It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler
I'm glad that you're now of the opinion that social media, search engines and the like can influence public opinion. So watching the video, I can't help but notice Tucker Carlson starts out the segment with a line of bull# about "a couple dozen Facebook ads" which is of course not at all accurate. Must be a little mind rending for him to walk the line between being dismissive of a well funded and staffed foreign influence campaign and sounding the alarm on the potential for undue influence by tech execs using the very same platforms.
Ah, who am I kidding? Tuck's a pro.
So it's not really clear the nature of the relationship from the excerpts. I didn't hear any evidence of manipulation of search results. Who was the email sent to? Seems like that would be important. But if there were services performed for free, that would seem to represent an in kind donation and be a violation of campaign finance. Not that campaign finance violations are a big deal, amirite? (kidding)
What I wonder though, is if these were services that were paid for or not. I say services because there's a clear insinuation here that not only was there a campaign finance violation but that there was some manipulation of search results beyond the type of microtargetted advertising that all of these platforms make their money from — and I didn't hear anything that indicated that.
To that point, here's how the author's position is described:
The email we obtained came from a woman named Eliana Murillo, the head of the multicultural marketing department.
So the person who would be ultimately responsible for among other things, marketing targeted specifically to Hispanics. Let me share with you something that I've shared before here on ATS.
Facebook "embeds," Russia and the Trump campaign's secret weapon
Brad Parscale: Well, we had our-- their staff embedded inside our offices.
Lesley Stahl: What?
Brad Parscale: Yeah, Facebook employees would show up for work every day in our offices.
Lesley Stahl: Whoa, wait a minute. Facebook employees showed up at the Trump headquarters --
Brad Parscale: Google employees, and Twitter employees.
Lesley Stahl: They were embedded in your campaign?
Brad Parscale: I mean, like, they were there multiple days a week, three, four days a week, two days week, five days a week --
Lesley Stahl: What were they doing inside? I mean --
Brad Parscale: Helping teach us how to use their platform. I wanna get --
Lesley Stahl: Helping him get elected?
Brad Parscale: I asked each one of them by email, I wanna know every, single secret button, click, technology you have. "I wanna know everything you would tell Hillary's campaign plus some. And I want your people here to teach me how to use it."
Lesley Stahl: Inside?
Brad Parscale: Yeah, I want 'em sittin' right next to us --
Lesley Stahl: How do you know they weren't Trojan Horses?
Brad Parscale: 'Cause I'd ask 'em to be Republicans, and I'd -- we'd talk to 'em.
Lesley Stahl: Oh, you only wanted Republicans?
Brad Parscale: I wanted people who support Donald Trump from their companies.
Lesley Stahl: And that's what you got?
Brad Parscale: Yeah. They already have divisions set up that way.
Lesley Stahl: What do you mean?
Brad Parscale: They already have groups of people in their political divisions that are Republican and Democrat.
The Clinton campaign paid Google millions of dollars, just like the Trump campaign. How do you imagine a letter from somebody from one of the teams embedded with the Trump campaign might sound?
originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: theantediluvian
You're so full of crap it's coming out of your ears. You're comparing ads on Facebook and Twitter with Google's search engine? Seriously?
I don't know a single person who takes anything they see on Facebook or Twitter seriously, but easily half the country believes whatever Google tells them.
Your strawman argument is nonsense.
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
He's a professional forum writer, its his job.
originally posted by: Elton
I don't think there are any repercussions for trying to get people to vote.
I don't think there are any repercussions for a company for trying to get people to vote the way they would like, as long as they did not try and buy a vote or force someone (duress) to vote a certain way.
I could be mistaken, but I'm not sure what law Google would have broken...