EPSTEIN ON US ELECTIONS
Google’s biased search algorithm actually flipped
seats in the 2018 US midterm elections, according to a researcher who found the
search engine’s “dramatically biased” results could have shifted over 78
million votes to Democrats. Published time: 25
Mar, 2019
“Upwards
of 25 percent of the national elections in the world are being decided without
people’s knowledge by Google’s search algorithm,” senior research psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein of the
American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology told RT, calling the
search engine the “deciding factor” in close races.
Listen VIDEO:
Epstein, who received his PhD in psychology from Harvard
University and is the former editor-in-chief of
Psychology Today, said that his methodology was thorough and meticulous.
Epstein’s study of three 2018 California House races found Google
played the deciding role in flipping those Republican-held seats to the Democrats,
influencing millions of undecided voters by controlling what they saw when they
searched 500 election-related terms. Google’s results showed a “significant liberal
bias,” unlike Bing’s or Yahoo’s – and
with 90 percent of the search engine’s market share in the US, that bias is
enormously influential.
Search results favoring one side of an issue can influence anywhere
from 20 to 80 percent of undecided voters, depending on the issue and
demographic group, Epstein said. He has spent six years investigating the role
of what he calls the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME) in swaying public
opinion, more recently focusing on the political ramifications by looking at
various countries’ elections.
“People trust algorithmic output. They trust
Google. They think because it’s generated by a computer, they don’t see the
human hand - they think it’s impartial and objective and, because of that,
their opinions change,” Epstein said.
====
ANEXO :
GOOGLE DENIES IT MANIPULATES
SEARCH RANKINGS
While Google denies it manipulates search
rankings to manipulate political sentiment or makes election-specific tweaks, Epstein says their response is disingenuous – he never
claimed they re-ranked results, merely that the results
they displayed were biased.
Despite denials, Google has already faced hefty government fines for
manipulating search results. In 2017, the
European Union imposed a €2.4 billion ($2.7 billion)
fine on the tech giant for purportedly tailoring search results to favor its
own comparison shopping service.
Google was hit with a $21.1 million fine a
year later – this time in India, where the company was accused of
directing web users who were searching for flights to its own flight search
page – depriving other businesses of gaining a foothold
in the market.
====
RELATED 1:
Real clear politics
ADAM
SCHIFF: THERE IS STILL
"SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION,"
Do Not Think
You Can Bury This Report
Posted By Tim Hains
On Date March 24, 2019
On Date March 24, 2019
Rep. Adam Schiff, the chair of the House
Intelligence Committee, told ABC's "This Week" host George
Stephanopoulos on Sunday that just because special counsel Robert Mueller does
not plan to issue any more indictments does not mean his report does not
include evidence of crimes”. Schiff said that the
American people should wait to draw conclusions from the report until it's made
public, and said that the underlying evidence
must be provided to Congress.
"There's a difference between compelling evidence of collusion and whether the special counsel concludes that he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the criminal charge of conspiracy," Schiff explained. "Do not think you can bury this report. Do not think you can bury the evidence in secret by briefing eight people in Congress and say we have discharged our responsibility. That's not going to cut it."
"There's a difference between compelling evidence of collusion and whether the special counsel concludes that he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the criminal charge of conspiracy," Schiff explained. "Do not think you can bury this report. Do not think you can bury the evidence in secret by briefing eight people in Congress and say we have discharged our responsibility. That's not going to cut it."
Stephanopoulos asked: "You told the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday if
there is no bombshell, there is no impeachment. Does no
new indictments qualify as no bombshell?"
"Not necessarily," Schiff replied. "Because again, George, as you pointed out, they can't indict the president. That's the policy. And therefore there could be overwhelming evidence on the obstruction issue. And I don't know that that's the case, but if this were overwhelming evidence of criminality on the president's part, then the Congress would need to consider that remedy."
READ THE Transcript via ABC News, in the source below:
"Not necessarily," Schiff replied. "Because again, George, as you pointed out, they can't indict the president. That's the policy. And therefore there could be overwhelming evidence on the obstruction issue. And I don't know that that's the case, but if this were overwhelming evidence of criminality on the president's part, then the Congress would need to consider that remedy."
READ THE Transcript via ABC News, in the source below:
….
====
RELATED 2:
New
Clinton Emails Shed Light On Private Server And Communications
[[
SO: Nada garantiza que lo dicho por quienes están en el
poder sea la verdad. Aun después de haber concluido su mandato.. pueden seguir
violando leyes y pagando para ocultar la verdad. Es la triste realidad de
nuestra América. Por eso no voy a votar por Dems & Reps.. votaré por socialistas para asegurar
el cambio radical. Y si no se unen en un FRENTE POPULAR.. la ABSTENCIÓN será la SOLUCIÓN. ]]
----
----
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario