Utopia Talk / Politics / Tulsi Sues Google

Forwyn Member	Thu Jul 25 20:05:09 Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a 2020 presidential contender, is suing Google over claims that the tech behemoth violated her right to "free speech." In a federal complaint filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Gabbard alleged Google censored her presidential campaign when it suspended their advertising account for several hours last month. A Google spokeswoman pushed back on Gabbard's claims in a statement to The Hill, attributing the brief suspension to sudden "large spending changes" that set off Google's automated systems. "We have automated systems that flag unusual activity on all advertiser accounts – including large spending changes – in order to prevent fraud and protect our customers," the spokeswoman said. "In this case, our system triggered a suspension and the account was reinstated shortly thereafter." Gabbard's lawsuit marks the first time a presidential contender has sued a large technology company over such claims. The Hawaii Democrat's principal campaign committee, Tulsi Now Inc., is suing Google, accusing it of violating her First Amendment rights along with a litany of violations under California law. "With this lawsuit, Tulsi seeks to stop Google from further intermeddling in the 2020 United States Presidential Election," the complaint reads. Gabbard's lawsuit reflects a narrative typically espoused by Republicans, many of whom have spent years claiming that the top tech companies in the world routinely censor their perspectives. President Trump has long accused the companies of discriminating against himself and other Republicans, and last month held a "social media summit" dedicated explicitly to the issue. Few Democrats have gotten behind the charges, mostly passing them off as a conservative talking point and pointing out there is little evidence beyond individual anecdotes to substantiate the claims. In a statement, Gabbard's campaign pointed out that the suspension of her advertising account came shortly after the first debate last month, during which Gabbard was one of the most-searched Democrats. "In the hours following the 1st debate, while millions of Americans searched for info about Tulsi, Google suspended her search ad account w/o explanation," the campaign said. "It is vital to our democracy that big tech companies can’t affect the outcome of elections." Gabbard, a long-shot candidate who regularly polls around 1 percent, has long staked out positions that put her at odds with most of the Democratic party. The complaint also alleges that Google did not offer adequate explanations for her advertising account's suspension during the hours between June 27 and 28. "For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline," it reads. "Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension." "In response, the Campaign got opacity and an inconsistent series of answers from Google," it states. Gabbard is seeking $50 million in damages. The lawsuit comes as Google is facing intensifying scrutiny from Capitol Hill and federal regulators over potential antitrust concerns. The Department of Justice earlier this week announced it has launched an investigation into companies that dominate various digital markets, including online search. Google holds about 92 percent of the world's search engine market share. Lawmakers and experts have been raising concerns over Big Tech's role in the upcoming elections after trolls and foreign actors manipulated the top platforms to spread misinformation during the 2016 presidential election. http://the...-google-over-censorship-claims
Forwyn Member	Thu Jul 25 20:05:10 Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), a 2020 presidential contender, is suing Google over claims that the tech behemoth violated her right to "free speech." In a federal complaint filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Gabbard alleged Google censored her presidential campaign when it suspended their advertising account for several hours last month. A Google spokeswoman pushed back on Gabbard's claims in a statement to The Hill, attributing the brief suspension to sudden "large spending changes" that set off Google's automated systems. "We have automated systems that flag unusual activity on all advertiser accounts – including large spending changes – in order to prevent fraud and protect our customers," the spokeswoman said. "In this case, our system triggered a suspension and the account was reinstated shortly thereafter." Gabbard's lawsuit marks the first time a presidential contender has sued a large technology company over such claims. The Hawaii Democrat's principal campaign committee, Tulsi Now Inc., is suing Google, accusing it of violating her First Amendment rights along with a litany of violations under California law. "With this lawsuit, Tulsi seeks to stop Google from further intermeddling in the 2020 United States Presidential Election," the complaint reads. Gabbard's lawsuit reflects a narrative typically espoused by Republicans, many of whom have spent years claiming that the top tech companies in the world routinely censor their perspectives. President Trump has long accused the companies of discriminating against himself and other Republicans, and last month held a "social media summit" dedicated explicitly to the issue. Few Democrats have gotten behind the charges, mostly passing them off as a conservative talking point and pointing out there is little evidence beyond individual anecdotes to substantiate the claims. In a statement, Gabbard's campaign pointed out that the suspension of her advertising account came shortly after the first debate last month, during which Gabbard was one of the most-searched Democrats. "In the hours following the 1st debate, while millions of Americans searched for info about Tulsi, Google suspended her search ad account w/o explanation," the campaign said. "It is vital to our democracy that big tech companies can’t affect the outcome of elections." Gabbard, a long-shot candidate who regularly polls around 1 percent, has long staked out positions that put her at odds with most of the Democratic party. The complaint also alleges that Google did not offer adequate explanations for her advertising account's suspension during the hours between June 27 and 28. "For hours, as millions of Americans searched Google for information about Tulsi, and as Tulsi was trying, through Google, to speak to them, her Google Ads account was arbitrarily and forcibly taken offline," it reads. "Throughout this period, the Campaign worked frantically to gather more information about the suspension." "In response, the Campaign got opacity and an inconsistent series of answers from Google," it states. Gabbard is seeking $50 million in damages. The lawsuit comes as Google is facing intensifying scrutiny from Capitol Hill and federal regulators over potential antitrust concerns. The Department of Justice earlier this week announced it has launched an investigation into companies that dominate various digital markets, including online search. Google holds about 92 percent of the world's search engine market share. Lawmakers and experts have been raising concerns over Big Tech's role in the upcoming elections after trolls and foreign actors manipulated the top platforms to spread misinformation during the 2016 presidential election. http://the...-google-over-censorship-claims
Rugian Member	Thu Jul 25 20:20:09 "Tulsi Sues Google" Crownroyal: "This is false. Tulsi is not suing Google, Tulsi Now, Inc is. Also, it's not Google being sued, it's Google LLC. Maybe you should get your facts right if you want people to take you seriously and not consider you to be a complete and utter tard. Now let's spend thirty posts debating this point where I act like I've completely pwnt you over this."
Dukhat Member	Thu Jul 25 20:25:51 DURR I MAKE FALSE EQUIVALENCY NOW DURRR
Rugian Member	Thu Jul 25 20:48:50 Hush, Little Bill Thompson Anyway, hopefully this case gains some traction, but I doubt that this will lead to any substantive changes in time for 2020.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Jul 25 21:43:20 i await Trump misunderstanding this story, like he misunderstood the China/treasonous activity story, and like he has misunderstood literally every other story about Google & yes i mean every single one, prove me wrong
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Jul 26 01:56:35 "Gabbard, a long-shot candidate who regularly polls around 1 percent..." Oh boy, a nobody as far as the current race is concerned is pulling a publicity stunt. And I see the usual suspects have fallen for it.
Pillz Member	Fri Jul 26 02:22:55 Gabbard/Webb would be the second best possible ticket. The best being Brady/Ivanka
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Jul 26 07:08:42 Biy, rugian's butthurt lashing out came out of nowhere. I don't think you and I even conversed lately, certainly nothing with animosity.
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Jul 26 07:09:00 and why are there two threads?
hood Member	Fri Jul 26 07:12:11 Lawyers find the lawsuit to be extremely frivolous and full of the kind of legal innovations that don't win you cases: http://ars...sues-google-for-ad-censorship/ But of course a dependable percent of dumbasses just swallow it whole.
Forwyn Member	Fri Jul 26 11:22:07 "around 1 percent" There are 23 candidates, naturally ~15 of them will be 2% or less. Breakaway candidates are rare (retards prefer soundbytes like "tHaT lItTlE gIrL wAs mE), but it certainly doesn't help when you have a small window where you're the #1 most searched candidate following a debate and a retarded algorithm bans you. "extremely frivolous" Yeah, looks like it. But Google needs to a) Flag campaign ad accounts to not be shut down during media spikes, and/or b) Not require three fucking levels of support to get the account re-opened. Is this 2001? It should be the labor equivalent of a captcha to get it reopened.
hood Member	Fri Jul 26 11:37:14 Sure. But at the same time, it could have been avoided with a simple warning call. "Hey Google, this is Tulsi Gabbard for President calling about our ad account. We're about to make some big purchases, please whitelist us." I do it with my credit card.
kargen Member	Fri Jul 26 21:14:25 Conservative groups should jump on board in support of Gabbard and say see we told you this shit was happening. Google wants Kamala Harris to win so they are undermining Gabbard's campaign just like they undermine anything a conservative group tries to do. Would be entertaining.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Jul 26 23:01:55 "Google wants Kamala Harris to win so they are undermining Gabbard's campaign just like they undermine anything a conservative group tries to do." is that a serious comment? hard to tell w/ you people...
hood Member	Fri Jul 26 23:06:07 It actually seems legit; this isn't the first time I've heard that Kamala Harris is "google's candidate."
obaminated Member	Fri Jul 26 23:37:20 tw doesn't think corporations can have political interests.
Forwyn Member	Fri Jul 26 23:40:38 Google moved more votes than Russia in 2016
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Jul 26 23:47:23 i like Tulsi but she is not doing well in polls & seems extremely unlikely to get the nomination... i see no reason to sabotage her or how it would help Kamala (this was before Tulsi attacked Kamala)
kargen Member	Sat Jul 27 02:42:33 My comment was going more in the direction that conservative organizations have been making this claim for a long long time now and should take advantage to say see we told ya. I know Kamala Harris is the new darling for much of the media but can't speak for who Google might want to win. Still would be entertaining to watch if the conservatives jumped in with that argument.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 11:26:30 conservatives complain a lot, i've seen no proof (getting negative stories results when googling 'Trump' is not proof... at least not about google... Trump is garbage)
obaminated Member	Sat Jul 27 11:28:05 tw doesn't like to think that corporations have actively worked against trump, it screws up the narrative that he has been forced fed for 3 years. that trump isn't an underdog.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 11:34:09 not every single person acts corruptly based on their political views like how R's cited people who merely donated to Dems being on Mueller's team, how dare he!!! maybe Google wrote legitimate algorithms and it is indeed all automated & w/o corrupt intent maybe infowars gets poorer results than the New York Times for a legitimate reason
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 11:49:27 old people tend to be conservative young people tend to be liberal young people use the internet way more... so liberal sites get more traffic... there, issue explained plus the conservative sites who complain are whack job heavy bias sites trying to compare themselves to more normal media
kargen Member	Sat Jul 27 15:50:17 maybe Google wrote legitimate algorithms and maybe monkeys will fly out all our asses. One is as likely as the other. There are whack job sites on both sides of the political spectrum but only one side gets consistently blocked. Also if you do a search for something in the news the first sites listed are almost always left leaning sites. You have to scroll down to find sites with a right wing slant if they get listed at all. The exception being FOX News sometimes comes up 2nd on the list.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 16:06:01 "One is as likely as the other. " false... extremely obviously so... "only one side gets consistently blocked" if you believe nut jobs "The exception being FOX News" what site would you like to come up more? the bias sites on the right slant way further than the ones on the left & i'll bet the sites that come up first are related to how many people like & visit those sites find more nut jobs to visit your whack jobs sites & their ranking will probably rise
kargen Member	Sat Jul 27 16:19:52 No really... watch for monkeys. In your world they could appear at any time. I'm not looking for a particular site. I like reading about a subject from a variety of perspectives. I want a more balanced representation of sites when I do a search. Most visited is a nice argument but doesn't explain why Mother Jones is often found near the top and Breitbart isn't found at all unless you specifically look for them and they have very similar numbers for unique visitors and subscribers.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 16:30:14 do you have evidence of Mother Jones doing so well vs Breitbart? that isn't from a nut job site...
kargen Member	Sat Jul 27 16:48:43 I know when I search for a topic that is in the news I often see Mother Jones in the top five results. I don't recall ever seeing Breitbart listed on the first page. I'm still surprised that you think an algorithm written by people with biases would not reflect those biases. Actually I'm not that surprised. The bias might not even be intentional but it is there.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 19:27:46 & i'm surprised you think the reverse... trying to make it biased would actually take effort personal experience is hardly proof... and maybe Breitbart doesn't make their pages search friendly
kargen Member	Sat Jul 27 21:53:59 At this point if President Trump said chocolate ice cream is his favorite flavor I am convinced you would respond that chocolate doesn't exist. That is how bad your delusions have taken over. I point this out because it seeps into other conversations. We are talking about Google here yet you have brought up President Trump at least two times in this thread and have somehow convinced yourself that anybody that doesn't think President Trump is a Nazi can never ever be correct about anything ever and those that do can never be wrong.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Jul 27 22:01:01 Trump is known to believe Google is biased & suppressing conservatives just as you are claiming... he even had a retarded social media summit of crazies to talk about it. (he's also known to have no idea what Google is or what he's talking about on any tech subject)
hood Member	Sun Jul 28 01:32:00 The google algorithm is programmed to feed you results it thinks you'll click on. If you regularly go to Breitbart, google will return similar results. If you regularly go to Mother Jones, it will return those results. If you only ever visit conspiracy theory blogs with websites that look like they haven't been updated since the 90s, well then those are the results you'll get. Returning results people won't click on means google doesn't get money. Google wants money much more than it wants to skew results in one political bent or another.
obaminated Member	Sun Jul 28 08:28:45 google is biased, i dont know why that is still a question mark for people, it was proven in 2016 and the proceeding years where only right wing people kept getting shut down and right wing thinkers getting fired. its like debating the sky is blue, its fucking blue but some idiots will try and tell you its not exactly blue. its fucking blue. google is clearly a problem.
hood Member	Sun Jul 28 09:42:44 ^ tards at work
Daemon Member	Sun Jul 28 10:15:33 Here is an unbiased news aggregator, does not discriminate breitbart!: https://newsaggregator.oii.ox.ac.uk/news/app/ (url does not work without the s)
Dukhat Member	Sun Jul 28 20:40:51 Just another way for the billionaire overlords who own the Republican party to shift the Overton window to the right. It DoEsNt ShOw Me ShItTy CoNsErVaTiVe SoUrCeS FuLl Of LiEs. MuH lIbErAl bIaS.
kargen Member	Sun Jul 28 22:17:16 Tulsi Gabbard has turned this into a fund raising event. "Please join Tulsi in her fight for our core American values of free speech and fair elections. The Big Tech companies need to be held accountable for their actions, and that’s why we need Tulsi in the White House! We need your donation of $25, $50, $100, or whatever you can give to help Tulsi continue her fight to preserve our democracy. Thank you for your support!"
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jul 29 13:15:23 >>The google algorithm is programmed to feed you results it thinks you'll click on.<< This isn't completely true. Google has lowered the effect of politics on the algorithm. It was this so called "fake new update". In reality it was a down ranking of news content. In some ways they updated the diversity of hits :) Which you know, probably a good thing. But at the same time those hardest hit in the news media were independent content creators. This is what I am hearing from progressive content creators on youtube. The algorithm is now largely favoring corporate main stream media over independent.
hood Member	Mon Jul 29 13:21:55 I don't think anything you provided actually contradicts what I said. The argument is that censoring is happening based on politics. Google cutting the chaff across the board isn't political in nature; mt will still get Hillary conspiracy theory results, it'll just stop coming from 4chan and troll Twitter accounts. Instead he'll get it directly from rt.com and can see the primary source. Or: your post seems to be a more nuanced version of mine, providing support for my statement.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jul 29 15:00:31 In many ways we agree, but all these things can be true at the same time. All political rankings took a hit over the board, but independent news media the most and rightwing/conservative the hardest.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: