[DrCaleb]

desertdude desertdude:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

What narrative? The one in your head? I keep telling you the voices are not your friends.

llama66 llama66:

Listen, coy humour seems not to be working. Your "Oh, I get it!" Is fucking retarded. Please stop, you are affecting my IQ with your retarded catch phrase.

Where's the civility here?

We've asked Anthony to stop.

All it does is encourage more. I agree, it's very uncivil.

[DrCaleb]

Tricks Tricks:

Just so we're clear, a private american company is not allowed to support a candidate?

*cough*NRA*cough*

[llama66]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Tricks Tricks:

Just so we're clear, a private american company is not allowed to support a candidate?

*cough*NRA*cough*

*achoo*sierra club*achoo*

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

Breitbart makes my head hurt.

Here's the CNET (techy and politically neutral) take on it:

https://www.cnet.com/news/google-co-fou ... ked-video/

[Coach85]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

raydan raydan:

Breitbart makes my head hurt.

Here's the CNET (techy and politically neutral) take on it:

https://www.cnet.com/news/google-co-fou ... ked-video/

Still no evidence of meddling.

Anything else?

[Tricks]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

martin14 martin14:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Only if you post something that is verifiable as true. Rumours and things they made up to fit the 'narrative' are unacceptable.

$1:

"In her email, Murillo touts Google's multi-faceted efforts to boost Hispanic turnout in the election," Carlson reported. "She knows that Latinos voted in record-breaking numbers, especially in states like Florida, Nevada, and Arizona, the last of which she describes as 'a key state for us.'"

In her email, Murillo "brags that the company used its power to ensure that millions of people saw certain hashtags and social media impressions with the goal of influencing their behavior during the election."

This is particularly noteworthy, as the New York Times's Farhad Manjoo noted last month that "if Google somehow went rogue and decided to throw an election to a favored candidate, it would only have to alter a small fraction of search results to do so. If the public did spot evidence of such an event, it would look thin and inconclusive, too."

Yet Google's Murillo specifically brags about intervening in the election. Google "supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states," she wrote. Carlson quoted her as to what this support constituted: "A silent donation."

Technically, Voto Latino is a non-partisan entity dedicated to encouraging Latinos to vote. In reality, however, it swings heavily in one direction. Indeed, Hillary Clinton endorsed the organization this year.

Good enough ?

Yawn... so is 24 Sussex.

And from Bart's article:

$1:

It was reported earlier this week that Google tried to boost turnout among the Latino population to help Hillary Clinton, only to be dismayed as the usually solid Democratic voting bloc switched to the GOP in record numbers.

So, where is the meddling? Getting people to turn out is done by governments all the time. Google didn't try to influence who they voted for. Are they meddling?

Lots of companies had campaigns to increase voters. Uber and Lyft were providing much cheaper transportation to polls. The people who would take advantage of something like that are going to be overwhelmingly younger people. Does that count as meddling too?

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

If you can't find a way to make it fit in the thread title, you should at least put it in the post. Like this:

LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election

Every single time I truncate or rephrase the title to an article I post the original full title at the top of the text.

This is no different than any other post I've put up for the past thirteen years.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

So, where is the meddling? Getting people to turn out is done by governments all the time. Google didn't try to influence who they voted for. Are they meddling?

$1:

Google "supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states," she wrote. Carlson quoted her as to what this support constituted: "A silent donation."

Technically, Voto Latino is a non-partisan entity dedicated to encouraging Latinos to vote. In reality, however, it swings heavily in one direction. Indeed, Hillary Clinton endorsed the organization this year.

Yes of course no one tried to influence nothing, it's all legit and transparent.

What were you saying about eyes ?

Tricks Tricks:

Just so we're clear, a private american company is not allowed to support a candidate?

Is Google a private company or a public utility ?

If they are a private company, then they are responsible for content they host,
like on You tube. They deny any responsibility, same as Facebook.
So they try to be like a public utility, except they don't behave
if they pick sides.

Gotta pick one.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Tricks Tricks:

Just so we're clear, a private american company is not allowed to support a candidate?

*cough*NRA*cough*

*achoo*sierra club*achoo*

*sniffle* WholeFoods*sniffle*

[BartSimpson]

By the way:

Under US law if a company does something to 'get out the vote' then it's not subject to disclosure.

Google was not trying to get 'people' out to vote, they were trying to get statistically probable Democrat voters to come out and vote for Hillary. And they did not disclose this activity as required by law.

That's meddling.

[Tricks]

martin14 martin14:

Is Google a private company or a public utility ?

If they are a private company, then they are responsible for content they host,
like on You tube. They deny any responsibility, same as Facebook.
So they try to be like a public utility, except they don't behave
if they pick sides.

Gotta pick one.

I'm confused, who said google was a public utility? They are, in part, responsible for the content they host. That's why they are subject to DMCA take downs, copyright infringement claims, etc etc.

[Coach85]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

If you can't find a way to make it fit in the thread title, you should at least put it in the post. Like this:

LEAKED VIDEO: Google Leadership’s Dismayed Reaction to Trump Election

Every single time I truncate or rephrase the title to an article I post the original full title at the top of the text.

This is no different than any other post I've put up for the past thirteen years.

You didn't truncate or rephrase.

Your title is purposely misleading and false.

[DrCaleb]

martin14 martin14:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

So, where is the meddling? Getting people to turn out is done by governments all the time. Google didn't try to influence who they voted for. Are they meddling?

$1:

Google "supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states," she wrote. Carlson quoted her as to what this support constituted: "A silent donation."

Technically, Voto Latino is a non-partisan entity dedicated to encouraging Latinos to vote. In reality, however, it swings heavily in one direction. Indeed, Hillary Clinton endorsed the organization this year.

Yes of course no one tried to influence nothing, it's all legit and transparent.

What were you saying about eyes ?

Zzzzzzzzzzzz

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... 80&bih=885

[martin14]

Tricks Tricks:

martin14 martin14:

Is Google a private company or a public utility ?

If they are a private company, then they are responsible for content they host,
like on You tube. They deny any responsibility, same as Facebook.
So they try to be like a public utility, except they don't behave
if they pick sides.

Gotta pick one.

I'm confused, who said google was a public utility?

They do.

[BartSimpson]

The NRA does not support candidates. They are a 501(c)(3) non-profit issue advocacy group that is prohibited from involvement in partisan politics.

The NRA Institute for Political Action Political Victory Fund does this and they are a separate legal entity from the NRA. They do not comingle funds and they are prohibited by law from coordinating any activities that even appear to be political in nature.

For the record, I donate regularly to the NRA but I do not donate to the NRA-PVF.