Send a Tweet
- Advertisement -
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 6 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Best Web OpEds   

The Google Search Engine Black List

Quicklink Submitted By     (# of views)   30 comments
Author 11671
Message lila york
Become a Fan
  (98 fans)

(Image by Miguel Andrade [CC0])   Details   DMCA

Google appears to have maintained a ‘blacklist’ for dozens of websites on one of its mobile apps, as well as a ‘fringe ranking’ system that scored sites for “quality,” according to documents leaked by a company insider.

Published on Wednesday in a report by conservative transparency group Project Veritas, the documents appear to include hundreds of pages of technical details describing Google’s behind-the-scenes projects, as well as internal communications between employees...

“I felt that our entire election system was going to be compromised forever, by this company that told the American public that it was not going to do any evil”

Project Veritas report is here:

Read the rest of the story HERE:

At www.rt.com

 

- Advertisement -

Must Read 2   Supported 2   Valuable 2  
Rate It | View Ratings

lila york Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

"If wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth." Julian Assange "The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." -- William Colby (Former CIA Director) "We'll know our disinformation (more...)
 

Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Comments Image Post Quicklink Comment and Rate This Quicklink

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
          

Comment Here:   



You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.
Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 
Username
Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

6 people are discussing this page, with 30 comments  Post Comment


Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Google is effectively breaking its own search engine, in order to accommodate the current Thought Police. I say, let 'em.

It won't affect me either way, as I don't use Google for anything. I don't use their search or their server apps, and I don't allow Google trackers to talk to my devices.

The sooner everyone realizes they don't need Google (or Facebook, or Twitter, or Amazon....) to function online, or to spread their word, the quicker they can stop worrying about being spied on, having their work censored or taken down, or having their elections manipulated.

I can't say this enough... You can't "reclaim" any of the current popular online services. As long as you keep using them, you won't be able to reclaim your privacy, or your ability to communicate freely, without censorship or interference from these centralized behemoths. The only solution is to abandon them, in favour of better services.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 7:27:58 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (8+)
Help
 
Indent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Devil's Advocate:   New Content

We need to keep writing about altenatives and how to access them. about vpns and privacy badger , alternatives to google, amazon, youtube and twitter and gmail. I replaced all of them. It took some time, but it was not difficult. It's only a matter of getting the information out.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:56:09 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

I actually think there's already a mass migration started away from the incumbent players. It might not even require much further input from people like me.

Once 1 or 2 of someone's "friends" leaves Facebook for something like Minds or Steemit, that causes that someone to start looking into what is happening. People are getting tired of seeing YouTube take down videos and channels, so they start looking at things like LBRY.

This effect is even truer when the "well-knowns" people were following start to pull out of the current mainstream. (Eg. Lee Camp has duplicated most of his work on multiple alternate platforms, and people are following him on those. Lee said he fully expects there will soon be a day when YouTube and Facebook pull his accounts anyway, so he's prepared for that now.)

It's like any other business - if you disrespect your customers, they go somewhere else that appears to treat them better. The large centralized players tried to convert what should have been their "customers" (the users) into the "product" itself. For a while, it made them rich, but the users are now seeing they've gotten very little out of the arrangement in return.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:21:51 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (8+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Devil's Advocate:   New Content

Well I hope you are right. I keep seeing statistics that google has like 90% of the global searches. maybe that is old data.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 12:05:00 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (1+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

Well, we all know statistics are only as good as the ones who compile and publish them. When you start to see Google doing strong appeals to the public and making promises to "really do no evil, this time", you'll know they've lost ground.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:35:21 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (3+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

nelswight

Become a Fan
Author 2581

(Member since Sep 3, 2006), 400 comments
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

cheers for you, Lila.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:47:27 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 

Don Smith

Become a Fan
(Member since Feb 25, 2009), 23 fans, 138 articles, 585 quicklinks, 1794 comments, 45 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

It's a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't for google. They're asked to protect the public from fake news and extremism but they're also asked not to censor.

The question of political bias (conservative vs. liberal) is a related but separate question, also very difficult.


The fundamental problem is that the news media is supposed to play the role that google is being asked to play: judge what is true and newsworthy.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 7:33:10 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

Nonsense! None of these companies have any such "responsibility" to "protect" anyone from any form of speech. The only ones suggesting they do are all working for your government.

The suggestion itself is the real "Lie of the Century". (Do you like my reassignment of your favourite term?)

Government is not supposed to interfere with free speech. It's in your Constitution, remember? These companies like to justify everything they do by inserting "private company privilege" into the conversation, yet they carry out censorship for the government. And, government "think tanks" have been put into the equation, acting as if they are "authoritative third parties".

This is unconstitutional, and Section 230 protections for these companies should be revoked. The fact that this doesn't happen is proof that the censorship is coming from the government itself.

News media has one actual job - report what is news. Not "judge" it for "truth". And it's certainly not their role to omit something newsworthy simply because it doesn't agree with their opinion (narrative), or just lie about something, to protect your government.

People seem to drink a lot of Kool-Aid these days.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 7:54:05 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (10+)
Help
 

Don Smith

Become a Fan
(Member since Feb 25, 2009), 23 fans, 138 articles, 585 quicklinks, 1794 comments, 45 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Nonsense! Like newspapers and TV stations, google has a responsibility to avoid sharing fake news. Google is doing much the same job as broadcasters, which are licensed and which are supposed to serve the public. If google didn't take efforts to filter the content presented in searches, then bad actors would easily exploit the system to pollute peoples' minds with propaganda.


Of course, I didn't say it's easy to determine what to show! It's extremely difficult and often impossible to determine what's true. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try at all.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:16:05 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

"...google has a responsibility to avoid sharing fake news."

No, they simply don't!

Google is a search engine, not a "broadcaster". The job of a search engine is to find what is on the Internet, and point you to it. End of story.

Google, like all internet sites and service providers, enjoys the protection of Section 230 of the Communications Act, which absolves them of any liability for the content posted by their users. Any "crimes of content" are supposed to be rectified by the pursuit of the actual perpetrators themselves.

Google is also NOT EVEN HOSTING THIS CONTENT. It only indexes what other sites are hosting. Google has even less claim to any "responsibility" here, than the sites that are actually displaying it.

You're failing to see the big, slippery slope in all of this. If you're fine with Google censoring anything, then I guess it's okay to go after everyone else as well. It'll be okay to break DuckDuckGo, Bing, and all the rest of the search engines the same way, and then just continue on bestowing this "responsibility" to every website on the Internet.

Obviously, you've already accepted this same "responsibility" is assumed by Facebook, Twitter, and others, judging by your words. Basically, you must be okay with everyone judging for you what you should read and say and publish, etc.

"If google didn't take efforts to filter the content presented in searches, then bad actors would easily exploit the system to pollute peoples' minds with propaganda."

The real propaganda is actually contained in that statement. That's what the makers of the Kool-Aid want everyone to think.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:33:45 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (10+)
Help
 
Indent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

I can't say this any better than DA did - you really are clueless about what is being done to you. to all of us. The difference between Pravda in Soviet Russia and CNN in 2019 is that no Russians believed anything they heard on Pravda. Before the censorship brigade got into action via google nobody had a problem sorting out what to believe on the internet and what not to believe. which sites to frequent and which to avoid. we are not bables.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:52:57 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (11+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

"I can't say this any better than DA did"

I think you actually did, with just this one point...

"we are not babies."

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:56:12 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (8+)
Help
 

Don Smith

Become a Fan
(Member since Feb 25, 2009), 23 fans, 138 articles, 585 quicklinks, 1794 comments, 45 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

You don't understand, apparently. Because google's algorithms decide what links to show first, google effectively decides what's news. It can't just fairly show everything on the Internet. It must, by the nature of a search engine, make decisions about what stories and websites should be prioritized. Hence, it has a responsibility to make that decision in a sound way. It's far too difficult a job for data scientists to do well.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 8:55:41 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

sorry but you still don't get it. when you google Information Clearing House, and that website is relegated to page 10 of the search because the war machine does not want you to read it, google is utterly failing in its mission. That iis what they do. Of all of the search engines only duckduckgo takes you to what you are looking for if it is something the MIC does not like. try searching for a pirate movie site, like putlocker on google. You won't find it even 100 pages in. If you search it on duckduckgo by contrast, you will find about 100 versions of it by different sponsors. and articles on where to find putlocker alternatives and which sites are safe. In other words the search engine duckduckgo is doing its job. google is not. google exists only to spy and to censor. It has no real usable function.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:07:36 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (9+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

Daniel Geery

Become a Fan
Author 1198

(Member since Jul 9, 2009), 69 fans, 365 articles, 3565 quicklinks, 16586 comments, 180 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

You mention "my first site of the day." And when truly pressed for time, the only one.

That Google, aka an arm of the CIA et. al., buries this is no surprise.

Submitted on Saturday, Aug 17, 2019 at 9:44:01 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

"You don't understand, apparently. Because google's algorithms decide what links to show first..."

And, who writes and employs those algorithms?! Who updates these algorithms to exclude that which is deemed "unacceptable"?

There's a difference between simply sorting out the content on the Internet, and deciding what is not going to be included and what sources are "authoritative" enough to list at the top of the list.

Once they started "deciding" what people "should" and "shouldn't" see, they crossed the line from being a search engine to becoming an arm of the State.

There's no "responsibility" to decide anything for us. There are simple indexing tools that don't depend on opinion, which Google has long abandoned, by design.

But again, it appears you're fine with others deciding for you what you should be allowed to see. It is you who doesn't understand this whole argument.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:09:06 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (8+)
Help
 

Don Smith

Become a Fan
(Member since Feb 25, 2009), 23 fans, 138 articles, 585 quicklinks, 1794 comments, 45 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Saying that google (or any other search engine) needs to filter content (decide what is more worthy of showing) is not the same as saying that google does it well. I can agree that google filters in a biased way that favors the interest of the MIC. Of course, I oppose such censorship and propaganda. But that doesn't mean I think google should just show everything in a random order! By the very nature of a search engine, it must prioritize.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:13:38 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

correct. It should prioitize by what it is you are looking for. Not by what they want you to see. which is what they do. Google thinks that the CIA propaganda rag WAshington Post is a "quality news source" . It thinks that Opednews is fake news. The truth is exactly the opposite. Google is a worthless propaganda arm. Just get rid of it.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:17:39 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (7+)
Help
 
Indent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Don Smith:   New Content

"By the very nature of a search engine..."

Google is no longer acting as a search engine. That is my point.

The "nature" of a search engine is to display what is available on the Internet. Google is no longer doing that. Google is deciding what smaller part of that Internet it wants to point you to. It lists sources of a predetermined opinion first, relegates other sources to distant pages, and excludes certain others completely.

Filtering has no place in an indexing operation. Filtering is a deliberate attempt to shape mass opinion. It's not that they "don't do it well" - it's that they SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT at all.

You simply have to ask yourself, if DuckDuckGo can do it right, why would it be so difficult for Google (the original search engine) to do it right? Obviously, Google had a different agenda than being just a search engine.

Submitted on Thursday, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:37:40 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (9+)
Help
 

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Important not to forget that Amazon, Face-plant, the Washington Post and google are all government contractors. They are paid - with our tax dollars - to censor us and spy on us and propagandize us. No human should have anything to do with any of them. We cannot defund them, but we can still force them into bankruptcy by never using or reading anything they produce. .

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 1:59:12 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (6+)
Help
 
Indent

Kate Jones

Become a Fan
Author 77226

(Member since Mar 7, 2012), 4 fans, 76 comments
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

Exactly. Boycott businesses who do not give you what you want or whose terms are too unpalatable. That is also how the free market works, which rewards businesses that supply what people want and need and are willing to pay for. Unfortunately, I doubt that enough people will boycott Google or Facecrook to make any difference in their success and survival. Too many people are still enjoying what they got hooked on, with all those free "benefits". Google et al. became rich because billions of people willingly and individually participated, with their time and money and their willingness to put up with the ever-growing intrusion of advertising. We who object are not enough yet to make a dent in their grasp on the general public.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:35:07 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Kate Jones:   New Content

"I doubt that enough people will boycott Google or Facecrook to make any difference..."

I encourage you not to underestimate the level of scorn they've already achieved. Too many people have experienced the betrayal.

They've either watched their favourite YouTube channel get summarily trashed in the wink of an eye, or they've been on the receiving end of the same. They're becoming aware of the newer venues popping up, and are checking them out.

The more people that abandon the old stuff, the more their friends and contacts will follow, in order to keep their circles complete.

You might remember when Facebook was first launched. It seemed to explode in no time. It can fall just as quickly, and new stuff can take over just as easily.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:47:12 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (5+)
Help
 

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

The only hurdle is lack of knowledge - about what it is these despicable orgs are doing and how to ditch them. This article has only been read by 212 people on this site. I sent ithe link around to other sites to get the word out, but unless it hits msm, the public will be largely in the dark.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 9:49:39 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (3+)
Help
 

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Leaked Documents - White planning executive order to censor the internet.

click here

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 11:45:37 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
Indent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

People get the majority of their news and interactions on social media now. I see lots of conversations about alternate media services mostly stemming from the fact they know they're being denied what they deserve to see.

The mainstream, with its silence on the subject, seems to be effectively promoting the alternate services, just with their current behaviour. It won't be long before the topic starts to explode, whether you hear it on CNN or see it on Facebook.

As for the "executive order", it would only affect centralized things like Facebook. It wouldn't have much effect on the new stuff. Decentralization and encryption are on the rise. They can't censor what they can't monitor. If anything, they could even cause people to move to newer services faster with such an order.

Sometimes, when you step back from the panic, things are not as dire as they first appear.

A major censorship order like that one would likely have lots of opposing energy against it, and could cause huge ripples all the way up to the next election. That might be a problem for the buffoon trying to get reelected.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:56:33 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (4+)
Help
 
IndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Devil's Advocate:   New Content

I can also see providers all over the world having a big problem with this executive order.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 4:03:24 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Devil's Advocate:   New Content

Well I hope you are right. The project veritas article discusses the FCC just shuttering any website they don't like. Given how things have been going lately that is not so far-fetched.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 6:45:23 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

"The project veritas article discusses the FCC just shuttering any website they don't like."

The trouble with that idea is, the FCC is a government agency. For them to censor would be totally unconstitutional. Many legal suits would follow.

I'm sure the people threatening these things are aware of that. I can't help thinking the whole proposal is just some kind of scare mongering to set the stage for some other tactic. It just doesn't make perfect sense on its face.

Then again, it was the FCC that outlawed certain language over the airwaves some years ago. But somehow, that scenario doesn't seem to equate with the present one. As you say, it's not like anyone's following "the rules" these days.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 7:49:59 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

lila york

Become a Fan
Author 11671

(Member since Feb 18, 2008), 98 fans, 72 articles, 126 quicklinks, 2738 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Devil's Advocate:   New Content

1958 interview with Aldous Huxley --horribly horribly prescient.

click here

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 8:45:53 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (4+)
Help
 
IndentIndentIndentIndentIndentIndent

Devil's Advocate

Become a Fan
Author 500650

(Member since Nov 9, 2014), 9 fans, 3068 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to lila york:   New Content

Nice catch! Yes, Huxley was one very intelligent man. One of those whose thinking was way ahead of his time.

Submitted on Friday, Aug 16, 2019 at 9:32:42 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (2+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Quicklink? Post Comment