Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 52 posts

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#21

Post by jjeaff »

mrosett wrote: post #10

I'm no fan of James O'Keefe, but some of the direct quotes are much more incriminating than this response makes them out to be: > “Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump sit…

It doesn't seem incriminating at all. When she says "the Trump situation" in this context it seems clear she is talking about making sure that foreign and otherwise nefarious actors are not able to game search results and the ad system to spread disinformation. Which is what happened in the last election.

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#22

Post by jexah »

jjeaff wrote: post #21
mrosett wrote: post #10

I'm no fan of James O'Keefe, but some of the direct quotes are much more incriminating than this response makes them out to be: > “Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump sit…

It doesn't seem incriminating at all. When she says "the Trump situation" in this context it seems clear she is talking about making sure that foreign and otherwise nefarious actors are not able to game search results and the ad system to spread disinformation. Which is what happened in the last election.

Buuuuullllllllllllsssshhhhiiii

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#23

Post by v7p1Qbt1im »

jeromic wrote: post #18
captainredbeard wrote: post #15

It would be nice if she’d elaborate on the comments she made, particularly where the “imprecise” language was —- what was she trying to say at the dinner? There were many long runs of commentary without opportunity for deceptive editing.

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.” “We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people g…

It could also just mean, they weren't prepared for the onslaught of bad actors like troll/bot farms. Those actors often take both sides of the argument with the simple goal to instigate hate and rage and eventually cause as much societal division as possible.

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#25

Post by captainredbeard »

UncleMeat wrote: post #20
jeromic wrote: post #16

Google has removed the original video from youtube over a "privacy claim" and have disabled responses on this medium post. It makes it hard to give Google the benefit of the doubt when their stance seems to be "stop talking about it", instead of addressing the content of the video.

Given that she has already gotten threatening messages, that seems like a reasonable response. The primary responsibility should be to the safety of the employee.

Private security is a better response if they’re concerned about her safety.

Viewed through the lens of human power, which is more likely?

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#26

Post by captainredbeard »

slubaro1987 wrote: post #4
Crontab wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of the Planned Parenthood hatchet job.

Also that time O'Keefe and co edited a speech about racial tolerance and solidarity among impoverished farmers to make it seem like the speaker was advocating racism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firing_of_Shirley_Sherrod Veritas has been caught doing this exact type of numerous times, and why anyone would consider them to be a credible source of information beggers belief. Hell they even refer to themselves as an i…

I’ve watched the video where she expressed “solidarity with impoverished farmers” in explicitly racial terms. Maybe her intent was simply solidarity, but race-based solidarity is frowned upon... and racist!

To those in disbelief, watch it yourself and see if it’s “deceptive editing” (a dog whistle)

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#27

Post by captainredbeard »

fcarraldo wrote: post #11
a_tractor wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You call that a "hatchet job" after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, through an independent forensics review, found[0] the videos to be "authentic and not deceptively edited?" The case involved the Texas Health and Human Services Commission decision to terminate the state’s Medicaid provider agreements with PP affiliates across the state, based in large part on those very videos. The Fifth Circuit affirmed that de…

This ruling by the 5th Circuit, which is controversial itself, has nothing to do with James O’Keefe or Project Veritas. O’Keefe’s attempt at smearing Planned Parenthood took place much earlier and was thoroughly discredited. The videos referenced in this case, by the “Center for Medical Progress”, have also been called into question, and a single victory in a circuit court appeal does not make them factual.

[flagged]

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#28

Post by [deleted] »

captainredbeard wrote: post #27
fcarraldo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This ruling by the 5th Circuit, which is controversial itself, has nothing to do with James O’Keefe or Project Veritas. O’Keefe’s attempt at smearing Planned Parenthood took place much earlier and was thoroughly discredited. The videos referenced in this case, by the “Center for Medical Progress”, have also been called into question, and a single victory in a circuit court appeal does not make them factual.

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Google exec responds to Project Veritas video about bias

#30

Post by khawkins »

UncleMeat wrote: post #20
jeromic wrote: post #16

Google has removed the original video from youtube over a "privacy claim" and have disabled responses on this medium post. It makes it hard to give Google the benefit of the doubt when their stance seems to be "stop talking about it", instead of addressing the content of the video.

Given that she has already gotten threatening messages, that seems like a reasonable response. The primary responsibility should be to the safety of the employee.

If getting "threatening messages" from anonymous social media accounts is the standard we're going to apply to whether or not we can talk about corruption of power, say goodbye to free speech.

Imagine an oil executive saying you can't report their name or what they said in a private conversation because some environmentalist sent them a vicious tweet. This is what you're arguing for.

Post reply on HN