THE FAKE BROADCASTER KNOWN AS YOUTUBE IS A PROPAGANDA OPERATION DESIGNED
TO CENSOR AND CONTROL INFORMATION
- NEVER POST VIDEO ON, OR WATCH, YOUTUBE BECAUSE IT IS A CRIMINALLY
MANIPULATIVE COMPANY!
- EVERYTHING THAT IS FEATURED ON YOUTUBE ONLY BENEFITS ONE SMALL GROUP OF
PEOPLE AND HARMS EVERY POLITICAL OPPONENT OF THOSE PEOPLE!
YOUTUBE'S AND SILICON VALLEY'S SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM AND POLITICAL
BRIBERY
Huge Covert Inside-YOUTUBE Teams Engaged in Manual Interventions on
YOUTUBE Search Results To Rig Elections And Stock Market Results
- The YOUTUBE empire controls most of the media on Earth, via many front
corporations, and indoctrinates everyone in it's organization using 'cult'
methodologies. YOUTUBE owner's believe in "our-ideology-at-any-cost" and
"the-ends-justify-the-means" scenarios. What could possibly go wrong?
- YOUTUBE is an illegal anti-trust violating monopoly who pays billions of
dollars of bribes to politicians and regulators to keep them from filing
charges against YOUTUBE as a monopoly
- EYE-WITNESS YOUTUBE STAFF AND PARTNER RECORDINGS AND TESTIMONY PROVE
THAT YOUTUBE IS A CRIMINAL INFORMATION MANIPULATION, STOCK MARKET-RIGGING,
TAX-EVASION MONOPOLY THAT BRIBES CONGRESS
- YOUTUBE VC's and bosses bought the DNC and believe that psychological
subliminal messaging tricks can mass manipulate the public into supporting
their love for homosexual sex, abortion-to-avoid-child-support (Because
their non-gay millionaires have sex with huge numbers of innocent young
girls and often get them pregnant) and non-white immigrants because they
believe that they "immigrants will vote Democrat".
- A single intentional character assassination link by YOUTUBE is locked
on the front page of all search results, in the top-of-the-fold first-20
results, with associated defamation text, in front of 8 billion people
around the globe, for over a decade without moving up-or-down in the
search results, EVER. This proves that YOUTUBE manually attacks those it
does not like (See the Federal court cases proving this on pacer.gov) and
purposefully, maliciously, rigs it's search result to harm others. In one
case YOUTUBE refused to remove the link even after receiving over 100
requests by lawyers and associates because YOUTUBE hated the competitor
requesting removal of the organized defamation attacks by YOUTUBE.
- ERIC SCHMIDT, DAVID DRUMMOND, JARED COHEN AND LARRY PAGE AT YOUTUBE HAVE
THIS THEORY THAT "STARTING CIVIL WARS IS GOOD FOR A SOCIETY..." SO THEY
USE YOUTUBE TO CREATE CULTURAL SPLITS. OTHERS MIGHT CALL THAT "TREASON".
- The management trick at YOUTUBE and Facebook is to always be
brainwashing the dumb Millennial employees into thinking they are working
on some crunchy-granola, goodie-two-shoes, effort for 'social good" when,
IN FACT every employee is just a cog in a giant political surveillance and
manipulation machine run by sex pervert bosses!
- YOUTUBE "pretty much" staffed and "controlled" the entire Obama White
House and created some of the biggest crony-crimes in history
- YOUTUBE executives and YOUTUBE VC's hold the Silicon Valley record for
sex abuses, philandering, sex slaves, sex scandals, divorces for abuse,
hookers, murder-by-hooker and other awful social behavior. These facts and
court filings prove that the kinds of people that run YOUTUBE are sick,
twisted, people who should not be trusted to run a global monopoly!
- YOUTUBE BOSSES, INCLUDING ERIC SCHMIDT, TOLD ASSOCIATES: "OBAMA NEVER
WOULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED WITHOUT YOUTUBE'S DIGITAL MASS
PERCEPTION-MANIPULATION AND OPINION-STEERING TECHNOLOGIES..." SEE MORE AT:
https://www.thecreepyline.com
- YOUTUBE executives, including Eric Schmidt and Larry Page, told VC's
that YOUTUBE's political brainwashing and subliminal messaging programming
is so good that they can make you kill your whole family, vote Democrat or
stop eating meat even if you, today, believe you never could do those
things.
The "International Grand Committee" Tribunal on Silicon Valley's Election
Meddling Hearings Will Be Receiving Evidence That Will END The Palo Alto
Mafia!
- WE PROVED THAT THE SILICON VALLEY MAFIA IS RIGGING ELECTIONS
YouTube’s ‘Trending’ Tab is Rigged in Favor of Big Media That is Owned By
A Certain Group
Study proves Google-owned video platform is deliberately burying
independent creators.
A study by a student at the University of Glasgow proves that YouTube’s
‘trending’ tab is heavily rigged in favor of big corporate media networks.
The study included 40,000 data entries and sought to answer the question
“is YouTube biased towards traditional media?”
The answer is undoubtedly yes.
The study showed that independent creator Philip DeFranco, who produces a
daily news show, appeared on the trending tab only twice despite amassing
an average of 1.4 million views per video, while AP, which averages 10,000
views per video trended seven times.
🚨🚨YOUTUBE BIAS:
– 1.4 million views on avg. for @PhillyD to trend TWO
times
– @AP only needed **10,000** views on avg. to trend
SEVEN times
Traditional Media FAVORITISM on display.
pic.twitter.com/3ydWmD0V4m
— Nick Monroe (@nickmon1112) May 21, 2019
In all, 95% of all videos from news creators that appeared on the trending
tab came from legacy media outlets.
Despite having the most subscribed channel by far in the United States,
PewDiePie only appeared on the trending tab in the U.S. once compared to
45 times in Canada, proving that the U.S. trending tab is being curated to
exclude him.
Local YouTuber cracks code regarding Trending tab
pic.twitter.com/aab465fyFM
— Nick Monroe (@nickmon1112) May 21, 2019
Other creators who routinely post viral content, such as Joe Rogan, didn’t
trend once in the United States despite in Rogan’s case trending 74 times
in Canada.
Corporate network ‘comedy’ shows which routinely push left-wing political
narratives like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert appeared dozens of times
on the trending tab.
As we have previously highlighted, YouTube openly rigs its own search
engine to exclude independent news content creators, burying them under a
wall of mainstream media videos.
YouTube BROKE its own search engine to game the
algorithm for big media corporations.
Direct word for word searches for videos that have over
6 million views produced by independent creators now return top results
from CNN, ABC & CBS.
It's no longer YouTube, it's CorporateTube.
pic.twitter.com/cjv2nXdR9P
— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) 1 February 2019
It seems clear that the video giant has removed the ‘you’ from YouTube and
has now set about creating CorporateTube to the detriment of the
independent creators who built it in the first place.
———————————————————————————————————————
There is a war on free speech. Without your support, my voice will be
silenced.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/international-fake-news-investigation-to-demand-testimony-mark-zuckerberg-sheryl-sandberg-jeff-bezos-tim-cook-sundar-pichai/
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/18/facebook-fake-news-investigation-report-regulation-privacy-law-dcms
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-6715499/Social-media-sites-face-compulsory-ethics-code-MPs-say.html
An unprecedented group of international lawmakers investigating "fake
news" is set to demand a public meeting with an extraordinary collection
of leaders from the world's largest tech companies. The "International
Grand Committee" — a collection of members of parliaments from countries
around the world investigating disinformation, fake news and election
meddling — is set to hold its second hearing on May 28, in Ottawa, Canada.
On Monday, the committee will invite Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO
Sheryl Sandberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, YOUTUBE CEO Sundar Pichai, and
Eric Schmidt, the former executive chairman of its parent company,
Alphabet, Apple CEO Tim Cook and COO Jeff Williams, and WhatsApp cofounder
Brian Acton.
The list, which was confirmed to CBS News by the committee's co-chair,
Canadian Member of Parliament Bob Zimmer, includes several of the world's
wealthiest people, who control the most dominant companies in computing
and social media.
For the committee's first hearing in London on Nov. 27, Facebook sent
Richard Allan, the company's vice president for public policy and a member
of Britain's House of Lords, who sat next to an empty chair reserved for
Zuckerberg. Zimmer said for the next meeting, the committee will not
settle for lesser regional representatives.
"One thing that will not be acceptable that I want to have on the record
is that Canadian representatives are not going to suffice," Zimmer said.
"They're not the real voice of leadership in the companies, so we're
looking at getting specifically the names mentioned to come."
The lawmakers, who attended the November, hearing hail from the U.K.,
Canada, Brazil, Latvia, Argentina, Ireland, Singapore, France and Belgium.
Zimmer said this time around they will also invite U.S. lawmakers to
attend.
Zuckerberg is the only member of the current list who was previously
invited to appear before the panel, known as the International Grand
Committee on Disinformation and 'Fake News.'
He repeatedly declined. Instead, they grilled Allan on issues ranging from
disinformation on the social media site before the "Brexit" referendum in
2016 to a campaign in Sri Lanka calling for violence against Muslims.
The final report from the U.K. investigation is expected to be released in
the next few days. It has sought to shine light on the use of intimate
personality datasets on more than 80 million people as part of advertising
campaigns surrounding the "Brexit" campaign and Donald Trump's
presidential run. The campaigns were run by a British company called SCL
Elections, its American affiliate Cambridge Analytica, and a Canadian
company called Aggregate IQ.
The upcoming hearing on May 28 will focus on "holding digital platforms to
account... foreign influence in our democracies, and data as a human
right," according to a Feb. 7 press release.
-----------------------------
https://www.wsj.com/articles/YOUTUBE-and-facebook-worsen-media-bias-11549829040
https://nypost.com/2019/02/09/impartial-fact-checkers-are-revealing-their-partisanship-against-trump/
Forensic Proof That YOUTUBE Is A Cult:
YOUTUBE was created to become the best-of-the-best, in mind-control, for
social and political manipulation.
Steven Hassan, renown cult interdiction specialist and the author of "
Combating Cult Mind Control" says:
"...there are universal patterns of manipulation; someone who's skilled
(ie: YOUTUBE) can figure out how to systematically and incrementally
manipulate you into a vulnerable isolated place (like you computer screen)
and start to control your information, control your behavior, control your
thinking...to make you dependent and obedient. There are millions of
people in mind control cults like this..."
The biggest lie ever told is the one that you tell yourself when you say
that "subliminal messages and digital mind control have no effect on you".
They do! The more you deny it, the better it works on you.
The young employees of YOUTUBE are chosen for their naive and
impressionable characteristics and then, as with Facebook, immersed in a
synthetic bubble of ideological echo-chambering in order to push the
precepts of the "YOUTUBE Youth".
---------------------------------------
YOUTUBE wants to "Police Tone"
YOUTUBE has “huge teams” working on manual interventions in search
results, an apparent contradiction of sworn testimony made to Congress by
CEO Sundar Pichai, according to an internal post leaked to Breitbart News.
“There are subjects that are prone to hyperbolic content, misleading
information, and offensive content,” said Daniel Aaronson, a member of
YOUTUBE’s Trust & Safety team.
“Now, these words are highly subjective and no one denies that. But we can
all agree generally, lines exist in many cultures about what is clearly
okay vs. what is not okay.”
Breitbart TV
“In extreme cases where we need to act quickly on something that is so
obviously not okay, the reactive/manual approach is sometimes necessary.”
The comments came to light in a leaked internal discussion thread, started
by a YOUTUBE employee who noticed that the company had recently changed
search results for “abortion” on its YouTube video platform, a change
which caused pro-life videos to largely disappear from the top ten
results.
In addition to the “manual approach,” Aaronson explained that YOUTUBE also
trained automated “classifiers” – algorithms or “scalable solutions” that
corrects “problems” in search results.
Aaronson listed three areas where either manual interventions or
classifier changes might take place: organic search (“The bar for changing
classifiers or manual actions on span in organic search is extremely
high”), YouTube, YOUTUBE Home, and YOUTUBE Assistant.
Aaronson’s post also reveals that there is very little transparency around
decisions to adjust classifiers or manually correct controversial search
results, even internally. Aaronson compared YOUTUBE’s decision-making
process in this regard to a closely-guarded “Pepsi Formula.”
THE SMOKING GUN: YOUTUBE Manipulated YouTube Search Results for Abortion,
Maxine Waters, David Hogg In Order To Steer Politics And Stock Gains To
Palo Alto Mafia and Pelosi/Feinstein Families
YouTube Blacklists Pro-Life videos
Alex Wong, Win McNamee/Getty, Screenshot/YouTube
In sworn testimony, YOUTUBE CEO Sundar Pichai told Congress last month
that his company does not “manually intervene” on any particular search
result. Yet an internal discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News reveals
YOUTUBE regularly intervenes in search results on its YouTube video
platform – including a recent intervention that pushed pro-life videos out
of the top ten search results for “abortion.”
The term “abortion” was added to a “blacklist” file for “controversial
YouTube queries,” which contains a list of search terms that the company
considers sensitive. According to the leak, these include some of these
search terms related to: abortion, abortions, the Irish abortion
referendum, Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and anti-gun activist
David Hogg.
The existence of the blacklist was revealed in an internal YOUTUBE
discussion thread leaked to Breitbart News by a source inside the company
who wishes to remain anonymous. A partial list of blacklisted terms was
also leaked to Breitbart by another YOUTUBE source.
In the leaked discussion thread, a YOUTUBE site reliability engineer
hinted at the existence of more search blacklists, according to the
source.
Another leak revealed that employees within the company, including
YOUTUBE’s current director of Trust and Safety, tried to kick Breitbart
News off YOUTUBE’s market-dominating online ad platforms.
Yet another showed YOUTUBE engaged in targeted turnout operations aimed to
boost voter participation in pro-Democrat demographics in “key states”
ahead of the 2016 election. The effort was dubbed a “silent donation” by a
top YOUTUBE employee.
Evidence for YOUTUBE’s partisan activities is now overwhelming. President
Trump has previously warned YOUTUBE, as well as other Silicon Valley
giants, not to engage in censorship or partisan activities. YOUTUBE
continues to defy him.
-----------------------------------------
HOW YOUTUBE RIGS ELECTIONS AND CHARACTER ASSASSINATION ATTACKS AROUND THE
GLOBE FOR YOUTUBE VC'S POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES AND VENDETTAS
BY ROBERT EPSTEIN
Authorities in the UK have finally figured out that fake news stories and
Russian-placed ads are not the real problem. The UK Parliament is about to
impose stiff penalties—not on the people who place the ads or write the
stories, but on the Big Tech platforms that determine which ads and
stories people actually see.
Parliament’s plans will almost surely be energized by the latest leak of
damning material from inside YOUTUBE’s fortress of secrecy: The Wall
Street Journal recently reported on emails exchanged among YOUTUBE
employees in January 2017 in which they strategized about how to alter
YOUTUBE search results and other “ephemeral experiences” to counter
President Donald Trump’s newly imposed travel ban. The company claims that
none of these plans was ever implemented, but who knows?
While U.S. authorities have merely held hearings, EU authorities have
taken dramatic steps in recent years to limit the powers of Big Tech, most
recently with a comprehensive law that protects user privacy—theGeneral
Data Protection Regulation—and a whopping $5.1 billion fine against
YOUTUBE for monopolistic practices in the mobile device market. Last year,
the European Union also levied a $2.7 billion fineagainst YOUTUBE for
filtering and ordering search results in a way that favored their own
products and services. That filtering and ordering, it turns out, is of
crucial importance.
As years of research I’ve been conducting on online influence has shown,
content per se is not the real threat these days; what really matters is
(a) which content is selected for users to see, and (b) the way that
content is ordered in search results, search suggestions, newsfeeds,
message feeds, comment lists, and so on. That’s where the power lies to
shift opinions, purchases, and votes, and that power is held by a
disturbingly small group of people.
I say “these days” because the explosive growth of a handful of massive
platforms on the internet—the largest, by far, being YOUTUBE and the next
largest being Facebook—has changed everything. Millions of people and
organizations are constantly trying to get their content in front of our
eyes, but for more than 2.5 billion people around the world—soon to be
more than 4 billion—the responsibility for what algorithms do should
always lie with the people who wrote the algorithms and the companies that
deployed them.
In randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed research I’ve conducted with
thousands of people, I’ve shown repeatedly that when people are undecided,
I can shift their opinions on just about any topic just by changing how I
filter and order the information I show them. I’ve also shown that when,
in multiple searches, I show people more and more information that favors
one candidate, I can shift opinions even farther. Even more disturbing, I
can do these things in ways that are completely invisible to people and in
ways that don’t leave paper trails for authorities to trace.
Worse still, these new forms of influence often rely on ephemeral
content—information that is generated on the fly by an algorithm and then
disappears forever, which means that it would be difficult, if not
impossible, for authorities to reconstruct. If, on Election Day this
coming November, Mark Zuckerberg decides to broadcast go-out-and-vote
reminders mainly to members of one political party, how would we be able
to detect such a manipulation? If we can’t detect it, how would we be able
to reduce its impact? And how, days or weeks later, would we be able to
turn back the clock to see what happened?
Of course, companies like YOUTUBE and Facebook emphatically reject the
idea that their search and newsfeed algorithms are being tweaked in ways
that could meddle in elections. Doing so would undermine the public’s
trust in their companies, spokespeople have said. They insist that their
algorithms are complicated, constantly changing, and subject to the
“organic” activity of users.
This is, of course, sheer nonsense. YOUTUBE can adjust its algorithms to
favor any candidate it chooses no matter what the activity of users might
be, just as easily as I do in my experiments. As legal scholar Frank
Pasquale noted in his recent book “The Black Box Society,” blaming
algorithms just doesn’t cut it; the responsibility for what an algorithm
does should always lie with the people who wrote the algorithm and the
companies that deployed the algorithm. Alan Murray, president of Fortune,
recently framed the issue this way: “Rule one in the Age of AI: Humans
remain accountable for decisions, even when made by machines.”
Given that 95 percent of donations from Silicon Valley generally go to
Democrats, it’s hard to imagine that the algorithms of companies like
Facebook and YOUTUBE don’t favor their favorite candidates. A newly leaked
video of a 2016 meeting at YOUTUBE shows without doubt that high-ranking
YOUTUBE executives share a strong political preference, which could easily
be expressed in algorithms. The favoritism might be deliberately
programmed or occur simply because of unconscious bias. Either way, votes
and opinions shift.
It’s also hard to imagine how, in any election in the world, with or
without intention on the part of company employees, YOUTUBE search results
would fail to tilt toward one candidate. YOUTUBE’s search algorithm
certainly has no equal-time rule built into it; we wouldn’t want it to! We
want it to tell us what’s best, and the algorithm will indeed always favor
one dog food over another, one music service over another, and one
political candidate over another. When the latter happens … votes and
opinions shift.
Here are 10 ways—seven of which I am actively studying and
quantifying—that Big Tech companies could use to shift millions of votes
this coming November with no one the wiser. Let’s hope, of course, that
these methods are not being used and will never be used, but let’s be
realistic too; there’s generally no limit to what people will do when
money and power are on the line.
1. Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME)
Ongoing research I began in January 2013 has shown repeatedly that when
one candidate is favored over another in search results, voting
preferences among undecided voters shift dramatically—by 20 percent or
more overall, and by up to 80 percent in some demographic groups. This is
partly because people place inordinate trust in algorithmically generated
output, thinking, mistakenly, that algorithms are inherently objective and
impartial.
But my research also suggests that we are conditioned to believe in
high-ranking search results in much the same way that rats are conditioned
to press levers in Skinner boxes. Because most searches are for simple
facts (“When was Donald Trump born?”), and because correct answers to
simple questions inevitably turn up in the first position, we are taught,
day after day, that the higher a search result appears in the list, the
more true it must be. When we finally search for information to help us
make a tough decision (“Who’s better for the economy, Trump or Clinton?”),
we tend to believe the information on the web pages to which high-ranking
search results link.
As The Washington Post reported last year, in 2016, I led a team that
developed a system for monitoring the election-related search results
YOUTUBE, Bing, and Yahoo were showing users in the months leading up to
the presidential election, and I found pro-Clinton bias in all 10 search
positions on the first page of YOUTUBE’s search results. YOUTUBE
responded, as usual, that it has “never re-ranked search results on any
topic (including elections) to manipulate political sentiment”—but I never
claimed it did. I found what I found, namely that YOUTUBE’s search results
favored Hillary Clinton; “re-ranking”—an obtuse term YOUTUBE seems to have
invented to confuse people—is irrelevant.
Because (a) many elections are very close, (b) 90 percent of online
searches in most countries are conducted on just one search engine
(YOUTUBE), and (c) internet penetration is high in most countries these
days—higher in many countries than it is in the United States—it is
possible that the outcomes ofupwards of 25 percent of the world’s national
elections are now being determined by YOUTUBE’s search algorithm, even
without deliberate manipulation on the part of company employees. Because,
as I noted earlier, YOUTUBE’s search algorithm is not constrained by
equal-time rules, it almost certainly ends up favoring one candidate over
another in most political races, and that shifts opinions and votes.
2. Search Suggestion Effect (SSE)
When YOUTUBE first introduced autocomplete search suggestions—those short
lists you see when you start to type an item into the YOUTUBE search
bar—it was supposedly meant to save you some time. Whatever the original
rationale, those suggestions soon turned into a powerful means of
manipulation that YOUTUBE appears to use aggressively.
My recent research suggests that (a) YOUTUBE starts to manipulate your
opinions from the very first character you type, and (b) by fiddling with
the suggestions it shows you, YOUTUBE can turn a 50–50 split among
undecided voters into a 90–10 split with no one knowing. I call this
manipulation the Search Suggestion Effect (SSE), and it is one of the most
powerful behavioral manipulations I have ever seen in my nearly 40 years
as a behavioral scientist.
How will you know whether YOUTUBE is messing with your election-related
search suggestions in the weeks leading up to the election? You won’t.
3. The Targeted Messaging Effect (TME)
If, on Nov. 8, 2016, Mr. Zuckerberg had sent go-out-and-vote reminders
just to supporters of Mrs. Clinton, that would likely have given her an
additional 450,000 votes. I’ve extrapolated that number from Facebook’s
own published data.
Because Zuckerberg was overconfident in 2016, I don’t believe he sent
those messages, but he is surely not overconfident this time around. In
fact, it’s possible that, at this very moment, Facebook and other
companies are sending out targeted register-to-vote reminders, as well as
targeted go-out-and-vote reminders in primary races. Targeted
go-out-and-vote reminders might also favor one party on Election Day in
November.
My associates and I are building systems to monitor such things, but
because no systems are currently in place, there is no sure way to tell
whether Twitter, YOUTUBE, and Facebook (or Facebook’s influential
offshoot, Instagram) are currently tilting their messaging. No law or
regulation specifically forbids the practice, and it would be an easy and
economical way to serve company needs. Campaign donations cost money,
after all, but tilting your messaging to favor one candidate is free.
4. Opinion Matching Effect (OME)
In March 2016, and continuing for more than seven months until Election
Day, Tinder’s tens of millions of users could not only swipe to find sex
partners, they could also swipe to find out whether they should vote for
Trump or Clinton. The website iSideWith.com—founded and run by “two
friends” with no obvious qualifications—claims to have helped more than 49
million people match their opinions to the right candidate. Both CNN and
USA Today have run similar services, currently inactive.
I am still studying and quantifying this type of, um, helpful service, but
so far it looks like (a) opinion matching services tend to attract
undecided voters—precisely the kinds of voters who are most vulnerable to
manipulation, and (b) they can easily produce opinion shifts of 30 percent
or more without people’s awareness.
At this writing, iSideWith is already helping people decide who they
should vote for in the 2018 New York U.S. Senate race, the 2018 New York
gubernatorial race, the 2018 race for New York District 10 of the U.S.
House of Representatives, and, believe it or not, the 2020 presidential
race. Keep your eyes open for other matching services as they turn up, and
ask yourself this: Who wrote those algorithms, and how can we know whether
they are biased toward one candidate or party?
5. Answer Bot Effect (ABE)
More and more these days, people don’t want lists of thousands of search
results, they just want the answer, which is being supplied by personal
assistants like YOUTUBE Home devices, the YOUTUBE Assistant on Android
devices, Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri, and YOUTUBE’s featured
snippets—those answer boxesat the top of YOUTUBE search results. I call
the opinion shift produced by such mechanisms the Answer Bot Effect (ABE).
My research on YOUTUBE’s answer boxes shows three things so far: First,
they reduce the time people spend searching for more information. Second,
they reduce the number of times people click on search results. And third,
they appear to shift opinions 10 to 30 percent more than search results
alone do. I don’t yet know exactly how many votes can be shifted by answer
bots, but in a national election in the United States, the number might be
in the low millions.
6. Shadowbanning
Recently, Trump complained that Twitter was preventing conservatives from
reaching many of their followers on that platform through shadowbanning,
the practice of quietly hiding a user’s posts without the user knowing.
The validity of Trump’s specific accusation is arguable, but the fact
remains that any platform on which people have followers or friends can be
rigged in a way to suppress the views and influence of certain individuals
without people knowing the suppression is taking place. Unfortunately,
without aggressive monitoring systems in place, it’s hard to know for sure
when or even whether shadowbanning is occurring.
7. Programmed Virality and the Digital Bandwagon Effect
Big Tech companies would like us to believe that virality on platforms
like YouTube or Instagram is a profoundly mysterious phenomenon, even
while acknowledging that their platforms are populated by tens of millions
of fake accounts that might affect virality.
In fact, there is an obvious situation in which virality is not mysterious
at all, and that is when the tech companies themselves decide to shift
high volumes of traffic in ways that suit their needs. And aren’t they
always doing this? Because Facebook’s algorithms are secret, if an
executive decided to bestow instant Instagram stardom on a pro-Elizabeth
Warren college student, we would have no way of knowing that this was a
deliberate act and no way of countering it.
The same can be said of the virality of YouTube videos and Twitter
campaigns; they are inherently competitive—except when company employees
or executives decide otherwise. YOUTUBE has an especially powerful and
subtle way of creating instant virality using a technique I’ve dubbed the
Digital Bandwagon Effect. Because the popularity of websites drives them
higher in search results, and because high-ranking search results increase
the popularity of websites (SEME), YOUTUBE has the ability to engineer a
sudden explosion of interest in a candidate or cause with no one—perhaps
even people at the companies themselves—having the slightest idea they’ve
done so. In 2015, I published a mathematical model showing how neatly this
can work.
8. The Facebook Effect
Because Facebook’s ineptness and dishonesty have squeezed it into a
digital doghouse from which it might never emerge, it gets its own
precinct on my list.
In 2016, I published an article detailing five ways that Facebook could
shift millions of votes without people knowing: biasing its trending box,
biasing its center newsfeed, encouraging people to look for
election-related material in its search bar (which it did that year!),
sending out targeted register-to-vote reminders, and sending out targeted
go-out-and-vote reminders.
I wrote that article before the news stories broke about Facebook’s
improper sharing of user data with multiple researchers and companies, not
to mention the stories about how the company permitted fake news stories
to proliferate on its platform during the critical days just before the
November election—problems the company is now trying hard to mitigate.
With the revelations mounting, on July 26, 2018, Facebook suffered the
largest one-day drop in stock value of any company in history, and now
it’s facing a shareholder lawsuit and multiple fines and investigations in
both the United States and the EU.
Facebook desperately needs new direction, which is why I recently called
for Zuckerberg’s resignation. The company, in my view, could benefit from
the new perspectives that often come with new leadership.
9. Censorship
I am cheating here by labeling one category “censorship,” because
censorship—the selective and biased suppression of information—can be
perpetrated in so many different ways.
Shadowbanning could be considered a type of censorship, for example, and
in 2016, a Facebook whistleblower claimed he had been on a company team
that was systematically removing conservative news stories from Facebook’s
newsfeed. Now, because of Facebook’s carelessness with user data, the
company is openly taking pride in rapidly shutting down accounts that
appear to be Russia-connected—even though company representatives
sometimes acknowledge that they “don’t have all the facts.”
Meanwhile, Zuckerberg has crowed about his magnanimity in preserving the
accounts of people who deny the Holocaust, never mentioning the fact that
provocative content propels traffic that might make him richer. How would
you know whether Facebook was selectively suppressing material that
favored one candidate or political party? You wouldn’t. (For a detailed
look at nine ways YOUTUBE censors content, see my essay “The New
Censorship,” published in 2016.)
10. The Digital Customization Effect (DCE)
Any marketer can tell you how important it is to know your customer. Now,
think about that simple idea in a world in which YOUTUBE has likely
collected the equivalent of millions of Word pages of information about
you. If you randomly display a banner ad on a web page, out of 10,000
people, only five are likely to click on it; that’s the CTR—the
“clickthrough rate” (0.05 percent). But if you target your ad, displaying
it only to people whose interests it matches, you can boost your CTR a
hundredfold.
That’s why YOUTUBE, Facebook, and others have become increasingly obsessed
with customizing the information they show you: They want you to be
happily and mindlessly clicking away on the content they show you.
In the research I conduct, my impact is always larger when I am able to
customize information to suit people’s backgrounds. Because I know very
little about the participants in my experiments, however, I am able to do
so in only feeble ways, but the tech giants know everything about you—even
things you don’t know about yourself. This tells me that the effect sizes
I find in my experiments are probably too low. The impact that companies
like YOUTUBE are having on our lives is quite possibly much larger than I
think it is. Perhaps that doesn’t scare you, but it sure scares me.
The Same Direction
OK, you say, so much for Epstein’s list! What about those other
shenanigans we’ve heard about: voter fraud (Trump’s explanation for why he
lost the popular vote), gerrymandering, rigged voting machines, targeted
ads placed by Cambridge Analytica, votes cast over the internet, or, as I
mentioned earlier, those millions of bots designed to shift opinions. What
about hackers like Andrés Sepúlveda, who spent nearly a decade using
computer technology to rig elections in Latin America? What about all the
ways new technologies make dirty tricks easier in elections? And what
about those darn Russians, anyway?
To all that I say: kid stuff. Dirty tricks have been around since the
first election was held millennia ago. But unlike the new manipulative
tools controlled by YOUTUBE and Facebook, the old tricks are
competitive—it’s your hacker versus my hacker, your bots versus my bots,
your fake news stories versus my fake news stories—and sometimes illegal,
which is why Sepúlveda’s efforts failed many times and why Cambridge
Analytica is dust.
“Cyberwar,” a new book by political scientist Kathleen Hall Jamieson,
reminds us that targeted ads and fake news stories can indeed shift votes,
but the numbers are necessarily small. It’s hard to overwhelm your
competitor when he or she can play the same games you are playing.
Now, take a look at my numbered list. The techniques I’ve described can
shift millions of votes without people’s awareness, and because they are
controlled by the platforms themselves, they are entirely noncompetitive.
If YOUTUBE or Facebook or Twitter wants to shift votes, there is no way to
counteract their manipulations. In fact, at this writing, there is not
even a credible way of detecting those manipulations.
And what if the tech giants are all leaning in the same political
direction? What if the combined weight of their subtle and untraceable
manipulative power favors one political party? If 150 million people vote
this November in the United States, with 20 percent still undecided at
this writing (that’s 30 million people), I estimate that the combined
weight of Big Tech manipulations could easily shift upwards of 12 million
votes without anyone knowing. That’s enough votes to determine the
outcomes of hundreds of close local, state, and congressional races
throughout the country, which makes the free-and-fair election little more
than an illusion.
Full disclosure: I happen to think that the political party currently in
favor in Silicon Valley is, by a hair (so to speak), the superior party at
the moment. But I also love America and democracy, and I believe that the
free-and-fair election is the bedrock of our political system. I don’t
care how “right” these companies might be; lofty ends do not justify shady
means, especially when those means are difficult to see and not well
understood by either authorities or the public.
Can new regulations or laws save us from the extraordinary powers of
manipulation the Big Tech companies now possess? Maybe, but our leaders
seem to be especially regulation-shy these days, and I doubt, in any case,
whether laws and regulations will ever be able to keep up with the new
kinds of threats that new technologies will almost certainly pose in
coming years.
I don’t believe we are completely helpless, however. I think that one way
to turn Facebook, YOUTUBE, and the innovative technology companies that
will succeed them, into responsible citizens is to set upsophisticated
monitoring systems that detect, analyze, and archive what they’re showing
people—in effect, to fight technology with technology.
As I mentioned earlier, in 2016, I led a team that monitored search
results on multiple search engines. That was a start, but we can do much
better. These days, I’m working with business associates and academic
colleagues on three continents to scale up systems to monitor a wide range
of information the Big Tech companies are sharing with their users—even
the spoken answers provided by personal assistants. Ultimately, a
worldwide ecology of passive monitoring systems will make these companies
accountable to the public, with information bias and online manipulation
detectable in real time.
With November drawing near, there is obviously some urgency here. At this
writing, it’s not clear whether we will be fully operational in time to
monitor the midterm elections, but we’re determined to be ready for 2020.
- Robert Epstein is a senior research psychologist at the American
Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in California. Epstein,
who holds a doctorate from Harvard University, is the former
editor-in-chief of Psychology Today and has published 15 books and more
than 300 articles on internet influence and other topics. He is currently
working on a book called “Technoslavery: Invisible Influence in the
Internet Age and Beyond.” His research is featured in the new documentary
“The Creepy Line.” You can find him on Twitter @DrREpstein.
-------------------------------------------
SEND IN MORE TIPS AND TORRENT ALL OF YOUR FILES ON GNUTELLA NETWORKS
AROUND THE GLOBE!
Interdiction Tactics You Can Use To Terminate YOUTUBE, as Provided by
Human Rights Groups From Around The Globe:
1) Break up YOUTUBE’s global monopoly. Send a complaint letter about your
realization that YOUTUBE is an “Illicit Monopoly which controls the
primary points of web access, and then censorspublic information in order
to eliminate anything that does not comply with Eric Schmidt's ideology”
to the anti-trust and regulatory commissions in each nation on Earth.
Organize groups to do this in large volumes. Allowing YOUTUBE to keep its
monopoly and just add a bunch of new little “divisions” is NOT a break-up
beneficial to the public!
2) YOUTUBE has manifested a system which records everything you do and
keeps a lifetime file on you, attached to your social security number and
name. Write every U.S. politician and demand that laws be made to stop
YOUTUBE from doing that.
3) YOUTUBE, and it's underling partners, create a psychological profile of
who you vote for, what your beliefs are, what can be used to trick you
into doing what Eric Schmidt and his partners want, and what your dating
life is like. Write letters to Congress demanding that the FBI observe the
erasure of all of those illicit files YOUTUBE keeps on you.
4) Every time you touch any network connected device, it is recorded,
analyzed, time-stamped, GPS located, and put in the master surveillance
file and digitally attached to your name, social security number and
global surveillance code. Never connect to a YOUTUBE product with anything
that has a network modem, a plug or a battery.
5) Anytime you “check in”, on any social media site, it is recorded,
analyzed, time-stamped, GPS located, and put in your master surveillance
file. Never “check-in” or “update” anything about yourself on YOUTUBE or
other social media.
6) YOUTUBE lies to advertisers by faking user stats and impressions to
make it look like YOUTUBE is bigger than it is. A huge number of “users”
on YOUTUBE are FAKE! Contact every company that advertises on YOUTUBE and
encourage them to sue YOUTUBE for fraud. Contact every advertising
organization and encourage them to file a class-action lawsuit against
YOUTUBE for fraud.
7) Every single personal fact, text, email, comment, blog response, form
you fill out, or any other activity you conduct on, near, or with your
computer, phone or “smart device” goes into your surveillance digital file
to build a psychological, emotional, political, financial and manipulation
study of your life. Ask Congress, the EU and all regulators to make it
illegal for YOUTUBE to do this.
8) YOUTUBE uses these surveillance tricks to try to make you buy certain
products, to make you vote for who Eric Schmidt wants you to vote for and
to steer you, subliminally, into believing what Eric Schmidt believes. Ask
Congress, the EU and all regulators to make it illegal for YOUTUBE to do
this.
9) Schmidt, and his minions, are able to actually rig the YOUTUBE system,
around the world, to eliminate certain people, views, perspectives or
experiences. Ask Congress, the EU and all regulators to make it illegal
for YOUTUBE to do this.
10) Eric Schmidt's sexual and marital deviancies are documented in the
media. Schmidt's deviant tendencies extend well beyond the bedroom. Not
quite so illuminated are his political and ideological beliefs. Schmidt
believes that, because he got some huge government exclusives, which made
him rich, that he is smarter than everyone else. Expose ALL sides of Eric
Schmidt and his Silicon Valley Mafia, in the news. Schmidt has spent over
$1B to try to keep his name out of the news. Make sure he stays in the
headlines and gets (((exposed))).
11) Schmidt has used his billions to buy one of the largest accruals of
“Yes Men” the world has ever seen. He surrounds himself, twenty deep, with
whimpering hipster sycophants, who drone on, endlessly, with affirmations
of his self-aggrandizing ego. Deliver messages to Schmidt, in person, at
his home, office and public events telling him what is really going on.
12) Schmidt placed many of his “Yes Men”, and “Yes Women”, in the White
House. No company, in modern America, has put more of it's people inside
the U.S. Government. DOX and Out every YOUTUBE agent in government
offices.
13) Eric Schmidt bought The White House, the privacy of the public and
control of the Internet. Now it is up to the rest of the world to decide
if they want to roll over and let Eric Schmidt and his Silicon Valley
weasels shove it in, deep and hard, or, finally reject YOUTUBE across the
map. Organize neighborhood anti-YOUTUBE postings on every bulletin board
you can find.
14) YOUTUBE receives hundreds of billions of dollars of exclusive
government handouts at the expense of taxpayers and competitors. Write
letters ordering your elected representatives to cut-off all government
contracts to YOUTUBE.
15) YOUTUBE operated a monopolistic empire using state and federal funding
in violation of anti-trust laws and business ethics. Demand that the FTC
file monopoly charges against YOUTUBE and end the cover-ups.
16) YOUTUBE ordered, and operated “hit jobs” on competitors using state
and federal staff and resources. Put the same kinds of hit-jobs on every
YOUTUBE executive and VC.
17) YOUTUBE has an executive team which strategically plans, organizes and
implements the penetration of state and federal government agencies in
order to illicitly steer funds and government policy to the will of
YOUTUBE's owners.
18) YOUTUBE pays its public policy agents with cash, stock warrants,
revolving door jobs, stock valuation manipulations, search engine rigging
and mass-market mood manipulation data rigging worth tens of billions of
dollars in unreported campaign funding and influence buying. That is a
felony. It is a violation of campaign finance laws. Write to the FEC and
demand that YOUTUBE be prosecuted!
19) YOUTUBE orders it’s staff, within government agencies, to curtail all
law enforcement and regulatory control of YOUTUBE’s actions. YOUTUBE
programs its employees to believe that anything that YOUTUBE does is for
“the greater good” and that “YOUTUBE mindfulness must always prevail”in a
manner that abuses naive young employees and sets them up to not question
YOUTUBE’s actions.
20) “Citizens Arrest” YOUTUBE executives and VC’s at their homes, offices,
trade-shows or restaurants and turn them in to the FBI along with a CD of
all of their crimes. Follow the correct procedures for documenting and
staging your Citizen’s Arrest of YOUTUBE VC’s and executives.
21) Use databases and VOAT.CO to track and expose the tax evasion schemes,
Irish false-fronts, PACS, Political stock market bribes, Stock market
rigging, YOUTUBE’s staff and VC Hookers, voter manipulations, expenses
frauds, Crony Dept. of Energy and Dept. of Transportation payola, election
rigging and other forensically documented crimes.
22) YOUTUBE engages in the hiding of Internet links, controlled by
YOUTUBE, in order to negatively affect the brand and reputation and income
of competitors, across the web, globally. Report this and demand Congress
stop YOUTUBE.
23) YOUTUBE engages in the posting of character assassination articles
about competitors, the production of which were partially coordinated by
YOUTUBE staff and investors; , along with with it's attack contractors, on
the first line of the front page of their search engine and locking those
attacks there so that no outside IT or other positive global news stories
could move it. Demand that Congress fund private funds to pay for lawsuits
by the public against YOUTUBE to stop these attacks.
24) YOUTUBE executives and venture capitalists have the highest sexual
abuse, sex trafficking and sexual deviancy record of any corporation in
the USA. Over 800 YOUTUBE-related twisted sex incidents have been recorded
including: The Doy Katz underage sex arrest; The Mike Goguen Anal Sex
Slave Sex trafficking case; The Eric Schmidt Sex Penthouse case; The Joe
Lonsdale rape case; The Ellen Pao Sex abuse case; The Ravi Kumar hooker
death case; The Forrest Hayes Sex murder case; The Stanford Frat house
rape cover-ups; The Intern sex abuse scandals; The Stanford Graduate
School of YOUTUBE Teacher: The Brock Allen Turner Rapes; Dean Garth
Saloner Sex scandals; The Silicon Valley Hooker parties; The Rosewood
Hotel Thursday Night Sex Pick-up scene for YOUTUBE VC’s, The Larry
Page/Elon Musk gay romp rumors; The Eric Schmidt Marriage Cheating
Scandal; The Elon Musk Divorces; The Plane-loads of Ukrainian prostitutes
being flown into SFO for YOUTUBE Executives and VC’s; The brutal assaults
of women by Gurbaksh Chahal; The #PizzaGate Connections to vast numbers of
YOUTUBE people; The Draper Fisher Intern Rape Investigation; The Famous
Gay Tech CEO’s Who Have “Cover
Wives” Revelations; The Sergey Brin 3 Way Sex Romp With His YOUTUBE
Glasses Staff; and hundreds more need to be publicly discussed and
analyzed.
25) Upon legal receipt of removal demands from competitors and their
lawyers, YOUTUBE refused, in writing, to remove the attacks in order to
damage competitors maximally. Public support needs to be expanded to sue
YOUTUBE for refusing to cease attacks upon demand.
26) YOUTUBE engages in DNS, web pointing, down-ranking and search results
targeting in order to damage the Internet operation of competitors
web-sites and press releases. This must be reported to FTC and SEC as
felony abuse of public rights.
27) YOUTUBE’s competitors hired IT experts to do a multi-year sting and IT
analysis investigation, involving the setting of hundreds of “trap
servers” around the world, to prove, over a five+ year period, that
YOUTUBE was manipulating search results in order to damage some parties
and falsely enhance others, who were YOUTUBE's covert partners. Other
parties, including universities, research groups, the European Union, The
Government of China, The Government of Russia and other parties, have now
emulated and proven these results showing definitive proof of YOUTUBE's
malicious manipulation of the Internet in order to damage it's competitors
and promote it's friends while also damaging it's friend's competitors.
YOUTUBE must be sued for these crimes. Sue each YOUTUBE Executive and VC,
individually, one at a time, in Small Claims Court!
28) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider Gawker Media.
29) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider Steve Spinner.
30) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider Wilson Sonsini.
31) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider Steven Chu.
32) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider and founding investor: In-Q-Tel.
33) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider John Doerr.
34) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider Vinod Khosla.
35) Track and publicly expose YOUTUBE’s financial, stock market,
management, marketing, and personal relationship with attack services
provider New America Foundation.
36) YOUTUBE sought to “Cheat Rather Than Compete” against competitor’s
products, which have now been proven, by industry documentation, to have
been superior to YOUTUBE's. Expose YOUTUBE as a business cheater.
37) In light of the accruing charges and evidence, YOUTUBE was forced to
break-up it's main operation, changing it's name from: “YOUTUBE” to
“Alphabet”, in order to attempt to mitigate it's damages in this, and
other pending cases, by creating a false-front structure whereby YOUTUBE
attempt to hide their tax and legal liability obligations by, on paper,
reducing the operation into smaller parts. Expose YOUTUBE’s sham corporate
structure and shell companies and recognize the entire operation, and each
and every part, and owner, as being liable for competitors damages.
38) YOUTUBE copied dozens of competitors products, which the federal
patent office had issued patents and secured files on as being first
developed by others, years before any interest in, or development by
competitors. YOUTUBE either gave away the copied products, in order to
terminate competitor's revenue opportunities, or used billions of dollars
of “unjust rewards” secured, according to the U.S. Treasury, from
ill-gotten gains via contract manipulations and illegitimate tax loss
write-offs and payola tax waivers, to flood competitor's out of the market
and order financing blacklists to be created by their investors. The New
York Times article on Larry Page proves him to be a patent thief.
YOUTUBE’s patent attorney runs the U.S. Patent Office. Demand that
YOUTUBE's shill: Michelle Lee from the U.S. Patent Office be investigated
and that a public fund be established by Congress to help small inventors
who are attacked and blockaded by YOUTUBE.
39) YOUTUBE engaged in additional malicious harassment using retained
writers who did not disclose their “shill”, “meat puppet”, “Troll” and
“Click-Farm” media attack services function for YOUTUBE. Dox and Expose
the media shills that YOUTUBE hires.
40) YOUTUBE engaged in other malicious activities, against competitors,
disclosed to competitors by whistle-blowers and ex-employees of YOUTUBE
which are documented in YOUTUBE electronic communications. The NSA, CIA,
DIA, FBI and Congress have all of YOUTUBEs emails since 2006. Demand
public revelation of those emails.
41) Larry Page, Eric Schmidt, Ann Wojcicki and Sergey Brin did not build
the first YOUTUBE, they stole the technology from others. Competitors can
prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports
already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a
Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
42) YOUTUBE, YouTube, Alphabet, Jigsaw, In-Q-Tel, and all of their various
front organizations, are controlled by the same people with the same
bizarre agenda. Competitors can prove it in court! News reports,
Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand an end
to the cover-ups with letters to Congress. Demand a public inquiry into
these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
43) YOUTUBE, and a company called Kleiner Perkins, have a campaign payola
deal with White House executives. This deal trades search engine rigging
for Cleantech “green money” handouts ordered up by White House staff from
various state and federal agencies. Competitors can prove it in court!
News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it.
Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
44) YOUTUBE has a contracted relationship with rogue groups, like In-
Q-Tel, Media Matters and New America Foundation; who use U.S. treasury
funds to attack competitors. competitors can prove it in court! News
reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it.
Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
45) While it is well known that the CIA finances YOUTUBE it is unclear if
YOUTUBE works for the CIA or the CIA works for YOUTUBE. Demand a public
inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate
these charges.
46) YOUTUBE staged a program to give “free” YOUTUBE computers and software
to children in order to indoctrinate them when they are young like
McDonalds does by putting playgrounds at all of the McDonalds. YOUTUBE’s
child propaganda effort copied the CIA’s South American indoctrination
program to a T. Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a
Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
47) YOUTUBE has paid money to Gawker Media and Gawker Media has paid money
to YOUTUBE for smear campaigns to help Obama and Debbie Wasserman. Members
of the public can prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and law
enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these
charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
48) YOUTUBE and Gawker Media have a series of quid-pro-quo relationships
which provide for the mutual deployment of character assassinations of
their business and political enemies. Competitors can prove it in court!
News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it.
Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
49) YOUTUBE has placed over 400 of YOUTUBE’s staff inside of the U.S.
Government and the California State Government. competitors can prove it
in court! News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already
prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal
Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
50) YOUTUBE’s lawyer, and other YOUTUBE associates, work in and control
the U.S. Patent Office for the protection of YOUTUBE patent territory.
competitors can prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and law
enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these
charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
51) YOUTUBE has always had, and today fully has, total control over the
text, links, results, adjacent results and all positioning of each and
every YOUTUBE search result and Mnemonic impression and YOUTUBE
selectively adjusts those results in order to harm competitors and
political adversaries and hype investor friends and partners like Elon
Musk. YOUTUBE lied to government regulators, in multiple nations, when
YOUTUBE stated that executives had no control over YOUTUBE results.
competitors can prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and law
enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these
charges. Demand a Federal
Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
52) Competitors, competitors lawyers and others sent hundreds of
communications to YOUTUBE asking YOUTUBE to stop harassing, cyber-stalking
and search engine locking attacks against competitor's which YOUTUBE
refused to comply with and in fact, increased the attacks mentioned
herein. competitors can prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and
law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into
these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
53) YOUTUBE receives operational orders from White House campaign
financiers. competitors can prove it in court! News reports, Congressional
and law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into
these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
54) YOUTUBE stated on the record that it’s search results change every few
hours yet YOUTUBE locked each attack on competitors on the same top lines
of the front page of YOUTUBE, around the globe,for over five years without
any shift in placement. competitors can prove it in court! News reports,
Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a
public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
55) YOUTUBE meets the legal definition as an organized crime
RICO-violation illicit “Cartel”. competitors can prove it in court! News
reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it.
Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
56) YOUTUBE lies about how many women and blacks it hires. Expose this
fact.
57) YOUTUBE bribes politicians to get YOUTUBE’s owned politicians to harm
YOUTUBE’s competitors. Competitors can prove it in court! News reports,
Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a
public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
58) Competitors placed thousands of server sensors in different ISP’s in
different locations around the entire internet for extended periods of
time in order to catch YOUTUBE rigging the internet and did, in fact,
catch YOUTUBE rigging the internet. Others have emulated these tests and
also caught YOUTUBE rigging internet results. competitors can prove it in
court! News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already
prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal
Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
59) YOUTUBE rigs the internet to hide misdeeds and company failures by
Elon Musk while, concurrently, pumping up and hyping cover stories to hide
those misdeeds because Larry Page and Elon Musk are best boyfriends and
YOUTUBE owns parts of Tesla and Tesla battery suppliers. Competitors can
prove it in court! News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports
already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a
Federal Prosecutor toinvestigate these charges.
60) Email this document to anybody in your contact manager that has a
@Gmail address. Send this to everyone you discover with a @Gmail address
so you can save them from getting “data-raped and privacy abused” by
YOUTUBE.
61) YOUTUBE has received billions and billions of U.S. Treasury money that
were exclusively provided to YOUTUBE. competitors can prove it in court!
News reports, Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it.
Demand a public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
62) YOUTUBE pumps marketing hype for stock market pump-and-dumps which
inure exclusively to YOUTUBE investors and against YOUTUBE enemies.
competitors can prove it in court! News reports,Congressional and law
enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a public inquiry into these
charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to investigate these charges.
63) YOUTUBE sabotaged and circumvented competitor's government funding and
rerouted it to YOUTUBE. competitors can prove it in court! News reports,
Congressional and law enforcement reports already prove it. Demand a
public inquiry into these charges. Demand a Federal Prosecutor to
investigate these charges.
64) Post this phrase everywhere you can: “FRIENDS DON’T LET FRIENDS USE
YOUTUBE”
65) Write every trade office of every nation on Earth and show them this
document and tell them that “...most people hate YOUTUBE” and to “...not
do business with YOUTUBE or their citizens will look upon them unkindly.”
66) Make certain that everyone in the world knows that: Hidden Voice
Commands Could Hijack Your Phone from up to 10 feet away, or via embedded
Youtube audio. (vocativ.com) and that nobody should use YOUTUBE’s YouTube.
67) YOUTUBE uses cheap overseas labor to keep Americans out of work. Sue
YOUTUBE and file charges with equal opportunity and job rights
organizations if YOUTUBE discriminates against you because you are a U.S.
Citizen. Post notices on all Asian blogs about what a lying, abusive,
crappy employer YOUTUBE is.
68) Put a President like Donald Trump in the White House.
69) Have Donald Trump and Congress make laws that stop YOUTUBE from doing
YOUTUBE’s crimes and domestic business abuses.
70) Expose YOUTUBE’s entire DNS ring to every global interdiction team
that can provide counter-measures to YOUTUBE’s illegal control of
information.
71) Find everyone that YOUTUBE has abused and provide them with a free,
pre-written, in-pro-per lawsuit against YOUTUBE.
72) Hire private a public investigators to hunt down all of YOUTUBE’s
staff and VC’s illegal sex trafficking operations: ie: Michael Goguen,
Forrest Hayes, John Doerr, Sergy Brin, etc. (There are hundreds) and help
the victims sue those abusers.
73) Shut down every abuse of domestic workers by filing lawsuits against
YOUTUBE’s abuse of Women, Blacks, Young Asain boys, interns and other
groups.
74) Lobby The White House for Executive Orders that make YOUTUBE stop
running an illicit Cartel.
75) Sue each YOUTUBE manager, director, owner and VC in small claims court
individually for the maximum amount that the small claims court allows.
Each voter should sue each executive of YOUTUBE and get their $5000.00,
$10,000.00, etc. payments from YOUTUBE for YOUTUBE’s damages to them on a
personal basis.
76) Do not FOR EVEN ONE SECOND let YOUTUBE PR shills spin the hype that
“Those were the previous people at YOUTUBE that did all of those bad
things, we are all new and shiny and non-Evil” That is their lie! The
people at YOUTUBE have gotten MORE evil!
77) Post, point to, link to and publicize the Corbett Report videos about
YOUTUBE at:
https://www.corbettreport.com/ with such links as:
https://www.corbettreport.com/just-be-evil-
the-unauthorized-history-of-YOUTUBE/
78) Call out each member of the U.S. Congress for being such blind idiots
and putting up with the YOUTUBE executives lies and "delay,and defer"
tactics in public hearings. It is "beyond obvious" that YOUTUBE is a
cult-like cartel of extremist manipulators. If Congressional leaders are
too stupid to understand how subliminal messages and server-based mass
behavior manipulation works then they should not be in office. YOUTUBE has
no intention of "doing a better job". Demand the arrest of YOUTUBE
executives.
MORE COURT-READY EVIDENCE AND PROOF:
https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/your-smart-light-can-tell-amazon-and-YOUTUBE-when-you-go-to-bed
https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/12/drudge-silicon-valley/
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/03/07/leaked-audio-YOUTUBE-discusses-steering-the-conservative-movement/
NOTE: YOUTUBE hides this site from internet searches and we have the
proof. Help us sue YOUTUBE for anti-trust and human rights violations.