With the arrival of the global Corvid pandemic the lies of Big Tech and the restriction of free speech has accelerated. As readers will no doubt be aware, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube recently took the unprecedented steps of kicking a U.S. President off all their social media platforms. 

Many have spoken out against this violation of free speech and the precedence it sets for the future.

Even Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey said that he was uneasy about his platform’s decision to ban former U.S President Donald Trump.

On January 13, 2021 he tweeted :

“Having to take these actions fragments the public conversation. They divide us. They limit the potential for clarification, redemption, and learning. And it sets a precedent which I feel is dangerous”

Regardless of one’s political affiliations, the move highlights the immense control that Big Tech corporations now have over online information and how it can be yielded to support various hidden agendas. 

Former Facebook Exec @chamath said recently:

“I think we have created tools that are ripping apart the social fabric of how society works. The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops we’ve created are destroying how society works. No civil discourse, misinformation. You are being programmed.”

The following article takes an in-depth look at just one of these platforms – Google.

Efforts to Combat ‘Fake News’ Ramped Up After Election.

After Donald Trump won the election in 2016 a Big Tech insider and former senior software engineer at Google (and YouTube) exposed what was said when the company held an all-hands meeting. 

According to Zach Vorhies Google’s CFO broke down in tears over the election results, while founder Sergey Brin said he was personally offended by them.

In short, the bosses at Google were devastated by Trump’s unexpected victory.

Vorhies said,

“The company took a hard left and abandoned liberal principles and went toward authoritarian management of products and services.”

It didn’t take long before Vorhies realised that Google were manipulating public opinion and the entire political landscape. He resigned so that he could warn the public how Google were attempting a coup of the U.S President.

Vorhies had also discovered that Google had re-defined fake news to include events that had actually happened!

Vorhies also discovered that Google had created an artificial intelligence system which classified all available data on the Google Search engine.

He explained the reason that Google wanted to classify all this data was so they could use an artificial intelligence system in order to re-rank the ENTIRE INTERNET – in accordance with Google’s corporate cultural values of course.

In June 2019, Zach Vorhies resigned from Google. He took with him 950+ pages of Google internal documents regarding Google’s extensive censorship system. He delivered them to the Department of Justice and Project Veritas. These documents were ultimately printed on his website and the Project Veritas website.

How Are Google Altering Reality?

Yes, that’s right readers – Google are manipulating search results in order to reflect their own views and to influence social behaviour.

Naturally Google have denied any of this is happening. 

So how are Google doing this?

According to Vorhies: MLF (ML Fairness) & Project Purple Rain is how.

They’re doing what?

Machine Learning is a type of artificial intelligence – something Google have dubbed Machine Learning Fairness, or ML Fairness.

Vorhies said:

“As you imagine, they’re not going to call their censorship regime something bad. They’re going to call it something like fairness. So, if you’re against that, you’re against fairness. It’s a euphemism.

I also discovered that under the umbrella project, ‘ML Fairness,’ there were subcomponents like ‘Project Purple Rain,’ which is a 24-hour response team that is monitoring the internet.

Things got political in June 2017 when Google deleted ‘covfefe’ (which translates into I will stand up) out of it’s Arabic translation dictionary in order to make a Trump tweet become nonsense.

This would have been benign if it weren’t for the coincidence of the main stream media attempting to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from the presidency, a week later. 

This is when Zach Vorhies became suspicious that Google were engaging in a seditious conspiracy to remove the President of the United States.

Zach decided that his document cache should be given to the appropriate law enforcement agencies (Department of Justice) in order to disclose this seditious activity. He also wanted the public know the full extent of Google’s information control tactics.

‘Algorithmic Unfairness’ – The Narrative of Reality.

Recently the amazing investigative journalist, Sharyl Attkisson has taken on Google and questioned it’s manipulation of pretty much all the information we now get to see in their internet search results.

Attkisson reported how Susan Wojcicki, the CEO of Google owned YouTube, has made pushing down “fake news and increasing authoritative news” sound like a good thing.

However when Vorhies looked at Google’s design documents, the fake news they were actually censoring wasn’t really fake new at all. 

“I was apolitical, but I started to think, is this really fake news? Why are they defining it as fake news – in order to justify censorship? This is part of Google’s efforts at social reconstruction to correct algorithmic unfairness, which could be any algorithm that reinforces existing stereotypes”.

Could objective reality be algorithmically unfair? Google says it could.

Vorhies used the example of doing a Google search for CEOs. The search returned images of mostly men. Although this is true in reality, could it be considered algorithmically unfair? According to Google, it justifies intervention in order to fix it”.

Vorhies also uses the example of Google’s autofill search recommendations that pop up if you do a Google search.

Autofill is what happens when you start typing a search query into a search engine and algorithms kick in to offer suggestions to complete your search.

EG: If you type “men can,” you may get autofill recommendations such as “men can lactate” and “men can get pregnant,” or “women can produce sperm”. These subjects represent an inversion of stereotypes and a reversal of the gender roles given to humanity by Mother Nature. (See: Bills Gates and the Eugenics Movement )

Google would like us to believe that the autofill recommendations are what most people are searching for. They have even stated that the autofill suggestions are generated by a collection of user data.

That’s not true – at least not anymore.

As Vorhies told Sharyl Attkisson during a 2019 interview: 

“This story about the autofill first got disclosed by Dr. Robert Epstein, who is a Harvard-trained psychologist and former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today. What he said was that Google had flipped a bunch of votes for Hillary using this autosuggest feature. I’ve investigated this claim. I’ve verified it to be true … It turns out that a lot of the popular searches were being suppressed.

The most significant thing about this feature is the fact that you don’t expect to have this part of your online experience to be hatched for political reasons. You think that this is legitimately what other people are searching for. As a result, you don’t have your filters on. Your brain puts on these filters when it starts to evaluate politically charged information. 

When you read a newspaper article, you may be thinking to yourself, ‘This may be true, this may not.’ You’re skeptical. But when you’re typing into a search, you don’t think that because you don’t think that’s rigged, so whatever bias is inherent in that search result slips through and goes directly into your subconscious. This is what Epstein was explaining.”

Vorhies said his tipping point came when the chief executive officer of Alphabet Inc (and its subsidiaries Google and YouTube), Sundar Pichai, told Congress that the company doesn’t filter results based on political bias.

Pichai also told Congress that there were no websites that Google had secretly blacklisted.

“That’s when I saw that Sundar Pichai was lying to Congress by saying that they don’t use blacklists.”

Proof of Lies: Here is a file called “news black list site for Google now.” According to Vorhies, this document is the “black list,” which restricts certain websites from appearing on news feeds for an Android Google product.

Big Tech Fact-Checking Ramped Up

The sudden onslaught of “fact-checking” organisations is another form of censorship which is now interfering with free speech and the viewing of online information which conflicts with the official agenda.

Fact-checking now represents a multimillion-dollar industry that stands to benefit certain interests.

Citing data from Duke University Reporters’ Lab, Attkisson reported:

“Fact check groups have quadrupled in number over five years from 44 to 195.

Facebook and Google are major funders of news organisations and fact check efforts, spending hundreds of millions of dollars. The problem with labeling something as “false and misleading information” is the damage that occurs if said information is not actually false or misleading.

When a banner pops up on social media warning readers that the content is false, most people will not click through.” 

The Poynter Institute is one of Facebook’s fact-checking partners. They describe themselves as a “global leader in journalism” and apparently believe that a free press is essential.

However, once the Poynter Institute flag a Facebook post as false they know that its reach is decreased by an average of 80%.

Furthermore, Facebook’s so called trusted fact-checking partners are compromised with various conflicts of interest. All of them financial.

So much so that in August 2019 the Children’s Health Defense movement led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sued Facebook, it’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg and three of its fact-checking partners – Science Feedback, Poynter Institute and PolitiFact.

In part they alleged that these so called ‘fact-checkers’ were not independent nor were they fact-based, even though they describe themselves as so. You can read the full details of the lawsuit here

Fact Checkers Receive Millions From Political Groups

PolitiFact is a branch of the Poynter Institute which claim that the fact-checking of journalism is at it’s heart.

According to Attkisson, PolitiFact has received millions from groups like the WEF who are looking to install the Great Reset, count immigrants in the U.S. census and change voting processes for presidential elections from the existing electoral system to one of a popular vote. 

PolitiFact has also received $900,000 from the Democracy Fund, which is a major funder of anti-Trump political efforts. Between them George Sorrus’s left-leaning Open Society Foundation and the Omidyar Network gave the Poynter Institute $1.3 million in order to help them develop their international fact-checking network.

Science Feedback is a French organisation who claim to verify the credibility of any influential science claims made in the media.

However in 2019 Science Feedback (which often sides with the vaccine industry) was used to discredit a documentary which tied the coronavirus to a lab in Wuhan, China. However the Science Feedback’s source was discovered to be a U.S. scientist who actually worked at the Wuhan lab.

Attkisson also reported how fact-checking/censorship was massively increased during the final weeks of the 2020 presidential campaign. Twitter were censoring and/or fact-check labelling most of Donald Trump’s tweets and when the New York Post published an exposé on Joe Biden’s son all tweets on the subject were banned altogether.

After the election, Google run YouTube banned any videos which disputed Jo Biden’s victory.

So this begs the question of why is it wrong that these companies try to keep harmful information or conspiracy theories from reaching people? 

As Vorhies said,

“The problem is that they’re a monopoly. And if they’re going to put their finger on the public narrative, that’s going to be meddling in the election.”

So, What Can We Do?

Efforts to shut down public discussions and the information we get to see now are in full force.

So, what can we do?

Sir Francis Bacon was the first to state that Knowledge is Power so let us look beyond the fact-checker’s labels and Google’s canned search results in our quest for truth.

There are alternatives for most if not all of Google products, and by using these alternative platforms, we can help them grow…. and that will mean Google becomes less and less relevant.

Here’s Zac being interviewed….

Listen to the lyrics of Liar by the Sex Pistols (above ) the clues are there for all to see.

Thank-you for reading.

Author: Anonymous