Research: Google Search Bias Flipped Seats for Democrats in Midterms

By Allum Bokhari

Google encourages users to "go vote"

New research from psychologist and search engine expert Dr. Robert Epstein shows that biased Google searches had a measurable impact on the 2018 midterm elections, pushing tens of thousands of votes towards the Democrat candidates in three key congressional races, and potentially millions more in races across the country.

The study, from Epstein and a team at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT)analyzed Google searches related to three highly competitive congressional races in Southern California. In all three races, the Democrat won — and Epstein’s research suggests that Google search bias may have tipped them over the edge.

The research follows a previous study conducted in 2016 which showed that biased Google results pushed votes to Hillary Clinton in the presidential election. Democrats and Google executives have disputed these findings.

Epstein says that in the days leading up to the 2018 midterms, he was able to preserve “more than 47,000 election-related searches on Google, Bing, and Yahoo, along with the nearly 400,000 web pages to which the search results linked.”

Analysis of this data showed a clear pro-Democrat bias in election-related Google search results as compared to competing search engines. Users performing Google searches related to the three congressional races the study focused on were significantly more likely to see pro-Democrat stories and links at the top of their results.

As Epstein’s previous studies have shown, this can have a huge impact on the decisions of undecided voters, who often assume that their search results are unbiased. Epstein has called this the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME).

According to Epstein’s study, at least 35,455 undecided voters in the three districts may have been persuaded to vote for a Democrat candidate because of slanted Google search results. Considering that each vote gained by a Democrat is potentially a vote lost by a Republican, this means more than 70,910 votes may have been lost by Republicans in the three districts due to Google bias. In one of these districts, CA 45, the Democrat margin of victory was just over 12,000 votes.

The total Democrat win margin across all three districts was 71,337, meaning that bias Google searches could account for the vast majority of Democrat votes. Extrapolated to elections around the country, Epstein says that bias Google results could have influenced 4.6 million undecided voters to support Democrat candidates.

Moreover, Epstein’s findings are based on modest assumptions, such as the assumption that voters conduct one election-related search per week. According to Epstein, marketing research shows that people typically conduct 4-5 searches per day, not one per week. In other words, the true impact of biased search results could be much higher.

Epstein’s study may also understate the level of liberal bias in Google search results, due to its use of a 2017 study from Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center to rank sources by their bias. The study assigns conservative sources like Breitbart News a far higher bias rating than ostensibly centrist but in fact highly liberal sources like the New York Times. The study also gives online encyclopedia Wikipedia a non-liberal bias rating, despite the fact that its most controversial pages are typically hijacked by its cabal of left-wing editors to push partisan liberal narratives.

As the Los Angeles Times notes, Epstein is not a Republican and publicly supported Hillary Clinton in 2016. Nevertheless, Democrats and liberals continue to ignore or doubt his findings. House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) has repeatedly called claims of big tech bias a “conspiracy theory,” as have other congressional Democrats. And left-wing academics interviewed by the Los Angeles Times also heaped doubt on Epstein’s work.

Dr. Robert Epstein is featured in the 2018 documentary The Creepy Line, which was produced by Breitbart News editor-at-large Peter Schweizer and explores the bias amongst the Masters of the Universe in Silicon Valley.

Breitbart News continues to expose left-wing bias at Google. Recent reports reveal that company managers have told employees that the tech giant must stop “fake news” because “that’s how Trump won,” that Google-owned YouTube adjusted its algorithms to push pro-life content off its top search results, and that the company’s own internal researchers describe the company’s changes in policy since 2016 as a “shift towards censorship.”

Trump to ‘look into’ Facebook censorship after site gags his social media chief

President Donald Trump has promised to look into accusations of anti-conservative bias on Facebook, after the social media giant apparently blocked his social media chief Dan Scavino from commenting.

Scavino complained on Monday that Facebook had abruptly blocked him from replying to his followers, with the company claiming his comments had been reported as spam.

“AMAZING. WHY ARE YOU STOPPING ME from replying to comments,” he wrote. “People have the right to know. Why are you silencing me???”

Screen Shot 2019-03-20 at 11.29.08 AM

“I will be looking into this!” Trump tweeted in response. The president has often accused Silicon Valley tech companies of discriminating against conservative users, and did so again on Tuesday. “Facebook, Google and Twitter, not to mention the Corrupt Media, are sooo on the side of the Radical Left Democrats,” he tweeted. “But fear not, we will win anyway, just like we did before!”

Screen Shot 2019-03-20 at 11.30.03 AM

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has repeatedly dismissed accusations of liberal bias directed at the company. Grilled by Republican lawmakers on the topic last year, Zuckerberg claimed that their examples of censorship were once-off mistakes, but did admit that most of his employees probably lean left politically.

These accusations have come from within the company too. An anonymous whistleblower told conservative watchdog Project Veritas last month that Facebook actively developed and uses “deboosting” tools to suppress and delete right-wing content. Last year, a Facebook employee called the company a liberal “monoculture that’s intolerant of different views,”and savaged Facebook’s workforce for being “quick to attack – often in mobs – anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.”

The employee’s rant, posted on an internal message board, attracted the support of more than 100 other workers, who formed a group called ‘FB’ers for Political Diversity.’

TWITTER ADMITS SHADOWBANNING LISA PAGE TWEET BY FEDERALIST CO-FOUNDER “TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE”

Twitter Admits Shadowbanning Lisa Page Tweet By Federalist Co-Founder "To Keep People Safe"

Sorry citizen, some facts are just too dangerous for your own good

Zero Hedge – MARCH 19, 2019

Twitter has admitted to shadowbanning a tweet by The Federalist co-founder Sean Davis in order to “keep people safe.” 

Tweeting a passage last week from former FBI attorney Lisa Page’s Congressional testimony discussing the FBI’s rush to find connections between the Trump campaign and Russia, Davis pointed out the irony of Hillary Clinton’s campaign employing former UK spy Christopher Steele, a foreign national, “working with Russians to obtain damaging information about Donald Trump.” 

CAP

Of note, the dossier Steele compiled which was subsequently used to obtain a warrant to spy on a Trump adviser (and later smear Trump) relied on a “senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” and “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin,” according to Vanity Fair.

CAP

Following his March 12 tweet, Davis wondered if Twitter was experimenting with “shadow bans” – as he could only see his tweet if he was logged in, meaning nobody else could see it.

CAP

Six days later, Twitter confirmed with Davis that they had deliberately shadow-banned his tweet in order to “keep people safe.”

CAP

“Twitter gave me no notice or explanation when it shadowbanned one of my Tweets about Russian interference in our elections,” wrote Davis, adding “But what’s worse is how Twitter apparently gives its users the fraudulent impression that their tweets, which Twitter secretly bans, are still public.”

In short, Twitter did not want the public to consider the irony of Hillary Clinton’s campaign paying for a foreign national to collude with Russians against Donald Trump, while the FBI scrambled to prove the Trump campaign did.

Unreal.

In other censorship news, ZeroHedge is now banned in New Zealand and much of Australiafollowing our reporting on the Christchurch terror attacks.

Sorry citizen, some facts are just too dangerous for your own good.

BUZZFEED CEO PANICS: BIG TECH HAVING ‘HUGE PROBLEM CONTROLLING CONTENT’

BuzzFeed CEO Panics: Big Tech Having 'Huge Problem Controlling Content'

Fake news peddler worried the Left losing ability to dominate cultural narrative

 | Infowars.com – MARCH 11, 2019

Tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter are having a “huge problem” controlling content on their platforms, and censoring conservatives isn’t enough, claimed BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti.

“Tech platforms are having a huge problem with the content on their platforms,” Peretti said Friday at SXSW. “They don’t make the content and are having trouble controlling the content.”

Peretti also said that censoring conservatives alone isn’t enough; Big Tech also needs to promote “good content,” ie particular points of view.

“We can’t just police bad content, we have to produce good content,” Peretti said.

A video presentation included in Peretti’s speech showed an image of a garbage can equated with the words “Anti-Vaxxers,” “trolls,” “political extremists,” “flat-Earthers,” “racists,” “misogynists,” and “pedophiles,” as among the issues Big Tech faces.

“They’re trying to get rid of all the bad stuff, and it’s an endless fight to get rid of all the terrible content that’s uploaded to these platforms, and they can never win this fight,” Peretti said.

“There’s a vacuum which is created by a lack of good content and it’s made it difficult for the platforms, and it’s opened up this opportunity for all these other bad actors to upload content.”

The Austin Chronicle’s Austin Sanders agreed with Peretti’s premise, saying that “it’s not just about banning Alex Jones.”

“The point illustrates the challenge facing platforms like Facebook and Twitter: It’s not just about banning Alex Jones, it’s about promoting the media companies that produce quality journalism, so more people are seeing thoroughly verified information,” Sanders wrote Friday.

BuzzFeed recently laid off 15 percent of its workforce over budget issues, which Peretti reportedly badly mishandled.

Ted Lieu Deletes Insane Tweet Ripping President Trump for Trip to Alabama to Visit Tornado Victims

 

Trump antagonist Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) deleted a tweet posted Friday morning attacking President Donald Trump for taking a trip to Alabama. Lieu went off on Trump with Lieu acting completely unaware that parts of Alabama had been recently devastated by deadly tornadoes. Lieu later explained the tweet, saying he assumed Trump was going to Alabama for a rally.

CAP

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) in a previous display of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Trump tweeted Friday before he departed, “Heading now to the Great State of Alabama!”, prompting Lieu to vomit on Twitter:

“WE ARE IN THE THIRD WEEK OF A NATIONAL EMERGENCY! Can you feel the emergency? Is this why @RealDonaldTrump is going to Alabama, because we need to build a Wall along Alabama’s southern border? Oh wait, I just looked at the map….#FridayMorning Thoughts”
CAP
CAP
Lieu deleted the tweet after being hammered and posted an explanation, “I have concluded based on Twitter comments I received that my last tweet was inappropriate. I understand the purpose now of the President’s visit to Alabama. I apologize and am going to delete my tweet.”
CAP
Lieu followed with a reply to former NYPD offcier John Cardillo, crediting Cardillo with informing him about the nature of Trump’s visit to Alabama, “You have the absolute right to criticize my inappropriate tweet and to not accept my apology. It was your first Tweet that alerted me to the purpose of the President’s visit. Thank you for your input.”
CAP
Lieu explained to another critic that he assumed Trump was going to Alabama for a rally, “Sure. I thought Trump was going to a rally. Because that’s how he sometimes announces them on Twitter. I was incorrect in my assumption. And here is my explanation for why I deleted the tweet.”

Project Veritas Slams Twitter Execs’ Spying Claims

See the source image

Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde claim direct messages aren’t monitored

Thursday, March 07, 2019

Twitter founder Jack Dorsey and chief legal officer Vijaya Gadde told podcast host Joe Rogan that direct messages on the social media site are not monitored — a claim challenged by investigative journalist James O’Keefe of Project Veritas.

When asked by Rogan if company employees “read direct messages,” Dorsey replied, “We don’t read direct messages.”

Gadde followed up, explaining that the only direct messages read by employees are those which have been reported to Twitter support.

Rogan pressed further, asking if it was possible for Twitter employees to intentionally peruse a user’s direct messages.

“I don’t think so,” Gadde replied.

However, according to multiple Twitter engineers who discussed the subject of direct messages with undercover Project Veritas journalists, Dorsey and Gadde may have been misleading with their answers, at best.

“There’s teams dedicated to it [reading direct messages],” said Clay Haynes, a senior network security engineer at Twitter. “I mean, we’re talking… at least three or four hundred people… they’re paid to look at dick pics.”

“It is creepy Big Brother.”

Pranay Singh, a direct messaging engineer, revealed that all content shared on the platform — including private messages — are stored on Twitter servers for analytical and advertising purposes.

“So all your sex messages and your dick pics are on my server now,” Singh said. “Everything. Anything you post online.”

“A machine is going to look at it. An algorithm will look at it, and they’ll make a virtual profile about you.”

Watch the full exchange here.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑