not) later.
Seriously. Sputnik news. as in:
Sputnik (Russian pronunciation: [sputnk]; formerly The Voice of Russia and RIA Novosti) is a news agency, news website platform and radio broadcast service established by the Russian government-owned news agency Rossiya Segodnya.[2] Headquartered in Moscow, Sputnik has regional editorial offices in Washington, Cairo, Beijing, London and Edinburgh. Sputnik focuses on global politics and economics and is geared towards a non-Russian audience.[3] According to The New York Times, Sputnik engages in bias and disinformation,[4] and has widely been described as a Russian propaganda outlet.
So I know I searched clinton during that election and did not see is awesome is winning. What total BS.
You seem to be confused; Perhaps an AC can educate you...
President Donald Trump must, by virtue of the oath he swore, uphold the Constitution of the United States which includes the various amendments - one of which states:
'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
Now, one could argue that calling him an Orange-Haired Turnip to his face is not 'a redress of grievances' but putting that aside...
Neither Alphabet Inc, nor its officers, nor its employees are required to swear the same oath as the President. Nor are they required to fulfill the Constitutional obligations of government - as they are not our government - as part of any SEC filing, act of incorporation, or other legal document. Thus President Trump has no right to go after them for anything, unless the Congress of the United States were to pass legislation making this the case.
Which would be promptly struck down, especially by a majority Conservative court. The notion of private and corporate property has been long established in United States' jurisprudence and the right to allow or not allow 'speech' in all its forms has always been a part of that. It is the same as asking and then telling a disruptive customer to leave a movie theater.
of the word "debunk".
What Google did was to distract, NOT debunk - And I note with great interest that the top dude at Google has refused to testify before the US Senate after being summoned (a BAD move). The US Senate could subpoena his posterior, but he is very lucky that the current chairman of the committee in question does not like to use a heavy hand.
Google has essentially said that they vary the results you get for a search based on your location and previous searches (though they refuse to provide any proof that this is what they are doing). There are two problems with this:
[1] Searches for basic facts, historical matters, etc should not return different results based on where the searcher is located or what the searcher has previously searched for. It's one thing to adjust results like that if searching for "great cookie recipe" or "movies showing tonight" "local parks" but it's entirely invalid if searching for "Statue of Liberty" or "USS Midway" or "Pittsburg" or "Eiffel tower" or "Abraham Lincoln" or "Harry Truman" or "Barack Obama" or "Donald Trump".
[2] Anybody can do a quick Google for Trump and see for themselves that the previously published studies are in fact quite correct: Most of the results Google returns are links to media outlets that are outright hostile to Trump and report mostly negative stuff on him (The "mainstream" press in the US has reported over 90% negative on Trump during his first year and a half in office).
It's the meeting last week. He pretended the election is about them.
https://nypost.com/2018/08/28/trump-to-evangelicals-therell-be-violence-if-we-lose-the-house/
“This Nov. 6th election is very much a referendum on not only me, it’s a referendum on your religion, it’s a referendum on free speech and the First Amendment.”
They're supposed to support him, because a vote for a Democrat is a vote against them. The message is basically "choose party above religion".
Google in this claim, is supposed to be part of the deep state conspiracy that's stopping him/them, and taking away their/his freedoms.
Trumplestiltzkin living in fairy tale land again.
Google doesn't have to prove anything. Let Trump prove his accusation.
And even if Google were completely biased against Trump and every single Google employee wore PISS TAPE IS REAL t-shirts and carefully deleted every single Trumpist media outlet from their search results, so. fucking. what?
There is nothing you can get from Google that you can't get from a host of competitors. Free speech is a bitch, ain't it? If you run for public office, especially the highest public office, you can't get upset when one of your ex-girlfriends says you got the baby dick and couldn't last more longer than a commercial break.
The problem here is not what Google has or has not done or does or does not believe. The problem is that Donald Motherfucking Trump honestly believes that hating his gelatinous ass should somehow be illegal, and is prepared to use the full power of the United States government against a company that doesn't like him.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Parent post is literally reposting large amounts of Russian propaganda, read about Sputnik news if you think this is an exaggeration. This isn't particularly subtle either, Sputnik and RT don't try to hide their Russian origins, and as you can see from that link Sputnik was "established by the Russian government-owned news agency Rossiya Segodnya."
I guess the Russian sympathetic block has got their hands on mod points if unvarnished Russian propaganda is what passes for interesting or insightful.
Google has to prove Trump is lying? The person most famous for lying? The person who has made over 4000 false or misleading statements in office?
No, the onus is on the person who has a reputation of being a liar to prove the truth of his claims.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Donald Trump, king of fake news, lies again. Film at 11.
[ 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days ~ 7.6/day as of 2018-08-01 -- as noted and graphed ]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Exactly. Google is a company. They are not required to to be neutral.
-- Cheers!
Skepticism is fine, but that implies you do research and maintain the factual record. Trump support is the antithesis of that. It's the denial and converse of the provable record, personified in every direction. It's nazism.
The article claims the screenshot was fake but doesn't provide any evidence to back up their claim. Even providing a hint of what makes it a fake would have been useful. Instead, all they did was claim it was fake without any further discussion.
They go on to make assumptions about how the video was generated, but the fact of the matter is they have no way of knowing. They put up a strawman argument, tear it down, and declare victory. This is really silly.
What they *could* have done is provided proof that Google *did* link Trump-related events, but they did not actually do that. This is clickbait. Nothing less, nothing more.
remember, they also on the receiving end of the massive corporate tax break he just enacted. He's generating a ton of web traffic which is good for their ad business. He's lax on regulation which large corporations always love.
Bottom line, this is a bunch of very, very wealthy people having a completely meaningless scuff up while the world burns for the working class.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Facebook censors. [breitbart.com]
Posting a liknk to Breitbart is more or less equivalent to saying "my pisshead mates down the pub told me". I mean sure, it might be true, but neither lends more credibility to the claim.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Google ranks mainstream media sites differently, and news sites generally.. ranks higher up, and it wasn't always like this.
It wasn't always like this, the news sites were not a priority 10 years ago on google... i would barely ever get a CNN, NYTimes, Washingtonpost articles when I googled something like "Trump" or "McCain" or whatever, but now the whole first page is polluted with this stuff.
What's happening with Trump is that all the aforementioned media (including others) write (bad) articles about Trump 17 times a day for things he did do/say, and for things he didn't, which actually don't matter... what matter is that the keyword Trump is appearing all over these news sites, constantly. He's right but in a wrong way.
Google ranks media sites higher, and media sites bash Trump in whatever he does, so all search results appear as bad.
This is an issue, but it's a different issue than what Trump is saying. This ranking crap gives too much power to the media. Here's how it can be abused:
I'm Will Smith, and somebody blames me for rape. In our world, just a blame is enough for all the major and minor news networks to go with the story, so 100+ various news channels now have the same story with similar wording, and same keywords. Google crawls all the sites, and since it ranks news sites higher, the whole front page will be "Person X accused Will Smith of Rape"... and you will see the results with same title stacked together on the whole front page of google.,, and it will remain like that for a month.
Now after a month, a person X retracts or looses a lawsuit, but it's already too late... 1 billion people saw "Will Smith is probably a Rapist"... and in their minds that thought will forever linger. Google and the media just polarized 1 billion people to have an opinion, and quite a serious one at that. The alternative media sites will not appear in the search results, and I don't mean infowars.. I mean I never saw democracynow in search results, etc. It is always the same 8-10 sites, that are, in my opinion... just as bad as any other propaganda channels because they are not in the reporting news business anymore, they are in shaping opinions business now, because people are generally stupid... and are programmed from very young age to listen to the "tube". Unbiased, fact proven, real news, yeah ? Younger people, thank god, are waking up to it... and see the whole media industry in US as what they really are. Like George Carlin said..
"
then you have the media not just the
news media let's include them all the
media are almost literally exploding
with bullshit because they're located
right at the crossroads of all the other
bullshit the media are made up of equal
parts advertising politics business
public relations and show business these
people are sitting right at bullshit
junction there's enough bullshit in the
media for Texas to open a branch office
"
But hey.. if you would rather invent another epithet about Trump face color, instead of use your brain a bit... go for it. You're invaluable to this system, and good for you.
Ah, someone makes an allegation and it is up to the victim to prove they are guilty? My...how...American of you.
Trump will continue attacking anything that he sees as a challenge to his fragile ego, regardless of how far beyond reason it is for him to do so. Constitutional norms mean nothing to this maniac, and the constitution itself is but a vague reference to him - certainly not a document he has any familiarity with. It's unfortunate that the "opposition" party lacks the stones to actually take action against this goon. This may be our last chance to save our democracy and the democrats are asleep at the wheel.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Are you seriously implying that having faith in journalists is a good thing?
Absolutely it is. Not blind faith of course but the importance of journalism and journalists to maintaining a free and fair society almost cannot be overstated. So yes I have a well justified faith (for lack of a better word) that journalists are by and large a good thing.
Skepticism is good. Faith is not.
Journalism IS skepticism provided it is permitted to do its job.
Facebook censors. [breitbart.com]
Posting a liknk to Breitbart is more or less equivalent to saying "my pisshead mates down the pub told me". I mean sure, it might be true, but neither lends more credibility to the claim.
"I won't believe that boy who cried wolf until he's been eaten." - serviscope_minor
Well... yeah, actually. That's how that works. That is, in fact, the moral of the story. Liars are not believed even when they tell the truth. Breitbart lies incessantly, therefore it is not to be believed.
I understand thinking is hard for you, but you could at least try.