Google and The Deep State

Post Reply
BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Google and The Deep State

Post by BigEyeTenor » Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:13 am

Article from Russia Today.

Google's valuation today makes it the biggest company in the entire USA economy.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/j ... ot/ri17611
Assange: ‘Google is Not What it Seems’, They ‘Do Things the CIA Cannot’
Claire Bernish Subscribe to Claire Bernish(The Free Thought Project) Subscribe to The Free Thought ProjectSat, Nov 19 | 18,492 65


Julian Assange cautioned all of us a while back, in the vein of revelations similar to those provided by Edward Snowden, that Google — the insidious search engine with a reputation for powering humanity’s research — plays the dark hand role in furthering U.S. imperialism and foreign policy agendas.

Now, as the Wikileaks founder faces days of questioning by a Swedish special prosecutor over rape allegations inside his Ecuadorian Embassy haven in London today — and particularly in wake of the presidential election — Assange’s warning Google “is not what it seems” must be revisited.

Under intense scrutiny by the U.S. State Department for several controversial Wikileaks’ publications of leaked documents in 2011, Assange first met Google Executive Chairman, then-CEO, Eric Schmidt, who approached the political refugee under the premise of a new book. Schmidt, whose worth Forbes estimates exceeds $11 billion, partnered with Council on Foreign Relations and State Department veteran, Jared Cohen, for the work, tentatively titledThe Empire of the Mind — and asked Assange for an interview.

Later acknowledging naïvte in agreeing to meet the pair of tech heavyweights, Assange found afterward how enmeshed in and integral to U.S. global agendas Schmidt and Cohen had become.


In fact, both have exhibited quite the fascination with technology’s role in burgeoning revolutions — including, but not-at-all limited to, the Arab Spring. Schmidt created a position for Cohen in 2009, originally called Google Ideas, now Google Jigsaw, and the two began weaving the company’s importance to the United States into narratives in articles, political donations, and through Cohen’s former roles at the State Department.

That same year, Schmidt and Cohen co-authored an article for the CFR journal Foreign Affairs, which, seven years hence, appears a rather prescient discussion of Google’s self-importance in governmental affairs. Under the subheading “COALITIONS OF THE CONNECTED,” they wrote [all emphasis added]:

“In an era when the power of the individual and the group grows daily, those governments that ride the technological wave will clearly be best positioned to assert their influence and bring others into their orbits. And those that do not will find themselves at odds with their citizens.

“Democratic states that have built coalitions of their militaries have the capacity to do the same with their connection technologies. […] they offer a new way to exercise the duty to protect citizens around the world who are abused by their governments or barred from voicing their opinions.”

Perhaps appearing laudable on its surface — at least to some degree — as Assange pointed out, there is a self-mischaracterization by the American and other Western governments and inaccurately-monikered ‘non-governmental organizations’ that their interests in other nations’ affairs are innately good.

Report Ad
This cult of government and non-government insiders have a firm belief their goals should be the unassailable, unquestionable motivator for American imperialism — whatever the U.S. thinks best as a “benevolent superpower,” so should the rest of the ‘non-evil’ world.

“They will tell you that open-mindedness is a virtue, but all perspectives that challenge the exceptionalist drive at the heart of American foreign policy will remain invisible to them,” Assange wrote in When Google Met Wikileaks. “This is the impenetrable banality of ‘don’t be evil.’ They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem.”

Cohen, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the notorious Council on Foreign Relations, lists his expertise in “terrorism; radicalization; impact of connection technologies on 21st century statecraft; Iran,” and has worked for both Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton at the Department of State. Fortune, calling Cohen a “fascinating fellow,” noted that, in his bookChildren of Jihad, the young diplomat and technology enthusiast “advocates for the use of technology for social upheaval in the Middle East and elsewhere.”

Under the auspices of discussing technological aspects at Wikileaks’ disposal for the upcoming book, Schmidt; Cohen; Lisa Shields, a CFR vice president at the time; and Scott Malcomson — who would shortly afterward be appointed Rice’s lead speech advisor for her role as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations — descended on Assange’s safe haven in Norfolk, outside London.

It wasn’t until weeks and months after this gathering Assange fully realized how closely Google operates in tandem with the government of the United States — and how perilous the innocent mask of its public intentions truly is in light of such cooperation.

Report Ad
Ironically enough, in Wikileaks’ publishing three years later of the Global Intelligence Files — internal emails from private security firm, Stratfor — Cohen’s and Google’s true depth of influence became strikingly apparent. Assange wrote:

“Cohen’s directorate appeared to cross over from public relations and ‘corporate responsibility’ work into active corporate intervention in foreign affairs at a level that is normally reserved for states. Jared Cohen could be wryly named Google’s ‘director of regime change.’ According to the emails, he was trying to plant his fingerprints on some of the major historical events in the contemporary Middle East. He could be placed in Egypt during the revolution, meeting with Wael Ghonim, the Google employee whose arrest and imprisonment hours later would make him a PR-friendly symbol of the uprising in the Western press. Meetings had been planned in Palestine and Turkey, both of which—claimed Stratfor emails—were killed by the senior Google leadership as too risky. Only a few months before he met with me, Cohen was planning a trip to the edge of Iran in Azerbaijan to ‘engage the Iranian communities closer to the border,’ as part of Google Ideas’ project on repressive societies.”

However, most significantly, Stratfor vice president for intelligence Fred Burton, also a former official with the State Department, wrote in one of those emails:

“Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do . . . [Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed. Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag.”

Of course, the massive company — its various facets now under the umbrella of Alphabet, Inc. — has never been fully absent government involvement. Research for what would become ultimately become Google had been undertaken by company founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in cooperation with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — the strictly secretive technological testing and planning arm for the Department of Defense.


Report Ad
Indeed Google’s continued coziness with the diplomacy, military, and intelligence wings of the United States government should not be, though perpetually are, ignored.

Political establishment bulldogs on both sides of the aisle and their cheerleader corporate media presstitutes will continue for months or years to debate the failed presidential bid of Hillary Clinton and the apparently-shocking rise and election of Donald Trump, but technology played a starring role in those events. Several reports last year cautioned Google’s algorithms could swing the election — and not only the American election, but national elections around the globe.

“We estimate, based on win margins in national elections around the world,” said Robert Epstein, a psychologist with the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and author of one of the studies, “that Google could determine the outcome of upwards of 25 percent of all national elections.”

Considering lines between the tech giant and the government have essentially been abandoned, this revelation puts power and influence into acute, if not terrifying, perspective.

Google’s ties with the Pentagon and intelligence communities never ceased. Revealed by a Freedom of Information Act request cited by Assange, Google founder Brin, together with Schmidt, corresponded casually by email with National Security Agency chief Gen. Keith Alexander in 2012, discussing a program called the “Enduring Society Framework.” Alexander wrote to Brin:

Report Ad
“Your insights as a key member of the Defense Industrial Base are valuable to ensure ESF’s efforts have measurable impact.”

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Industrial Base is “the worldwide industrial complex that enables research and development, as well as design, production, delivery, and maintenance of military weapons systems, subsystems, and components or parts, to meet U.S. military requirements .”

It also provides “products and services that are essential to mobilize, deploy, and sustain military operations.”

Although Schmidt and Cohen ultimately watered down their book title The Empire of the Mind into the more palatable and less blatantly imperialistic, The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations, and Business, its message amounted to self-congratulatory justification for broader foreign policy goals. Nefarious warmonger Henry Kissinger, for one, praised the work, which included telling lines by the Google execs, such as:

“What Lockheed Martin was to the twentieth century, technology and cyber-security companies will be to the twenty-first.”

So ubiquitous has Google become, its presence — like similarly U.S. government-connected Facebook — is nearly indispensable in the daily lives of hundreds of millions worldwide.

However well-known is the government intelligence framework in such platforms, it would be ill-advised to ignore the far darker Machiavellian aspects of private corporate technology’s intersection with global political agendas — and the force that coalition wields around the planet.

Whether or not the American establishment’s empire suffered a blow in the election of Donald Trump will be a debatable point for some time, but it’s a veritable guarantee its cogs — seeing themselves as the planet’s saviors — have planned in advance for just such an occasion.

“If the future of the internet is to be Google,” Assange noted, “that should be of serious concern to people all over the world—in Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa, the former Soviet Union, and even in Europe—for whom the internet embodies the promise of an alternative to US cultural, economic, and strategic hegemony.”

Empire will remain empire until its dying breath — particularly if it functions under the obstinate belief it, alone, can save the world. Julian Assange should be praised for the transparency and insight he and Wikileaks have readily given the world, instead of excoriated and blamed for faults which lie in the establishment framework — it is this political, intelligence, and military web deserving of a pointed finger.

BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Re: Google and The Deep State

Post by BigEyeTenor » Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:08 am

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/0 ... g-j27.html
New Google algorithm restricts access to left-wing, progressive web sites
By Andre Damon and Niles Niemuth
27 July 2017
In the three months since Internet monopoly Google announced plans to keep users from accessing “fake news,” the global traffic rankings of a broad range of left-wing, progressive, anti-war and democratic rights organizations have fallen significantly.
On April 25, 2017, Google announced that it had implemented changes to its search service to make it harder for users to access what it called “low-quality” information such as “conspiracy theories” and “fake news.”
The company said in a blog post that the central purpose of the change to its search algorithm was to give the search giant greater control in identifying content deemed objectionable by its guidelines. It declared that it had “improved our evaluation methods and made algorithmic updates” in order “to surface more authoritative content.”
Google continued, “Last month, we updated our Search Quality Rater Guidelines to provide more detailed examples of low-quality webpages for raters to appropriately flag.” These moderators are instructed to flag “upsetting user experiences,” including pages that present “conspiracy theories,” unless “the query clearly indicates the user is seeking an alternative viewpoint.”
Google does not explain precisely what it means by the term “conspiracy theory.” Using the broad and amorphous category of fake news, the aim of the change to Google’s search system is to restrict access to alternative web sites, whose coverage and interpretation of events conflict with those of such establishment media outlets as the New York Times and the Washington Post.
By flagging content in such a way that it does not appear in the first one or two pages of a search result, Google is able to effectively block users’ access to it. Given the fact that vast amounts of web traffic are influenced by search results, Google is able to effectively conceal or bury content to which it objects through the manipulation of search rankings.
Just last month, the European Commission fined the company $2.7 billion for manipulating search results to inappropriately direct users to its own comparison shopping service, Google Shopping. Now, it appears that Google is using these criminal methods to block users from accessing political viewpoints the company deems objectionable.
The World Socialist Web Site has been targeted by Google’s new “evaluation methods.” While in April 2017, 422,460 visits to the WSWS originated from Google searches, the figure has dropped to an estimated 120,000 this month, a fall of more than 70 percent.
Even when using search terms such as “socialist” and “socialism,” readers have informed us that they find it increasingly difficult to locate the World Socialist Web Site in Google searches.
^turd*

BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Re: Google and The Deep State

Post by BigEyeTenor » Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:22 am

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-truth- ... 602578/amp
The Truth War Is Being Lost to a Global Censorship Apparatus Called Google

Graham Vanbergen 1 day ago Categories: English

We are fast approaching the time where the informational war being waged between the establishment (specifically the vested interests of the rich and powerful) and the independent news outlet is rapidly heading towards its final showdown. Personally, although somewhat defeatist, I think this battle is already lost, it is simply a matter of time. The supposed defenders of free speech, that is the political establishment and their billionaire media cronies have taken sides and this is becoming more evident every day.

Today, the mainstream media has a self-inflicted credibility problem. In 2006, about 65 percent of the general public believed what they read in British newspapers in and in little more than ten years this high level of trust has crashed to little more than a quarter. In fact, trust in the four institutions of government, business, media and NGO’s has taken a dramatic dive in just the last three years alone.

However, 60 percent of people now get their news from search engines, not traditional human editors in the media. It is here where the new informational war takes place – the algorithm. Google now takes 81.2 percent of all search engine market share globally.

This dangerous monopoly should have been controlled years ago. In the end, monopolies such as these restrict free trade, prevent the market from setting prices, from evolving and finding new markets. Google are often buying up the competition or competitive technologies and exploiting or killing it. The EU has just fined Google a massive €2.42 billion for precisely this. So-called ‘disruptive’ technology is the enemy of monopolies.

Google has the ability to drive demand and set the narrative, create bias and swing opinion. Monopolies can get into cartel agreements with what competition they do have to create the false facade that there is some sort of competition.

PayPal co-founder, major investor in Facebook (their first outside investor) and eBay investor Peter Theil once said

“All happy companies are different: Each one earns a monopoly by solving a unique problem. All failed companies are the same: They failed to escape competition.”
Using his vast wealth, Peter Thiel is now chairman of Palantir. That Palantir was originally funded by the CIA and has the NSA and GCHQ as major clients should give rise to suspicion. In all, 500 freedom of information requests by non-profit Muckrock and Motherboard about Thiel’s activities have met with the response from the NYPD, the CIA and the NSA – “that any responsive documents were exempted to protect national security.”

Palantir are now in the frame along with another dark dystopian data company called Cambridge Analytica for swinging Britain’s EU referendum. The Guardian is now facing a massive lawsuit for publishing “The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked” –

Here The Guardian asks the question

“A shadowy global operation involving big data, billionaire friends of Trump and the disparate forces of the Leave campaign influenced the result of the EU referendum. As Britain heads to the polls again, is our electoral process still fit for purpose?”
This is the same story that I wrote for TruePublica three weeks earlier in “The Link Between Brexit And The US Election, MI6, Fake News And Dark Money.”

In my report I was able to highlight that the London School of Economics was now warning that “new technology has disrupted British politics so much that current laws are visibly unable to ensure a free and fair election of any type or indeed control the influence of money in politics.”

“One company, Cambridge Analytica (CA) is in the frame for influencing not just Brexit but the US election where personal data is used to target voters. Its parent company SCL Group is known for involvement in military disinformation campaigns of social media and voter targeting and is used by the military and politicians to study and manipulate public opinion and political will.”
As you can see, Billions are being spent on supplanting real democracy and functional capitalism in a desperate attempt to save what is left of the neoliberal wet-dream. Not content with trashing democratic principle and free speech, censorship is the latest preferred tool of reckless billionaires.

As mentioned in a previous article, TruePublica’s readership rose month-on-month reaching 160,000 unique visitors a month before inexplicably crashing to 25,000 a few months ago. It has been a rollercoaster ever since. These are small numbers compared to the big players but TruePublica had a two year horizon simply to collaborate and help drive independent news to mainstream readership. Faced with such powerful enemies of the truth and free speech, what’s the point?

Last December The Guardian reported “How Google’s search algorithm spreads false information with a rightwing bias. “

It reported that

“Google’s search algorithm appears to be systematically promoting information that is either false or slanted with an extreme rightwing bias on subjects as varied as climate change and homosexuality.”
The World Socialist Website has been equally brave in investigating and publishing their predicament as they saw a fall of 67 percent in user traffic. Their article “Google’s new search protocol is restricting access to 13 leading socialist, progressive and anti-war web sites” is enlightening and corroborates the Guardian story.

“New data compiled by the World Socialist Web Site, with the assistance of other Internet-based news outlets and search technology experts, proves that a massive loss of readership observed by socialist, anti-war and progressive web sites over the past three months has been caused by a cumulative 45 percent decrease in traffic from Google searches.”

The drop followed the implementation of changes in Google’s search evaluation protocols. In a statement issued on April 25, Ben Gomes, the company’s vice president for engineering, stated that Google’s update of its search engine would block access to “offensive” sites, while working to surface more “authoritative content.”

The World Socialist Web Site has obtained statistical data from SEMrush estimating the decline of traffic generated by Google searches for 13 sites with substantial readerships. The results are as follows:

* wsws.org fell by 67 percent

* alternet.org fell by 63 percent

* globalresearch.ca fell by 62 percent

* consortiumnews.com fell by 47 percent

* socialistworker.org fell by 47 percent

* mediamatters.org fell by 42 percent

* commondreams.org fell by 37 percent

* internationalviewpoint.org fell by 36 percent

* democracynow.org fell by 36 percent

* wikileaks.org fell by 30 percent

* truth-out.org fell by 25 percent

* counterpunch.org fell by 21 percent

* theintercept.com fell by 19 percent
From my own research, these losses of readership in the last six months, from highs to lows amounted to a colossal 30.4 million unique visitors a month. I can’t vouch for other websites but at TruePublica the average visitor reads 1.84 pages per visit. At this calculation over 55 million pages of content a month are being withheld from just the 13 websites listed above. It is not possible to come to any other conclusion that Google has blatantly been involved in an act of global censorship.

In further extracts from the wsws article:

“In late May, changes to Google’s algorithm negatively impacted the volume of traffic to the Common Dreams website from organic Google searches,” said Aaron Kaufman, director of development at progressive news outlet Common Dreams. “Since May, traffic from Google Search as a percentage of total traffic to the Common Dreams website has decreased nearly 50 percent.”
The article goes on to say that

“the extent and impact of Google’s actions prove that a combination of techniques is being employed to block access to targeted sites. These involve the direct flagging and blackballing of the WSWS and the other 12 sites listed above by Google evaluators. These sites are assigned a highly negative rating that assures that their articles will be either demoted or entirely bypassed. In addition, new programming technology teaches the computers to think like the evaluators, that is, to emulate their preferences and prejudices.”
Hence the reason why I started off this piece with a negative prediction for the future of truth telling media outlets.



Google is a private company, they are not breaking the law. It might be immoral, unprincipled and shameless, but lawmakers across the western world have done nothing to diminish this transnational anti free speech power. But then, why would they?

The WSWS article closes by saying

“The fight against corporate-state censorship of the Internet is central to the defense of democratic rights, and there must be a broad-based collaboration among socialist, left and progressive websites to alert the public and the widest sections of the working class.”
Whilst this sentiment is surely true, it is not enough and it never will be and it’s not about the working class – it’s about all of us, irrespective.

What is required now is a collaboration project to actually work together – to create a penetrating and deafening noise to alert the unaware, give a bigger motivation and resources to combat the rising scale of censorship and defend the civil liberties of everyone. If we don’t, before long, it will indeed be too late. And then what?

User avatar
greycircle
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:00 am

Re: Google and The Deep State

Post by greycircle » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:16 pm

Trending on Twitter. The Google Manifesto. I put a X in these links because it tried to load Twitter in this page or something. Couldn't control it. X right after the the H in https



hXttps://twitter.com/polnewsforever/status/894769565325860867

hXttps://twitter.com/polnewsforever/status/894763791618945024



Not sure what to make of this. Could it really be? I feel all sceptiKal and and shit....More at link.


Gizmodo
Exclusive: Here's The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google [Updated]
Kate Conger
Saturday 4:30pm
Photo: AP

Update 7:25pm ET: Google’s new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance Danielle Brown has issued her own memo to Google employees in response to the now-viral memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” Brown’s statement, obtained by Motherboard, can be found in full at the end of this article.

A software engineer’s 10-page screed against Google’s diversity initiatives is going viral inside the company, being shared on an internal meme network and Google+. The document’s existence was first reported by Motherboard, and Gizmodo has obtained it in full.

Advertisement

In the memo, which is the personal opinion of a male Google employee and is titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” the author argues that women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women. “We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism,” he writes, going on to argue that Google’s educational programs for young women may be misguided.

The post comes as Google battles a wage discrimination investigation by the US Department of Labor, which has found that Google routinely pays women less than men in comparable roles.

Gizmodo has reached out to Google for comment on the memo and how the company is addressing employee concerns regarding its content. We will update this article if we hear back.

The text of the post is reproduced in full below, with some minor formatting modifications. Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted.

Reply to public response and misrepresentation

I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.
TL:DR

Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.

This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.

The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.

Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the ... 564320/amp
exodus refugee

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest