Trump Threatens To Hit Back At Google For It’s Mega-Leftist Bent

Written by Wes Walker on August 28, 2018

The Technology Giant that helped Hillary launch her 2014 campaign is being called out for exercising political bias in their web searches.

You may have heard, just before the election, about Hillary’s close ties to the head of the company that owns Google.

Alphabet Inc. Chairman Eric Schmidt helped early development of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, according to newly released emails from WikiLeaks, suggesting executives of Google’s parent company could retain close ties to a Clinton White House.

Mr. Schmidt in April 2014 backed a startup dubbed Timshel that helped develop some of the technology behind Mrs. Clinton’s campaign website, including functions to sign up supporters and accept donations, according to the emails. — Wall Street Journal

There’s no question which party was preferred by most of Silicon Valley.
And that preference seems to be showing up in their web searches.

One journalist did an informal Google search test on several computers to get a sense of whether there is any bias or not.  We reported on that story here.

That may have been the story that prompted Trump to fire off these two tweets.

After Trump’s first round of tweets, the president’s chief economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, told reporters at the White House, ‘There needs to be some form of regulation for Google.’

‘We’ll let you know. We’re taking a look at it,’ he said.

Trump told reporters during an Oval Office press meeting that Google, Facebook, and Twitter were “treading on very, very troubled territory,” and that they had “better be careful, because you can’t do that to people.” Trump stopped short of describing any specific political consequences, but he asserted, “I think Google is really taking advantage of a lot of people, and I think that’s a very serious thing, and it’s a very serious charge.” — The Verge

The consequences that would follow are unclear.

In response, Google issued a statement saying: ‘When users type queries into the Google Search bar, our goal is to make sure they receive the most relevant answers in a matter of seconds.

‘Search is not used to set a political agenda and we don’t bias our results toward any political ideology,’ the statement said. ‘Every year, we issue hundreds of improvements to our algorithms to ensure they surface high-quality content in response to our users’ queries.’

The tech firm said, ‘We continually work to improve Google Search and we never rank search results to manipulate political sentiment.’

Google for Jobs co-founder Nick Zakrasek later told Fox Business, ‘We never rank results to manipulate political sentiment.’
Source: DailyMail

Do you have to deliberately rank results when you have left-of-center political activists working as ‘fact checkers’ from places like Snopes, Politifact ranking pages they fundamentally disagree with as ‘fake news’ not because it’s poorly cited, but because they dislike their kind of reporting? And what about the absolutely SHAMELESS partisanship of the SPLC that was somehow welcomed as a credible voice?

With ‘fact-checkers’ like these downranking credible, accountable and well-sourced right-of-center sites, do the folks at Google even NEED to mess with the algorithm?

After all, even a Harvard study had reported last year that most of the ‘mainstream’ cable channels were something like 90% negative in their reporting of news about the President, whereas the supposedly ‘partisan and in Trump’s pocket’ Fox News was somewhere closer to 50-50.

But FoxNews gets downgraded with Breitbart, DailyWire, Daily Caller and sites like our own ClashDaily, while CNN who has had to FIRE employees for their fake news and redactions, and who first introduced the now-infamous, and completely worthless Steele Dossier into the national conversation is usually top of the list.

That was a story even Buzzfeed was not willing to be the first to pull the trigger on.

CNN is also very fond of unattributed sources discrediting Trump. But they stand by those stories even when their source retracts them.

Time magazine — who had very flattering covers of Obama, and over-the-top caricatures of Trump again and again — is another ‘trusted’ and ‘unbiased’ news source.

In another platform, we’ve seen a simliar dynamic. Educational sites like Prager U get throttled back, but when someone tweets that Dana Loesh’s children will need to be murdered before she will adopt a more reasonable view of gun control, it takes a SECOND complaint to management before they realize that — yes — even against a right-winger, calling for the murder of children is ‘too much’. (The first time, it came back as a non-violation of policy.)

Is it possible that both Google AND the users complaining about bias against the right could be correct? Would the problem be solved by having either (a) absolute free reign for any and all news sites, with no weighting system beyond followers or some stable metric like that. Or (b) having an equivalent counterweight of right-leaning ‘fact check groups’ that score degree of bias to cover for the blind spots of rabid activists like the SPLC, who, while pretending at tolerance, have named churches and religious outreach organizations as ‘hate groups’.

Do we need someone like Trump to step in and fix this? Or would government involvement just invite the Deep State to merge with Big Tech

Trump isn’t just wanted by the Left who think that one day, they’ll finally nail him on some phantom ‘Russian Collusion’ allegation.

 Effeminization Of The American Male

by Doug Giles

Doug Giles, best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog, ClashDaily.com, has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity. That is, if the man-child will put down his frappuccino; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely and tornadic tome. Buy Now:The Effeminization Of The American Male