NBC Report Implicates Google in Antitrust Activity…

NBC News is taking a victory lap after their successful efforts to target their competition, The Federalist website, results in GoogleAds demonetizing the outlet. However, within the article the NBC report also implicates Google in large-scale antitrust violations.

According to NBC the outlet asked Google to take action against the Federalist. Emphasis mine:

(Via NBC News) […] The two sites, ZeroHedge and The Federalist, will no longer be able to generate revenue from any advertisements served by Google Ads.

A Google spokesperson said in an email that it took action after determining the websites violated its policies on content related to race.

“We have strict publisher policies that govern the content ads can run on and explicitly prohibit derogatory content that promotes hatred, intolerance, violence or discrimination based on race from monetizing,” the spokesperson wrote. “When a page or site violates our policies, we take action. In this case, we’ve removed both sites’ ability to monetize with Google.”

[…] Google blocked The Federalist from its advertising platform after the NBC News Verification Unit brought the project to its attention. (link)

Apparently NBC has a self-admitted division within its news operation that is specifically focused on eliminating any competition.  To accomplish this objective NBC requests Google to target and remove revenue from their competition.  An alignment of self-serving interest based on ideology.  This is only one example of an unlawful antitrust violation.

Again, the traditional media cannot win the debate of ideas without putting mechanisms into place to tilt the stage in their favor.

This is a rather stark admission; and the fact that NBC would publicly admit their intent is evidence of how little the media is concerned about the nature of their ideological manipulation.

However, there’s another public admission within the article that is worth highlighting.

[…]  Google added that it takes into account all of the content on a website including comments to determine if a policy violation has occurred.

That is how Google has gone beyond the scope of commerce, and into the realm of curtailing speech.  By weaponizing their ability to demonetize a platform Google attempts to force digital platforms to remove public speech they disagree with.

What you the reader/commentator write on a website can end-up with Big Tech targeting that website financially.  Think about the larger ramifications here.  Hopefully, in a modern era where so much information is now captured by alternative outlets, everyone is starting to see just how big an issue this control authority has become.

On May 28th, after President Trump signed an executive order targeting on-line censorship, CTH wrote a twitter thread about it.  There has to be a breaking point where the FCC or DOJ steps in to address these issues, if our constitutional republic is to survive.

[Read Executive Order Here] – In the periphery of this executive action there are indications, and a widespread expectation, the DOJ is close to filing an antitrust lawsuit against Google Inc and their affiliated companies. There is a possibility the controlling ideology of ‘big tech’ is about to merge with legal action by the DOJ.

The DOJ action has not yet happened, but there are signals it is close. There have been visible signals, subtle but visible, the DOJ was/is about to move on a massive (the biggest in history) antitrust lawsuit against Google and all affiliates.

The issue will not necessarily surface as most would think; via a bias based on conservative -vs- leftist ideology in content manipulation; though those underlying aspects are a part of the larger underpinning we will soon see surface.

Antitrust lawsuits, writ large, are based on “prices”, “costs”, and net “financial” distortions caused by corporations not competing based on open commerce. “Antitrust” in it’s structural form is based on costs and the manipulation of prices.  Essentially, controlled commerce.

In the digital sphere the targeted firms have not opened themselves to liability based on ideology; but rather Google, all subsidiaries and alliances, have opened themselves to antitrust violations through the manipulation and control of financial benefit.

Demonitization of digital platform content providers, in combination with Google’s control of almost all ad revenue in the digital space, is what has opened the door for DOJ intervention based on antitrust laws…. But will they take action? That’s the question.

Antitrust intervention is warranted because the content being generated on these on-line, digital platforms, is being arbitrarily valued by the media company GoogleAds and not the free market. Devaluing certain content they are ideologically opposed to creates consumer distortions.

Underpinning that revenue control is the ideological nature of the control enforcer, in this example Google. However, for the purpose of antitrust lawsuits, that motive is irrelevant.

The methods, practices and purposeful control of value; through collusion of corporate interest specific to a planned and organized effort to control monetary benefit; is the part of their activity that is quantifiable, discoverable, easily provable, and ultimately unlawful.

The financial distortion of internet commerce is the crack in the Big Tech stranglehold that should afford the DOJ the opportunity to step in.  Google (and all subsidiaries) will lose on the substance of their defense because ultimately their business practice has resulted in, and arguably they have engaged in, price fixing.

It will take time, but from an optimistic position if the DOJ take action eventually Google would be forced to settle a lawsuit.  There could be a massive financial settlement in addition to a negotiated Consent Decree. Within the decree terms, we could even see a break-up.

Any antitrust action is only tangentially related to President Trump’s previous confrontation with Twitter and big tech social media based on ideological lines. However, it is easy to see how the two issues will merge.  The monetary distortions are based on ideology.

As soon as the DOJ takes action Silicon Valley will hold an even larger self-interest in the 2020 election outcome; and they will respond accordingly.

This is definitely worth watching…

 

 

This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, AG Bill Barr, BGI - Black Grievance Industry, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Cultural Marxism, Dept Of Justice, Election 2020, media bias, Notorious Liars, Political correctness/cultural marxism, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

363 Responses to NBC Report Implicates Google in Antitrust Activity…

  1. Center for Countering Digital Hate Ltd., a UK company, is pushing this. How much do you want to bet that Soros money is behind it?

    Like

  2. todayistheday99 says:

    That picture of Obama and all the tech rats from SV is classic. I bet they had a huge collective hangover on November 9th 2016. I wonder what they were toasting. Probably something completely stupid like who has the biggest weasel.

    Liked by 8 people

  3. Bryan Alexander says:

    I am a long time member of an Alabama sports website (20+) years. You will not find more passionate people anwhere on the ‘net.

    What I have found over the years is that, for the most part, people will get out of control many times faster, be more provocative, issue threats and be trolls and nuisances much more readily when they are anonymous.

    The internet needs to reform itself to the point that people are not anonymous.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Hopper Creek says:

    Ice cream BAR anybody ? Topped with DOJ Cherries?

    Like

  5. RAC says:

    Google is too big it needs competitors. I don’t know a lot about the technicalities but I think many sites must use software provided by google. I come to this conclusion because I have google marked as untrusted in NoScript , and whilst I can still read the sites to get full functionality I have to temporally disable the restrictions.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. disklxik says:

    Wow! There are lots of hateful, slanderous and false comments on FaceBook.
    Does Google run ads on Facebook? Asking for AG Barr, he’s gonna look into it.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Somebody's Gramma says:

    For 20 years now Google has been owning the Internet. They have manipulated search engine results by promoting who/what they see fit, and burying those they don’t agree with. They’ve gotten filthy rich by manipulation, boosting, and banning. Whoever thought a dumb programmer could make over $200K/year? Google broke every promise it ever made. I was done with Google a long time ago. I will cheer and drink champagne if they get hit with an enormous and glorious anti-trust lawsuit.
    #GoogleIsEvil

    Liked by 9 people

  8. ed bernay says:

    How about all of President Trumps supporters commit to jumping to the competitors of these tech giants? After all isn’t this about influencing the next election anyway? They are doing everything they can to discourage commentary that exposes the BS of Democrat politicians.

    Liked by 4 people

    • HeLLINaHandbasket says:

      I’ve stopped using Chrome, Google search, Gmail, years ago.
      There are other great resources out there to use, for our most basic internet tools.
      Mozilla Browser
      ProtonMail Email
      DuckDuckGo Search Engine
      …and other brands that are just as great as a web browser, searching and emailing and at times I use Yandex search engine when even DuckDuckGo isn’t giving me “all” the results I think it should. I still use YouTube, but visit channels exclusively on BitChute whenever possible. We can do this, it just takes a little effort to give-up what’s convenient even though we know they’re out to destroy us.
      #MAGA

      Liked by 4 people

      • RAC says:

        And if you can find a seller of blank computers they’re cheaper without the OS,and use linux, not as user friendly as microsoft, but a several to choose from and after a while you can get by.

        Liked by 3 people

        • dd_sc says:

          There are plenty of Linux distributions that install a user interface similar to Windows; the learning curve is pretty short. And the computer doesn’t need to be blank, the Linux installation can wipe the drive prior to install if you want.

          Liked by 2 people

        • clive hoskin says:

          I stopped using”Windows”in 2000 when all the BS was going on.Have been using Linux since then.Probably the best operating system.Both to install and use is Linux Mint.It works similar to”Windoz”but much much faster.Once you get used to it you can venture out to the miriade of other flavors such as Debian or Suse or Red Hat.They are all downloadable from their websites for free and I have yet to encounter the dreaded”Blue Screen Of Death”

          Liked by 3 people

          • Linux Mint is the way to go IMO. I use the “Maté version. Ran Ubuntu since Warty Warthog but when they lost their minds with the “New and improved” desktop I moved to Mint and haven’t looked back.

            For anyone interested you can run windoze in a “sandbox” inside Linux for anything windoze you just gotta have AND it will run better in the process!

            Liked by 1 person

      • ed bernay says:

        Thanks. I’ll start using these too.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. Cyberfoy says:

    Don’t worry, Barr is on it.

    LOL

    Liked by 1 person

  10. “Don’t be evil.” ~Google
    ….. ooopsie

    Liked by 3 people

    • todayistheday99 says:

      Alphabet ended up doing the exact opposite of their mission statement. I wonder if the company founders know that to be a fact? The left is so twisted that the bulk of their employees probably believe that Trump is evil and must be stopped. It becomes a mental health issue when one eats their own excrement. Maybe they could be shut down on that basis.

      Liked by 4 people

      • HeLLINaHandbasket says:

        Well, you’re correct, they actually believe they are righteous in what they do. Heck, they’ve only told us every minute of every day that this is so (ha!)
        When Page and Strozk’s email told the world “he would fix it”, and in-so-many-words it was their “duty” to save America from evil, it’s for your own good.
        #MAGA

        Liked by 3 people

      • fractionalexponent says:

        So Wuhan bat soup is on the menu at the Google cafeteria?

        Liked by 2 people

      • I believe the bulk of their employees are not even Americans. H1B visa holders dominate silicon valley

        Liked by 1 person

        • wondering999 says:

          So essentially, while virtue-signalling furiously, we have imported a foreign government to rule us according to foreign rules

          Liked by 1 person

          • In the 90s I worked in the employee benefits in Silicon Valley. I saw the transition happening at that point. The white engineers were being replaced by foreigners because they could be paid half the money. At that time there was a big war for benefits as well. Who could provide the best benefit would get the best employees. That was expensive so why not find some foreigners to do the job and get rid of those expensive Americans. I’m sure the whole culture of those companies is now influenced by those hires. Why would they have loyalty to America?

            Liked by 2 people

            • wondering999 says:

              Wow.
              ““The social media giant is clearly taking a defensive stance which raises questions beyond the document. Their corporate posture is telling that while a record number of Americans are looking for work, one of America’s leading companies is credited with a memo targeting recruitment of foreign workers by nationality, then suspending six employees they suspect
              of revealing it. It doesn’t add up,” O’Keefe said.”

              Like

            • wondering999 says:

              Facebook explicitly favors Chinese and Korean workers over American workers. It’s in the memo!

              Like

  11. Beau Geste says:

    NBCand Google combine/conspire/agree to hurt a competitor, and restrain trade by killing off the Federalist and Zerohedge.

    The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.”

    The digital electronics laws protect Zerohedgs nd the Federalist from liability from posters. Google isn’t complaining about posts it doesn’t like on its own sites.

    Go get them EU Antitrust. Break them up into 3 or more competing companies, with access to all the same data. Make them all common carriers.

    Liked by 6 people

  12. juridicus2016 says:

    It is frankly terrifying that google makes its decisions based upon comments posted to a particular sight. If that is truly the case the left merely has to target its chosen sites, bombard them with the appropriate comments and the sight becomes demonitized and the group will struggle to survive. Much like NBC has apparently done here. When the mainstream media is owned by only a few companies that are all ideologically alligned, the days of a free and open press are over. Tragically the First amendment is reduced to a few words on a dusty parchment that no longer have any practical meaning or effect. May God save us all.

    Liked by 7 people

  13. islandpalmtrees says:

    Below you will find, old news for allot of us but I think it helps to understand who is pulling the Google strings.

    Think of this when you read “Google blocked The Federalist from its advertising platform after the NBC News Verification Unit brought the project to its attention. (link)”.

    Google blocking or the CIA?

    So now you know the CIA funded Google, they have people embedded with all of the mainstream media – CNN, NBC, Huffington Post, New York Times, Washington Post, probably Fox and finally, it’s worth pointing out that CrowdStrike received $100 million in investments led by Google Capital (since re-branded as CapitalG) in 2015.

    How the CIA made Google
    http://i1.wp.com/duckduckgo.com/i/fcf05594.png?zoom=2

    Small example
    14 cutting edge firms funded by the CIA
    Paul Szoldra Sep 21, 2016, 6:53 PM

    http://www.businessinsider.com/companies-funded-by-cia-2016-9?op=1

    Liked by 4 people

  14. AceODale says:

    I mentioned to my wife, “Remember watching AT&T get broken up by the Feds? We could be seeing that again with Google.”

    Liked by 4 people

  15. realitycheck6 says:

    ZERO HEDGE has banned individuals for years IF tiy did not agree with their antisematism and pro-russian viewpoint.

    To cry about being banned yet banning people on their own site is being a HYPOCRITE in the worse form.

    Like

    • Carrie says:

      I actually don’t completely agree. From what I witnessed, the virulent antisemitism began around 2015. Other commenters pushed back but it was unsuccessful. Now they are mostly ignored. It was widely discussed amongst the commenters how they are mostly comprised of trolls with a leftist bend that hoped to destroy the website.
      Not sure about the pro-Russia stance- more a pronounced stance to refuse to demonize Russia at every turn. That gave them a lot of problems by 2015. Not surprisingly. The big mistake is the owners do not censor the comments- at least here the trolls/rolcon can be immediately booted off the site.

      Liked by 2 people

      • realitycheck6 says:

        actually they do ban people … I know(lol) … many times its peoplewho have calmly disagreed with statements have been banned.

        To ban people with differing opinions and then whine about geting banned by major site is the height of hypocrisy. But thats just my opinion.

        Article about ZH may be true or false but they show up on all pro russian scans. I support Ukraine in its fight for independence and that why they banned me.
        https://newrepublic.com/article/156788/zero-hedge-russian-trojan-horse

        Liked by 1 person

    • HeLLINaHandbasket says:

      @realitycheck6
      Were you banned from ZeroHedge?

      Liked by 1 person

    • starfcker says:

      I’ve been banned from Zerohedge for 7 or 8 years. No big loss, the comment section ain’t what it used to be anyway. That was one of the first big unmoderated websites on the internet back in the day. Strangely enough, they have published articles I’ve written, but then I’m not allowed to comment on my own articles.

      Liked by 4 people

    • walt39 says:

      ZH has every right to ban people using its own site for whatever reason including the phase of the moon. The problem with Google is they’re able to mostly shut off the revenue to sites they DO NOT own whenever that serves Goo’s purposes and without reliable recourse.

      Liked by 3 people

  16. Doppler says:

    “What you the reader/commentator write on a website can end-up with Big Tech targeting that website financially.” Not to mention comments that might be posted by NBC’s own false flag bloggers, Antifa bloggers action league or similar enemies of liberty.
    The internet isn’t the wild west. It’s a mob-protected market where ideology and money run together.
    I’m not sure the Antitrust laws are the best weapon here, although it magnifies the impact. It’s also a free speech issue, in a unique set-up where google monetizes the internet by ad placements, Blogs attract viewers and commenters by content, and certain voices get silenced by the monopolist for ideological reasons. Plus the consumers of the content and the commenters aren’t paying customers, Google is selling their data to marketers, with targeted ads that generate revenue for Google.
    What is the law where Antifa Blogger posts fake offensive comment on Conservative website, causing website to lose money. It’s similar in ways to vandalism, defamation and fraud. I guess it needs a new statute regulating the internet, if only Congress had the prudence to invent effective, minimally invasive regulatory schemes, instead of turning every regulatory scheme over to the same set of lobbyists who own DC and rely on that ownership to harvest their own private profit.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. 2012%252F12%252F04%252F16%252Fobamatoasts.cQ0.jpg%252F950x534__filters%253Aquality%252880%2529

    Like

    • oops;

      President Obama, discussing how government and technology businesses can work together to “win the future.”
      John Doerr, partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
      Carol Bartz, president and CEO, Yahoo!
      John Chambers, CEO and chairman, Cisco Systems
      Dick Costolo, CEO, Twitter
      Larry Ellison, co-founder and CEO, Oracle
      Reed Hastings, CEO, NetFlix
      John Hennessy, president, Stanford University
      Steve Jobs, chairman and CEO, Apple
      Art Levinson, chairman and former CEO, Genentech
      Eric Schmidt, chairman and CEO, Google
      Steve Westly, managing partner and founder, Westly Group
      Mark Zuckerberg, founder, president and CEO, Fakityfakefake

      Liked by 3 people

  18. sundance says:

    Liked by 10 people

    • HeLLINaHandbasket says:

      The lefty tyrants STILL have no idea who our guy, President Trump is. Even though he’s told the world, for as long as I can remember, that it’s his stance to take revenge in the strongest way possible when you’ve been wronged, specifically so others take notice.
      #MAGA

      Liked by 4 people

  19. Nan says:

    Requiring people to use their legal names on the Internet is a recipe for disaster.

    I would suggest you look up a phenomenon known as “SWATTing” for just one example of how being public online can destroy somebody’s life.

    You have a right to speak anonymously. Would you willingly put up all your personal information on this forum, right now?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sharon says:

      Yes, this is a serious problem! A quilter I know who does sew-alongs was swatted during a live feed. It was horrible. If this got into middle-aged woman sewing, it has to be rampant.

      Liked by 2 people

  20. Shyster says:

    “Google” should be the amount of the settlement and fines.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. WD says:

    This monster has been allowed to grow for years. Wjthout opening a HUGE can of whoop ass, it will be almost impossible to put the ‘Genie back in the bottle’. The 4th of July is fast approaching folks. May be the last one you’ll enjoy as Free Men.

    Liked by 3 people

    • We aren’t free and haven’t been for a long time.

      You can’t own a home w/o gvt permission. Think I’m wrong? Try not paying “your” taxes and see what happens…

      Drive a car? Any built for a decade or more has a data logger (and GPS) that benefits who exactly? Sundance has pointed out if you drive a car you are constantly tracked by license plate scanners. Don’t even think about what your hand held transponder telling about you…

      That SSAN account # that is your de facto national ID #

      The only reason we can spout off here is we are like puppies squealing in a basket no threat to anyone (that matters).

      Liked by 1 person

  22. KBR says:

    “We have strict publisher policies”

    So Google admits it is a PUBLISHER now? Did I read that right?

    Liked by 6 people

  23. omyword says:

    The silencing of Gods lambs. We have entered into a new era. Please pray.

    Like

  24. Been a year since May 2019 when Trump announced a website for supporters and Conservatives to post descriptions of their experiences being banned, censored, and demonetized online. Reportedly there were many, many postings. The site is no longer active. He also hosted a White House Summit last July 2019 for key supporters and Conservatives on social media; he promised to marshal his administration to defend and protect them from one-sided and unfair online banning, censorship and demonetization.

    So a year has gone by and many of these talented and loyal people have been outright banned, repeatedly censored and demonetized. They wonder why Trump’s White House, FTC, FCC and DOJ have done nothing – meaning, where are any visible actions that reverse the behavior of Big Tech and Big Media that are decimating their voices and livelihoods. Trump recently announced in May 2020 that he might organize a committee to look into the issue. That online censorship continues to become even more one-sided, unfair, blatant and pervasive is seriously concerning as we find ourselves a few months from the election. Let me know if I’ve missed any meaningful ACTIONS (not tweets) from the Trump Administration.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. islandpalmtrees says:

    Tucker Carlson Tonight – Google controls 70 percent of all online advertising dollars! Now Google is controlled by the CIA. So who controls 70 percent of all advertising dollars the CIA. Google is also protected by Congress! They can not be sussed.

    They use the monopoly to control opposing opinions. Those that they don’t agree with.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. islandpalmtrees says:

    I want to make it clear. The real threat here is the CIA!

    Liked by 1 person

  27. OldSaltUSNR says:

    Well, well, well, the DOJ is just FINALLY recognizing the obvious, and doing “due diligence”, after delaying for four years. The obvious hope is that Trump is turned out of office, before the DOJ’s fake antitrust investigation gets going. The same applies to Durham’s investigation, and all those other “investigations”, i.e. Horowitz. The DOJ has managed to drag out these “investigations” long enough, that a Democrat winning in November can shut them all down, thus completing the DOJ’s & FBI’s open, obvious, and consistent obstruction of justice. Remember, no Democrat has gone to jail, or even been seriously threatened by anything the DOJ has done for four years, despite ample probable cause.

    I’m sorry, I’ll believe that the DOJ is seriously going after Google, Twitter, and the others, the moment after judgment, which will be what… maybe seven years from now (re: the Baby Bell/AT&T case went on a least that long, if I recall).

    This is yet another DOJ head fake. Don’t buy into it. Results are the only currency in which to evaluate the corrupt DOJ/FBI, and the results read like Obama was running the show himself.

    Liked by 4 people

  28. Sepp says:

    Alternate between using various search engines:

    DuckDuckGo

    Yandex

    Bing

    StartPage

    Liked by 3 people

  29. thedoc00 says:

    This is one case where the DoJ needs to go to Europe and request the evidence they used to punish US Big tech for bias, anti-trust, etc. The EU may have had different motives in mind (i.e. the EU was intent on raking in big cash rewards to their tax coffers vs actual protection of rights), but evidence is evidence. It also gives guides to what evidence to gather, where to find it and even the start of evidence trails back to the US and EU.

    Liked by 4 people

    • MaineCoon says:

      Months ago I believe it was President Trump who tweeted for examples of how people on tweeter (and elsewhere) had been censored, forwarding the proof.

      Liked by 3 people

  30. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Time for Congress to break up Goggle-Skynet before it’s too late.

    Like

  31. Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

    Google added that it takes into account all of the content on a website including comments to determine if a policy violation has occurred.

    This is clearly (REDACTED) by (REDACTED) so as to (REDACTED) by (REDACTED) in order to (REDACTED) for (REDACTED)

    Self censored to keep everyone safe.

    Liked by 4 people

  32. xsnake says:

    I wrote a comment on an article about Gorsuch in the Federalist today at precisely 2:34.
    Got a reply on it to respond to from Disqus at 3:01.
    Clicked the link….got to the Federalist….no comment section below the article…..checked a couple other articles….no comment sections.
    Looks like google put the screws to them.
    Been complaining for more than a decade about no big conservative money starting a QUALITY search engine to compete with google.
    Guess no one with a few billion cares to have hundreds of billions. The only big time entrepreneurs are capitalist hating Marxists.
    Put that in a novel twenty years ago and you’d’ve been laughed at.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. bessie2003 says:

    Wondering with the laws passed a few years ago in the European nations about online privacy and information sharing, such as news articles where copyrights were claimed, wonder if they included the right to limit certain types of comments and if so,

    would that be Googles justification, or even Twitters, for removing sites, accounts because of comments and content saying they’re simply trying to comply with the laws of the other nations?

    And if they do that, if those laws require stifling free speech, if the DOJ goes after those companies to remove their protections of platforms calling them now publishers, what’s to stop Google, Twitter, FB even, to move their operations to an overseas homebase to get around US laws?

    Like

  34. DWL says:

    We have an incredibly weak president that follows the advice of even weaker people. All the problems occurring in the world are in response to not punishing wrong doing. Letting bad people get away with bad things snowballs in to more evil. Trump talks a good game but so far, remind me, how many perp walks have you seen?

    His BS was called long ago. The only ones still buying the BS is his base

    Like

  35. Neo says:

    Google is claiming that the Federalists was never demonetized. NBC jumped the gun.

    Like

  36. Blind no Longer says:

    Tucker called them all out tonight. Mike Lee and even Doug Collins!!!

    I couldn’t agree more…they sit on the committees and do jack shit about it…almost like it’s planned.

    Like

  37. QuiAudetVincit says:

    Trust activities? Just imagine the tortuous interference claims ZH and the Federalist could and should bring against NBC

    Like

  38. ezgoer says:

    Google is run by America hating far left foreigners. Why do their actions surprise anyone?
    And phony conservative Senator Mike Lee does nothing about using much deserved anti-trust action. Probably because he and his corporate cheap labor donors will support anything that will harm Trump..

    Like

  39. Troublemaker10 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  40. henry says:

    If google isn’t hit hard and fast with huge anti-trust penalties; the next evolution of their crusade will be on all those who use their services. Gmail, etc., will be seized, deleted; who knows?

    Once a child’s temper trantrum starts, only stupid parents let it run amok.

    Like

  41. Phil McCoxwell says:

    Googles Achilles heel is that their google ads can be impacted by we the people in a significant way. Just like how we donate to causes when the are bullied, we can “vote” on google ads. It’s pretty simple actually. All we have to do is start clicking on multiple google ads a day. Just click, but NEVER purchase. Drive up the clicks, especially on your favorite websites, drive up costs to advertisers, drive down the value of the ads by not purchasing. It’s easy. I refer to it as shitclicking. Sure, google will get a revenue boost from their advertisers pockets, but sooner or later it will become too expensive and not worth it. So get clicking.

    Like

    • henry says:

      I have never clicked on any google ad and I wasn’t aware there was such an option.
      hmm…An idea worth trying.

      Like

    • Doppler says:

      I think you’re assuming they get paid by the click, as opposed to the far more specific paid by the sale following click model, which I believe exists and makes much sense to anyone paying for ads

      Like

  42. Tex Bender says:

    Once these tech companies start censoring posts on their websites, they become publishers, due to the fact they only want their chosen information on their website. This makes them editors/publishers and they are no longer exempt from lawsuits. Their Exemption needs to be reversed since they Are making an actively controlling what’s on their website.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. jbrickley says:

    A Red Diaper Doper Baby from the UK working for NBC in the UK used her Karen superpowers to flag the two websites. Google capitulated because they have the same twisted worldview.

    Like

  44. Doppler says:

    President Trump needs to take action. Tick Tock, the Left is running out the clock.

    Like

  45. majorkalhoun says:

    DOJ legal action would sure explain why Twatter hired a very corrupt Deep State attorney, James Baker.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. Cass Jay says:

    Isn’t this a restraint of trade issue also?

    Demonitising is stopping the income of these sites.

    What happens when the left post disgusting posts on right wing sites, merely to get them closed down?

    Liked by 1 person

  47. regitiger says:

    so, my question is given that The Federalist and Zerohedge are not direct competitors in any way with google and NBC, why are they a threat…I think I am answering my own questions here.

    it’s not a financial threat…a culture/idea threat? content war?

    seems to me that if these two represent a threat to google and NBC in the idea wars, one would presume there are quite a few more targets beyond just these two?

    or more specifically, what kind of SEO rewards in both search benefits and monetization are handed out like free candy for those that fulfill content that lines up nicely with google and NBC?

    perhaps I’m stating the obvious, but it would appear to me there is a far more serious set of issues here related to content control by google…

    is the relationship between NBC and Google one of mutual benefit only? or is there some other dark relationship involved? Is NBC acting in a way that google would prefer all other media companies to follow?

    I mean if we are really going to be serious about anti-trust…and I am serious enough to recognize it is a big problem…at what point do we also begin to investigate companies like Boeing? Microsoft? Apple ? Amazon ? Walmart ? Ebay? etc.

    many of these companies behave as captive market monopolies and do in fact influence content.

    do we trust congress will actually write laws that will help mitigate these risks?

    I’m not confident we will ever have a congress in this current installment doing anything other than lip service to correct markets…the relationship between lawmakers and the hugely powerful lobby groups would be at risk. I don’t see congress doing anything to harm that flow of money.

    these companies did not become powerful simply because they sell good product. They companies are intimately secured and safe and insulated from competition because congress has allowed and enabled that to happen.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s