UNCENSORED. Irish Communist, Jen Gennai admits censoring Conservatives. Project Veritas spy camera

UNCENSORED. Irish Communist, Jen Gennai admits censoring Conservatives. Project Veritas spy camera

The reason why I decided to come
to Project Veritas is because… …people need to know
what’s actually going on with Google. There’s this facade about what they’re doing. But what they’re actually doing, what the employees are actually seeing inside the company, is different. They’re not an objective source of information. They are a highly biased political machine… …that is bent on never letting somebody like
Donald Trump come to power again. This is a Goliath. I am but a David… …trying to say that the emperor has no clothes. Being a small Google ant, I can be crushed
and I’m aware of that… …but this is something that is bigger than me. This is something that
needs to be said to the American public. Earlier this year, a Facebook insider
exposed “deboosting” of Conservatives on Facebook. That insider inspired someone at Pinterest… …to come to Project Veritas with his story. Last week we released a report from
the Pinterest insider Eric Cochran… …detailing censorship of pro-life
and Christian content. The tech companies can’t fight us all. Today, we bring you a Google insider. A brave man who came forward and
brought us a story that will scare you. I think sunlight is the best disinfectant… …and people need to
start asking questions. A couple weeks before
the Google insider came forward… …Project Veritas secretly recorded with Jen Gennai… …a Google executive. Gennai talks about making sure
when people search for things… …through machine-learning algorithms,
Google’s political agenda is always present. Right after Donald Trump won
the election in 2016… …the company did a complete 180 in what
they thought was important. Before, they thought self expression
and giving everyone a voice was important. But now they’re like, “Hey,
there’s a lot of hate and because… …there’s a lot of hate and misogyny and racism… …that’s the reason why Donald Trump got elected. And so we need to fix that. And we need to start policing our users… …because we don’t like to have
an outcome like that. We don’t want to have an outcome
like that to happen again. Let’s talk a little about that. Tell me more about what you observed at
these meetings right after Trump was elected. Who said it? What was said exactly? The things that changed was that the tjs… …they started talking about the need
to combat hate and racism online. And also at YouTube they had
the same talks by the CEO, Susan. And they talked about combating that and… …getting rid of “unfairness”. And so slowly they started introducing the concept of… …machine-learning fairness. Jen Gennai is the head of responsible innovation
at Google Global Affairs. She determines policy and ethics for machine learning… …or “artificial intelligence”. What we’ve learned is that AI is increasingly
what Google search is all about. Fairness is a dog whistle. It does not mean what you think that it means… …and you have to apply doublethink in order
to understand what they’re really saying. And what they’re really saying about
fairness is that they have to manipulate… …their search results so it gives
them the political agenda that they want. And so they have to rebias their algorithms… …so that they can get
their agenda across. To unpack everything that she’s saying, …saying that she wants the algorithm
to be fair to a hand-picked… …representative of that community means
that what she’s trying to do is she’s… …trying to sell you a product. What she’s trying to do is she’s trying to sell
a product that’s not objective, …that doesn’t represent the will of its users… … but instead represents the will of a group
of people making decisions behind the shadows. So what did you find inside Google that was
related to this idea of “fairness”? What I found at Google related to fairness was a machine-learning algorithm called “ML Fairness”. “ML” standing for “machine-learning”. And “fairness” meaning whatever
it is that they want to define as “fair”. You could actually think of
“fairness” as unfair because… …it’s taking as input the clicks that people are making and then figuring out which signals… … are being generated from these clicks and
which signals it wants to amplify… … and then also dampen. So I have google.com up in front of me… …and I’m going to try to put this
AI machine-learning thing to the test. I’m going to type in the following words: “Men can” And I see: “men can have babies” “men can get pregnant” “men can have periods” “men can cook” Do most people search for that stuff
or what is the company doing internally? No. People aren’t searching for this. This is literally coming from… …source-of-truth databases… …that they’ve selected to represent the truth… …and that they are pulling this information from. Let me try it again with… Let’s try this with: “Women can”. I don’t see… I see: “women can vote” “women can do it” “women can do anything” “woman can be drafted” Yes. That seems a little interesting. So all these examples are… …part of the social justice narrative. Right? And so the sources of truth that
ML Fairness is selecting from to amplify… …are saying these keywords and so because that
source of truth has been vandalized… …the output of the algorithm is also
reflecting that vandalism. Project Veritas also received a trove of
confidential documents from within Google. This document is about
algorithmic unfairness. It reads: Gaurav Gite, a Google software engineer… …independently verified
the thesis of this document. This is a confidential document. Correct? Yes. This is not a document that Google
has come out and admitted… …that this is their process. That’s correct. And in this document it says… I’m going to read from it- In fact, if you brought this up without the document… …they would say that this is a conspiracy theory. Wow. So then they wouldn’t admit this publicly? They would never admit this publicly. In this document it says: What do they mean by that? What they want to do is they want to
act as gatekeepers between the user and… …the content that they’re trying to access. And so they’re going to come in, they’re going to
filter the content and they’re going to say, “Actually, we don’t want to give the user
access to that information…” “…because it’s going to create an outcome
that’s undesirable to us”. So this was an internal-only Google
document which says the goal is to… …establish, “a single point of truth”
for definition of news across Google products unquote what is this what does
this mean when they main single point of truth what they need is alignment with
the narrative and so the narrative come is manufactured by establishment players
and what they’re looking to do is they’re looking to boost authoritative
content have an editorial agenda does the company make news decisions is that
what I’m seeing in this document yes um this is describing what’s happening is
the news well Google have a problem if people saw this document nothing so why
wouldn’t Google want people to see this document the reason why is because um
right here in some of these boxes they’re applying editorial they’re their
editorial agenda on to the news sources and if you were to expand that you would
see that there’s a machine-learning a fairness within these uh algorithmic
checks and they state right here that it’s for call ability and extract
ability but in reality it’s it’s it’s does it fall in line with their with
their agenda and if it does it it pops to the top and if it doesn’t then it
gets buried other internal documents expose Google’s hopes for ML fairness
training data are collected and classified algorithms are programmed
media are filtered ranked and generated people like us are
programmed sounds like social engineering not search query Google’s power has become a political
issue with politicians on both sides of the aisle debating whether antitrust
legislation or other regulations and controls are in order right now there’s a lot of chatter in
Washington DC antitrust discussions and legislation being mentioned about
breaking up Google how do your bosses or the people that you work with inside of
Google feel about that for the most part they’re they’re ignoring it to them it’s
not even happening they don’t see it as a real threat
because it’s something that’s already happened before and passed she just said
what Google’s really thinking and they won’t say in public but she just said
you know what a lot of us see and know to be true you guys just got her and she
was just she just said the truth they’re not objective peace they’re not an
objective source of information they are a highly biased political machine that
is bent on never letting somebody like dongseong come to power again it’s unclear what Jenai is exactly
referring to but Google’s political agenda is undeniable with some other things I can type here
Hillary Clinton’s emails or doesn’t even give you a result Google is suggesting
that people do not search for this term is that correct that’s what they’re
saying it’s not even worth returning any results but people do search for this
absolutely and you can tell that because you can cross-reference some of their
other services that prove that people are if you want to get an example go to
trends google.com okay I’ll do that right now
trends google.com and shine clumsy nose yes okay and set it to what the last
five years seems like we had a spike in October of
2016 it says 100 I guess that is that 100 it’s all relative so in order to get
an idea of the relative importance of this you’re gonna want to compare it
against another search time let’s type in Donald Trump’s emails okay show me
what I’m looking at here still we see right here is relative to the search
term of Hillary’s emails Dom types of emails I was no search traffic no search
traffic now let’s go back to google.com and search for Donald Trump’s emails and
it should show us no autocomplete because according to Google no one
searches for it compared to Hillary Clinton’s emails but
it does it gives us a whole bunch of different examples for autocomplete so
nobody’s fewer people search for this and it autocompletes and everyone
searches for Hillary Clinton’s email and it doesn’t that’s right what’s the
explanation well according to them Hillary Clinton’s emails is a conspiracy
theory and it’s unfair to return results based on her emails and so through their
program of ML fairness they’ve deleted the autocomplete off the
internet like it didn’t even exist how did they do that was it manually was it
a human being was it it was it was it a machine a I the way that it works is
that the training Dai now with a human with a bunch of humans that considered
them social justice warriors or whatever you want to label them but they are
feeding the information and training the AI so that it will return results like
this and when they aren’t able to to train it there’s actually something that
someone that will go through and manually delete certain keyword times or
put it as a blacklist there’s a lot of people filing bugs internally against
Google I can figure these involved results and they dig more because
they’ve got no interest in fixing things that go against their social justice
narrative or I’ll reduce what they consider to be
fair Google is protected by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act it
says quote no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be
treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another
information content provider unquote meaning Google is not liable for any
content on their platform some people think a solution is this section 230 and
taking it away I mean they violated not only the letter of the law but the
spirit of the law section 230 says that in order for them to be a platform they
can’t censor the content that they have instead they decided to act as a
publisher making them responsible for everything that they put on and they’re
still masquerading as a platform even though they’re acting as a publisher it
doesn’t stop with Google search our insider says political biases are
censoring voices on YouTube owned by Google as well
he says the YouTube rollout discussion was at a rather bizarre location did
have it was a special occasion that happened in May and they they invited us
all to my temple to talk about the future of the company for YouTube and
they described that they were going to have more content filtering and right
after that happens a lot of the content creator started to demonetized
and they just heard two different I’m talking about did Reuben talking about
Piper DM talking about 10:10 pool and a lot of the other content creators that
are within the YouTube ecosystem just saw the view counts just go through the
floor what did YouTube do to make their view counts go down so Google is
targeting what they consider to be white weed news commentators so that includes
simple did for them students how to and a host of other people that they are
coming in they’re deciding that they don’t want these opinions to have a wide
appeal and so they’re coming in and they’re putting their thumb down and
they’re deciding which content that users are allowed to see the way that
Google is able to target people is that they tape videos and then they do a
transliteration through using artificial intelligence and they look at the
translated text of what those people are saying and then they assign certain
categories to them like what year or or or news talk and then they’re able to
take those and apply their algorithmic ly biasing unfairness algorithms to them
so that their content is suppressed across the platform specifically the
insider verified that Praeger you the conservative educational YouTube channel
and talk show host Dave Reubens videos received heightened analysis and the
artificial intelligence program vaya con vaya con police’s YouTube distribution
singling Prager and Ruben out as right-wing and News Talk
so their point nerd of control what’s scary about this to you what’s scary is
that Google’s deciding what’s important and what’s not important they are going
through and they’re effectively deleting conversations from the the national
narrative it reminds me of a book called 1984 and that should have been a warning
1984 should not be a user manual on how to run society and Google’s falling
directly into that trap when they’re deciding what gets read what gets
consumed what if we’re able to click on what appears you know it reminds me a
lot of fascism like you know it’s not just about burning books when videos get
pulled off of a platform that’s also a form of censorship I’ve been living this
for you know years and so you know it’s like yeah that’s
is and for other people shopping even for me it’s like this is why I’m coming
forward hmm because it is shocking people have no idea that it’s happening
they still hate the Google is an objective source of information and it’s
not are you afraid I am afraid I was more afraid but I had a lot of
difficulty with the concept of you know my life and be because of this but um I
I imagine what the other world would look like here it’s not a place that I
want to live in what do you think is gonna happen next for you hopefully I
get away with it and nothing bad happens but um bad news can happen I mean this
is a behemoth this is a Goliath I’m but it David trying to say that the emperor
has no clothes and being a small little ant I can be questioned I’m aware of
that but this is something that was bigger than me this is something that
needs to be said to the American public this year insiders approached Project
Veritas and told their stories exposing the Giants in Silicon Valley thanks to
the bravery and courage these insiders are showing big tech is being held
accountable this is a watershed moment it’s not the New York Times or CBS News
doing the work it’s individual citizens anonymous heroes who put their careers
on the line and they’ve struck a nerve and found their voice at Project Veritas
people always ask me what can I do you can follow the lead of Eric Cochrane and
the Google insider you too can be brave we’re a camera and contact us securely
project Veritas comm slash brave

Posts created 19620

One thought on “UNCENSORED. Irish Communist, Jen Gennai admits censoring Conservatives. Project Veritas spy camera

  1. Goolag gives you all results from a year or more ago when you search "google censorship…" , after you filter it to recent results they give you the same handful of videos with few views. They are actively trying to make it look like this BIG NEWS is not trending when it actually IS EVERYWHERE. This is super news, people are VERY interested and want MORE of this story! Google is very misguided!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top