- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Google does not like TigerDroppings - blacklists it!
Posted on 8/14/19 at 12:56 pm to sacrathetic
Posted on 8/14/19 at 12:56 pm to sacrathetic
The last 2 minutes of that video (last minute of the interview portion) was clearly scripted. "Project Veritas is the only organization with integrity, the times and the post stab people in the back, etc"
And of the supposed 1k pages of docs, the one page they chose to feature in the video is really, really tame and not damning in any way. This looks like a big pile of nothing so far. Anyone got cliffs of the worst of the doc dump?
And of the supposed 1k pages of docs, the one page they chose to feature in the video is really, really tame and not damning in any way. This looks like a big pile of nothing so far. Anyone got cliffs of the worst of the doc dump?
Posted on 8/14/19 at 12:57 pm to TH03
quote:thank you for your service in this thread.
TH03
Posted on 8/14/19 at 12:59 pm to PowerTool
quote:
Who?
Kibbles. For some reason, a website interviewed her. In the interview she talked about how she has been the victim of cyber bullying by this website.
Found the article: Here's How to Win the Civil Rights Social Justice War
The article has so much
Posted on 8/14/19 at 12:59 pm to dfintlyHmmrd
quote:I get all my news here. Breaking info is on TD way before the regular news picks it up
this isnt really a news site
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:00 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Okay link them
I'll go ahead and give you a few, but you must be honest when I ask if you a) have never heard of this stuff until now, and b) ever really tried to look into it.
This guy recently testified before congress
LINK
Google claims they never did any of the things discussed here, so I'll let you decide whether you believe that, and more importantly, whether you think the discussion was totally worthless since they also claim their systems don't allow manipulation.
LINK
Now explain to me the logic of believing an industry staffed overwhelmingly with people of a particular political belief system, with the means to do manipulate information, wouldn't do so to shift the zeitgeist in their preferred direction. You'll have to argue against human nature and the inescapable nature of unconscious or implicit bias.
There are also plenty of anecdotal examples daily of this stuff, if you're into anecdotes. I'll let you look for those if you want.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:01 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
I get all my news here. Breaking info is on TD way before the regular news picks it up
Where do you think TD gets it?
News doesn't break here. It's brought here from Twitter or from news site.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:02 pm to GRTiger
nm
This post was edited on 5/21/20 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:03 pm to Pilot Tiger
No a place like Democratic Underground is a certified loony bin. People that think boys have penises and girls have vaginas aren’t crazy, they are normal.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:03 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:and yet every left leaning website in the world that propagated the Russia fairy tale, which you believed and still believe to this day, is not listed.
demonstrably false conspiracy theories such as pizzagate
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:09 pm to TH03
quote:maybe but most news sites are just regurgitating what they learned from another source.
News doesn't break here. It's brought here from Twitter or from news site.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:10 pm to Chicken
Will, it's gotta start somewhere
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:11 pm to Chicken
a lot of local news and scoops break there though
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:11 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Project Veritas
Why didn't I see that when I first clicked on this thread instead of reading all of the replies? Granted, there were some hard truths pointed out in this thread but, still, anything from Project Veritas should be taken with a grain of salt. James O'Keefe, the site's founder, is a grade A piece of shite liar.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:13 pm to Chicken
Yes usually a tweet or Reuters or such. My point is that the lovely posters here aren't the ones breaking that. They're bringing it from that other source.
It's "breaking" here shortly after it's tweeted out and while actual news services are in the process of confirming the story before they run it. None of us have to do that before we post here, which can lead to misinformation or confusion especially in developing stories.
It's "breaking" here shortly after it's tweeted out and while actual news services are in the process of confirming the story before they run it. None of us have to do that before we post here, which can lead to misinformation or confusion especially in developing stories.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:15 pm to sacrathetic
What's ironic about the entire exercise of humoring Drac's bad faith discussion strategy by providing the links is how hard it was to locate these examples on Google. I had to know the name of the researcher and the specific story about the internal e-mails to get them in a search result.
Simply Googling "examples of Google/Facebook/Twitter bias" only returns articles about how they aren't biased. Imagine that.
Simply Googling "examples of Google/Facebook/Twitter bias" only returns articles about how they aren't biased. Imagine that.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:17 pm to mmmmmbeeer
quote:It's kind of like taking Dinesh D'Souza serious as a "historian".
Why didn't I see that when I first clicked on this thread instead of reading all of the replies? Granted, there were some hard truths pointed out in this thread but, still, anything from Project Veritas should be taken with a grain of salt. James O'Keefe, the site's founder, is a grade A piece of shite liar.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:21 pm to Logician
quote:Are you talking about the "russia fairy tale" for which dozens of people are facing charges?
and yet every left leaning website in the world that propagated the Russia fairy tale, which you believed and still believe to this day, is not listed.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:25 pm to GRTiger
quote:Well it worked. He's never coming back to the thread. When he says "link?", that's usually his last comment in the thread. It's his white flag. Once you can prove him wrong, poof.
What's ironic about the entire exercise of humoring Drac's bad faith discussion strategy by providing the links is how hard it was to locate these examples on Google. I had to know the name of the researcher and the specific story about the internal e-mails to get them in a search result.
Simply Googling "examples of Google/Facebook/Twitter bias" only returns articles about how they aren't biased. Imagine that.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:25 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:
The OT is very much anti-SJW / Progressive BS.
Yes, but that just shows clear, correct thinking. On almost every subject.
Posted on 8/14/19 at 1:27 pm to GRTiger
I’ll address these in reverse:
These examples that may or may not stem from anything political. For example a YouTube personality may be demonetized or a Twitter user banned not because of their political beliefs but their behavior. That is NOT targeting conservatives yet is cited as such regularly.
I’m sure on an individual basis this has happened, and I’m not defending that, but the idea that as a company Google or whoever is thinking up ways to attack conservative thought just is not born out in any kind of meaningful way, yet the right portrays them as one of their boogeymen to keep people like you fearful.
Your second link was behind a paywall so I couldn’t read the whole thing, but was published by WSJ, a right wing media source looking to fan the flames of fear as discussed. Notice the (public portion) simply lists “employees”. How many employees? Which employees? What policies does Google have in place to address partisanship in its algorithms? It could have been 2 janitors for all we know and WSJ, again being a right wing media outlet, has an interest in sensationalizing something like this.
The first link you gave was a lot more interesting.
I don’t think the discussion is worthless, and this article at least has some actual peer reviewed data behind it. But as the article itself says, progressive groups have also been targeted so it’s really not accurate to say it’s so much anti-conservatives than it is pro-establishment.
Further, much of the article talks about what Google “can” do and less about what it has done. Regardless I agree with Elizabeth Warren that, on a macro level, we should be having more serious conversations about the role big tech plays in all our lives. The issue I have is the right frequently distorting and lying not only about the focus of this issue but the effects. It’s just another victim play.
quote:
There are also plenty of anecdotal examples daily of this stuff
These examples that may or may not stem from anything political. For example a YouTube personality may be demonetized or a Twitter user banned not because of their political beliefs but their behavior. That is NOT targeting conservatives yet is cited as such regularly.
quote:
Now explain to me the logic of believing an industry staffed overwhelmingly with people of a particular political belief system, with the means to do manipulate information, wouldn't do so to shift the zeitgeist in their preferred direction.
I’m sure on an individual basis this has happened, and I’m not defending that, but the idea that as a company Google or whoever is thinking up ways to attack conservative thought just is not born out in any kind of meaningful way, yet the right portrays them as one of their boogeymen to keep people like you fearful.
Your second link was behind a paywall so I couldn’t read the whole thing, but was published by WSJ, a right wing media source looking to fan the flames of fear as discussed. Notice the (public portion) simply lists “employees”. How many employees? Which employees? What policies does Google have in place to address partisanship in its algorithms? It could have been 2 janitors for all we know and WSJ, again being a right wing media outlet, has an interest in sensationalizing something like this.
The first link you gave was a lot more interesting.
quote:
Google claims they never did any of the things discussed here, so I'll let you decide whether you believe that, and more importantly, whether you think the discussion was totally worthless since they also claim their systems don't allow manipulation.
I don’t think the discussion is worthless, and this article at least has some actual peer reviewed data behind it. But as the article itself says, progressive groups have also been targeted so it’s really not accurate to say it’s so much anti-conservatives than it is pro-establishment.
Further, much of the article talks about what Google “can” do and less about what it has done. Regardless I agree with Elizabeth Warren that, on a macro level, we should be having more serious conversations about the role big tech plays in all our lives. The issue I have is the right frequently distorting and lying not only about the focus of this issue but the effects. It’s just another victim play.
This post was edited on 8/14/19 at 1:46 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News