Probably the most insulting woke ad of the year thus far aired during Super Bowl LVI by Google….

NO ONE photographs well in low or back light. To come right out and say cameras were racist until you spend as much as $700 to buy a Google Pixel 6 phone and use it to photograph black people with good lighting (daylight?) is as insulting and racist as it gets. The fine people at Google must have assumed blacks are too stupid to place the subject in a well-lit environment and/or how and when to use the flash.

Then again, liberals have always been the most condescendingly racist people in America, have never taken selective racism seriously, so this is really of no surprise.

Before they lost the 2016 election, the Hillary Clinton campaign tried to set up Donald Trump with fake accusations and use those accusations to portray him as a traitor. They wasted near $32 million taxpayer dollars paying Democrat lawyers in a failed investigation. They lied to courts so they could spy on American citizens. Entertainers publicly fantasized about killing the president. They used third-party hearsay to launch an unsuccessful impeachment proceeding. They harassed and intimidated Administration officials at restaurants and at their homes. They doxxed and assaulted the president’s supporters. They assaulted and assassinated police officers. They used social and the news media to cover-for and censor opposition. They cheated to win the 2020 election. During that time, they vandalized, burned, looted and seized control over parts of major American cities. In 2020, they voted for a senile, old man who, at times, didn’t know where he was or which office he was running for and now wants us to “unite” behind him.

One can clearly see that Democrats are certifiably insane.

Now that Joe Biden believes he’s going to be the next President of the United States, even though his supporters threaten mass violence if he lost on Election Night, he conveniently wants Republicans and conservatives to forget an elongated, abusive past.

“Unite” with Democrats means give them all they want, or else.

That’ll be a tough one, Joe.

YouTube has banned some prominent white supremacist channels as internet companies face a backlash over racist content. In a statement YouTube said: “We have strict policies prohibiting hate speech on YouTube, and terminate any channel that repeatedly or egregiously violates those policies. After updating our guidelines to better address supremacist content, we saw a 5x spike in video removals and have terminated over 25,000 channels for violating our hate speech policies,” it added.
— BBC, 6/30/20

While it’s currently trendy to tell the world that #BlackLivesMatter and any racism is a bad thing, YouTube has always displayed a poor record of weeding out racism when it comes from their left.

On August 4th, 2010 I wrote an email to Andrew Breitbart (an original supporter of black conservatives against liberal racism) which later inspired the Big Government post, “Resolution Against YouTube ‘Racism’“.

Using the NAACP’s resolution against Tea Party “racism” as a model, I hereby ask YouTube to repudiate their racist users.

“I take no issue with Google’s YouTube community. I believe in freedom of assembly and people raising their voices in a democracy. What I take issue with is the YouTube’s continued tolerance for bigotry and bigoted statements. The time has come for them to accept the responsibility that comes with influence and make clear there is no place for racism & anti-Semitism, homophobia and other forms of bigotry on their website.”

The following are real comments of YouTube users from just one of my videos on the Black & Right channel. They have not been Photoshopped and distributed by Think Progress.

Here are the screenshots of actual comments sent to me from YouTube users that somehow made it past their oh-so supportive and racially sensitive “community standards” monitors.

I’ve sent screenshots of comments like these to YouTube on many occasions and have yet to receive acknowledgement.

And almost all of the offending users STILL have their YouTube channels to this day.

It’s amazing, with all the sophisticated algorithms and filters at their disposal, how easily the word “nigger” got by YouTube, as well as the professional media that can always interpret a presidential Tweet into something they want while missing concrete examples that require no investigation for possible motive or Snopes certification.

During a few of our phone conversations, I posed the idea to Andrew of adding “Big Race” to his family of then-growing websites; an idea he didn’t seem too crazy about.

Not because it was a bad idea but he probably knew the magnitude of such a project when it comes to monitoring racist hate speech from the left; racist hate speech that’s ignored thus obviously agreed with by the tolerant and inclusive within Google and other social media platforms.

It appears to be very domestic.

The idea that Google is subtly pushing masses of voters to the left has the ring of conspiracy, and thus the work of Robert Epstein is warmly embraced by conservative lawmakers — as well as a president — convinced big tech is plotting against them.

Epstein, a former Psychology Today editor in chief who runs a nonprofit institute in California, calls the phenomenon he has explored the Search Engine Manipulation Effect. “These are new forms of manipulation people can’t see,” he said. The technologies “can have an enormous impact on voters who are undecided. … People have no awareness the influence is being exerted.”

Google dismisses his research as the work of a misguided amateur. Company Chief Executive Sundar Pichai said at a House Judiciary Committee hearing in December that Google had investigated Epstein’s findings and found his methodology flawed.
— Los Angeles Times, 3/24/19

Of course they would, but to be fair, Google shouldn’t be singled out. Facebook and Twitter have similar capabilities and accusations of their abuse of right-leaning users abound.

Judge for yourself if Epstein is this “misguided amatuer” or if he’s hitting too close to home for Big Democrat Tech….

…

More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than any other losing presidential candidate in US history. The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
— CNN, 12/22/16

That “2.9 million votes” are within Dr. Epstein’s “manipulation” margin, and in 2018…

An estimated 113 million people participated in the 2018 midterm elections, making this the first midterm in history to exceed over 100 million votes, with 49 percent of eligible voters participating in the election. By comparison, the 2014 midterm elections had one of the lowest turnouts in American history, with only 36.4 percent of eligible voters participating.
— CBS News, 11/7/18

… an all-time record amount of midterm voters were inspired to “Go vote!”.

Google Doodle: Election Day logo update tells users to ‘Go Vote’
Twitter will put election information in-timeline with #BeAVoter

If it’s really this easy for “Big Tech” to manipulate search results, issue “Go vote!” messages to selected users, shadowban and/or punish chosen content creators, then one could rightly call into question the legitimacy of the final popular vote totals after the last presidential election, the results of the 2018 midterm election which resulted in one party retaking the House of Representatives; not to leave out local elections as well.

Today, too many are looking for reasons to be offended about anything; almost to the point of the absurd.

Star 102, WDOK-FM, calls itself “Cleveland’s Christmas station.” But its listeners are discovering that one holiday chestnut has been kicked to the curb. “Baby, It’s Cold Outside,” the duet in which a man tries to dissuade a woman from leaving a party despite her repeated protestations, has been pulled from the station’s Christmas playlist amid concerns about its predatory nature.

Seriously.

Penned by “Guys and Dolls” writer Frank Loesser in 1944, the Christmas song is perceived by some as unworthy for the most wonderful time of the year — particularly in the age of #MeToo.

“The character in the song is saying, ‘No,’ and they’re saying well, ‘Does no really mean yes?’ and I think in 2018, what we know is consent is ‘Yes’ and if you get a ‘No’ it means ‘No’ and you should stop right there,” Sondra Miller, president of the Cleveland Rape Crisis Center, told WJW-TV. “I’ve asked them to stop and think about the perspective of a survivor who was raped in that type of circumstance.”
— CNN, 12/1/18

Of course, it had to become monkey-see, monkey #MeToo.

More radio stations ban ‘Baby It’s Cold Outside’ amid #MeToo controversy

Now how many #MeToo activists have publicly objected to the fact that 465.3 million have viewed the following video on the socially-sensitive YouTube platform; a “song” that would clearly be offensive to today’s “survivor” demographic save for the fact it’s probably on many of their Spotify playlists.

Those who look down on and tell us all how we’re supposed to think are also guilty of not seeking out the best while distributing filth because they think so little of the ability of those they employ and the dignity of their consumers.

Earlier this month, Spotify introduced its new Hate Content and Hateful Conduct Policy. Its aim was to minimize their promotion of problematic artists, and led to R. Kelly and XXXTentacion’s music being removed from their curated playlists. Many, including followers of the #MuteRKelly movement, praised Spotify’s new ruling, but plenty others — including Kendrick Lamar — have expressed concern and disapproval over what they believed to be a form of targeted censorship against artists of color.
— Consequence of Sound, 6/1/18

Some of these so-called “artists of color” are downright embarrassing examples of limited talent who squander golden opportunities with creations of questionable aesthetic value. Maybe it’s a generational thing but I’m failing to see the “art”.

With all of the talented musicians and composers in the United States alone who are languishing without any opportunity to produce real music, record companies are more interested in distributing shit like this….

BTW — The previous examples were quickly and randomly found.

I know how hard it is to get any of the so-called artists, record and publishing companies to take a listen to original music; music it took months to compose, produce, perform, and mix to a competitive level. It’s sad watching today’s accepted acts whose music is subdued and lyrics that are narcissistic and depressing.

Contrast that with songs created that were justifiably overplayed on the radio back in the day but when performed with the appropriate professionalism, blows away anything created by shit talkers or the coffee shop snoozers.

When the looking-to-be-offended socially depressed decide to get the courage to take on the clearly sexist, racist, violence-embracing so called “music” assaulting the soundwaves of the general public, we have no time for their finding (what THEY consider) warped messages in songs written a generation-plus earlier hashtags were even contemplated as a vehicle for social awareness.

Until music company executives show any modicum of respect for the craft and continue to elevate the talentless who produce “songs” that aren’t allowed to be played in their own children’s rooms, we’ll have yet another double standard where real music is censored and shit is justified and mainstreamed.

And unappreciated classics will be left out in the cold.

You are “Googley”.

At a regularly scheduled all hands meeting, some Google employees and executives expressed their own personal views in the aftermath of a long and divisive election season.

“Personal views” and “values” they can act upon….

For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings. Nothing was said at that meeting, or any other meeting, to suggest that any political bias ever influences the way we build or operate our products.

Only someone who assumed the video wasn’t watched would formally issue such bullshit.

To the contrary, our products are built for everyone, and we design them with extraordinary care to be a trustworthy source of information for everyone, without regard to political viewpoint.
— Google spokesperson

See for yourself if that’s really how things went down shortly after the 2016 election….

Okay, time for a group hug.

The hubris: they actually record their public whine-fests, label them “confidential” because they’re too important for simple Americans to comprehend, they’re #snowflake cowards, and these are valuable enough for the privileged “Googlers” to view on demand: probably for therapeutic reassurance (with a joint or two).

Co-founder Sergey Brin can be heard comparing Trump supporters to fascists and extremists. Brin argues that like other extremists, Trump voters were motivated by “boredom,” which he says in the past led to fascism and communism.

VP for Global Affairs Kent Walker argues that supporters of populist causes like the Trump campaign are motivated by “fear, xenophobia, hatred, and a desire for answers that may or may not be there.”
— Breitbart, 9/12/18

One would think Soviet-born Brin would appreciate the perils of forced group-think and enforcement, but like too many who immigrate here to take advantage of our freedoms, he ultimately believes our nation should resemble the #shithole his family fled.

While my initial response to government regulation is negative, Google’s liberal elitist influence on the American people (especially impressionable young people) is no longer something that should be brushed off as incidental.

FLASHBACK

Google is facing renewed controversy over its alleged intolerance toward conservatives at the company, after a class action lawsuit filed by former engineer James Damore disclosed almost 100 pages of screen shots of internal communications in which employees discuss sensitive political issues.

Seriously, some are wearing “Google-Noogler-Intern-Employee” propeller beanie caps.

Screenshots of internal communications reveal numerous employees appearing to support the idea of being intolerant toward certain points of view, such as one post arguing that Google should respond to Damore’s memo by “disciplining or terminating those who have expressed support”.
— The Guardian (UK), 1/8/18

That said, until political persecution is prosecuted and fined just like any other kind of discrimination, this will continue and anyone not one of THEM will be targeted at their weaponized, search engine whims.

Despite Allegations, No Evidence of Trump–Russia Collusion Found
— Epoch Times, 5/25/17

All this time, the Democrats and their media pushed the narrative that Russia colluded with Donald Trump in defeating Hillary Clinton in the last presidential election.

The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.
— Obi-Wan Kenobi

But it turns out by their own admission, Facebook ran ads that, if anything, also triggered sore-loser liberals into disputing the legitimacy of the election of Donald J. Trump and we all know what’s happened since.

Top lawyers from Facebook and Twitter said Tuesday that Russian-linked posts and advertisements placed on the social networks after Election Day sought to sow doubt about President Donald Trump’s victory.
— Politico, 10/31/17

Well, that we know how well that’s worked on those who are quite competent in hating those that disagree with them.

We’re also receiving confirmation on what many of us already know. Silicon Valley liberals at Google, Facebook and Twitter blatantly manipulate social media interaction based on their personal biases.

A Twitter customer support worker who was on his or her last day on the job deactivated President Donald Trump’s account for a few minutes Thursday evening, the social media company reported. Shortly before 7 p.m. Thursday, social media reports surfaced that the president’s personal account, @RealDonaldTrump, was unavailable, providing the error message that the user “does not exist.” The account was restored by 7:03 p.m.

Twitter later said the deactivation “was done by a Twitter customer support employee who did this on the employee’s last day.” The account was unreachable for 11 minutes.

“We are conducting a full internal review,” the company said.
— Associated Press, 11/2/17

How many people has this kind of silencing happened to who don’t have visibility of the President of the United States, thus were more vulnerable to social media employee abuse?

Some of Twitter’s trend manipulation was clearly for partisan benefit to the political campaign their preferred.

In the two months preceding the election, around 57,000 users posted approximately 426,000 unique Tweets containing variations of the #PodestaEmails hashtag. Approximately one quarter (25%) of those Tweets received internal tags from our automation detection systems that hid them from searches. As described in greater detail below, our systems detected and hid just under half (48%) of the Tweets relating to variants of another notable hashtag, #DNCLeak, which concerned the disclosure of leaked emails from the Democratic National Committee.
— Testimony of Sean J. Edgett, Acting General Counsel, Twitter, Inc., 10/31/17

Would Twitter have been so aggressively hidden had those hashtags contained an anti-Trump message?

According to the social media execs, their employees are receiving training in an ongoing basis which is of no reassurance to us.

Over the last few months, we have been punished by YouTube (Google) for politically-incorrect content their “Community” deemed offensive, and it’s not for content we upload and is flagged, but they’ve gone back and found videos that may have been uploaded months ago and are now using as justification for shutting down our present ability to upload.

That’s just a couple of examples, not to mention “shadow banning” from Twitter of some of our messaging.

Stealth banning (also called shadow banning, ghost banning or comment ghosting) is the act of blocking a user or their content from an online community such that the user does not realize that they have been banned. By making a problem user’s contributions invisible or less prominent to other members of the service, the hope is that in the absence of reactions to their comments, the problematic user will become bored or frustrated and leave the site.
— Wikipedia

Again, we appreciate that Google, Facebook and Twitter are private companies and can conduct themselves however they wish as users volunteer to use their products and agree to their “terms”. But given their size and reach, there is a responsibility for them to be fair and impartial in their treatment of their customers.

If #DNCLeaks is deemed offensive enough for them to “hide” Tweets containing that hashtag, one would think that a #FuckDonaldTrump hashtag would so be hidden, not to mention the free reign that pornography has on social media platforms.

Good luck with that. Here’s content that apparently meet their “community standards”.

Don’t hold your breath for any changes in Silicon Valley once the spotlight cools off.

Imagine the ego it took to write “Obamacare Critics Still Tell Just One Side of the Jobs Story” while plotting to deceive and destroy the health care coverage of millions of individuals and families.

In listening to “Health Economist” Jonathan Gruber’s presentation of the “agenda” at the University of Pennsylvania, the arrogance is quite disturbing and the question that most comes to mind is… “Who elected YOU?”

“What’s been great about this process is that it’s been a fairly intellectually honest process,” said Gruber.

Turns out it was a good day to check in with Gruber. Of course, lined up on the other side, we have the entreaties of millions of misinformed, Bible-banging suckers, so there’s that.
— A Brief Interlude With Expert Opinion, Esquire Magazine, 9/26/13

This progressive educator (and his family) is probably having a very bad last few days and deservedly so. The truth always comes out and there can be a reckoning.

B&R Flashback: ObamaCare: DEFUND, Not Repeal

This must be done. What’s sad is that Gruber has more balls than some of the Republicans now in charge.

After numerous reports of videos being banned from YouTube, a Google Global Company, the need for answers became paramount. Researching the videos that currently reside on YouTube, took quite some time; they are seemingly endless.

Several weeks ago, NMATV sent out newsletters stating they had added a channel on their site for videos banned from YouTube. Gary Schneider, President of New Media Alliance, Inc., and Heritage New Media’s Partner, Inc. says the problem is even larger than NMATV, others not affiliated with his website have claimed YouTube is censoring items that adhere to the company’s guidelines for content, and have still been pulled. Google and YouTube, when questioned, give only automated responses, if any at all, citing copyright infringement, offensive content, abusive language etc, etc.

The problem is that criticizing Google can be considered suicidal.

As they are the most-used search engine on the Internet, they essentially have the power to make your site go away, and they know it. Any dissent is punishable.

Yesterday, in the YouTube series, readers responded with a myriad of answers, and surprisingly only one nasty comment. Some of you felt this was blatant censorship, while others realized YouTube is not a government entity, therefore it cannot be called censorship.

A few felt the first video should not have been banned because it did not violate YouTube’s rules of content. Yet another felt if the second video was pulled because the first was, that was two wrongs, that do not make a right. More than one pointed out the fact that Google is privately owned therefore, able to decide who and what can be included on their site. No argument there.

Check out the Google/YouTube song and dance, along with some video examples.

All we ever ask is consistency. Google/YouTube can do anything they want to enforce their own rules. All anyone could ask is that all parties be treated fairly. Is that too much to ask…?

On Friday we discussed YouTubes response to questions of censorship, and discerned that YouTube violates its own policy by promoting a video that clearly demeans persons with disabilities.  YouTube also continues to violate its own guidelines by leaving “hate speech” comments on the pages of videos they have removed.  By leaving the comments, they continually promote the malicious attacks of the extreme fringe who wish to verbally assault others, because of a difference in views.

Scott Rubin’s response, to the claims of censorship, unfortunately, do not hold water.  Clearly, YouTube cherry picks videos according to the wishes of the community, not based on their guidelines.  It remains to be seen whether anyone at YouTube or Google even view what videos have been flagged, before pulling them, the evidence says no.

I believe they have automated keyword searches. Some hit on words the monitors approve of and ones they don’t.

I don’t believe it’s objective, but that’s an opinion.

Luann Dawkins’ expose into the liberal attempt to control information via YouTube and other sites once thought of as neutral sources of information and entertainment.

Last week we discussed whether or not YouTube was censoring their website by removing conservative content-based videos. Clearly this is the case, even as YouTube claims the videos in question were removed for offensive content, or labeled hate speech. What was found is YouTube’s cherry picking, using flags from viewers as their only evidence of noncompliance, and pulling videos without serious investigation by their company. The videos flagged were very similar to the videos featured in part one and two of this series of articles, yet these videos remain on YouTube to this day.

Gary Schneider, President of New Media Alliance, Inc., and Heritage New Media Partners, Inc. believes the censorship doesn’t end with Google or YouTube. Social networking sites, like Newsvine (owned by MSNBC) has also pulled conservative content video citing self promotion, spam, pornography and sponsorship of political views, as justification for censorship.

In Part Five of Luann Dawkins’ series, it takes a rather personal turn.

Bob Parks, of Black and Right and NMATV, added a video to his channel on YouTube, depicting the 2005 brutal beheading of U.S. construction worker Jack Hensley, by Islamic Terrorists in Iraq.  This video was removed within 20 minutes by “community” flagging and YouTube citing, “content violations.”  Is it graphic?  Yes, and could possibly fall under YouTubes Community Guidelines as inappropriate.  Where the grey area begins is the distinction between educational and informative versus shock value.

According to YouTube’s Community Guidelines, under the heading, “Shocking and Disgusting,” it reads;

“The world is a dangerous place. Sometimes people do get hurt and it’s inevitable that these events may be documented on YouTube. However, it’s not okay to post violent or gory content that’s primarily intended to be shocking, sensational or disrespectful. If a video is particularly graphic or disturbing, it should be balanced with additional context and information. For instance, including a clip from a slaughter house in a video on factory farming may be appropriate. However, stringing together unrelated and gruesome clips of animals being slaughtered in a video may be considered gratuitous if its purpose is to shock rather than illustrate.”

YouTube clearly violates its own policy by removing the video, which is extremely graphic and disturbing, but is also “balanced with additional context and information.” While they are free to decide what to allow or remove, they should not mislead the “community,” into thinking they have joined a site where all views, opinions, and ideals are welcome.

My point was to counter the then-liberal assertion that the Iraqi insurgents weren’t terrorists, but “freedom fighters” engaged with imperial occupiers, granted George Washington-like status. If memories of my grade school experience serve, George Washington didn’t behead captured civilians.

The Iraqi insurgents did.

As the video inserted aired publicly all over the Islamic world, it’s not like it was shock. It was news for Americans, shielded by an anti-war, liberal media that wanted to perpetuate the insurgents’ victim status.

I attempted to offer “balance”.