Google 'idiot' get photos of Trump

Do you know if you Google the word "idiot" photos of the President of the United States, Donald Trump, comes up?

Democratic Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren pointed this out at the congressional hearing to the CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai. The purpose of the hearing was to determine whether Google displays bias among the website searches. Take a guess.

Pichai explained to Congress (a body of individuals whose combined knowledge of computers adds up to that of a twelve-year-old child) why searching for 'idiot' turns up pictures of Trump.

“If you Google the word ‘idiot’ under images, a picture of Donald Trump comes up. I just did that. How would that happen?” Lofgren asked.

Pichai answered by explaining that Google’s searches are based on multiple factors that determine the end result. [See video below for the exchange.]

“We take the keyword and match it against their pages and rank them based on over 200 signals -- things like relevance, freshness, popularity, how other people are using it,” he testified. “Based on that, at any given time, we try to rank and find the best search results for that query.”

Trump’s face also appears on Google image searches for “stupid” and “racist.”

Okay, that seems to make sense, although it's very disrespectful to the office of the president and can probably be controlled in a civil way if Google really tried harder.

I googled the word 'idiot' early in the morning and some interesting results came up:

1. "Google Image Search makes Trump the World's Top Idiot, but is it fair?"--South China Morning Post

2. "Google Hearing Sees 'Idiot' Trending"--BBC.com [There is a photo of Trump and he wasn't even at the hearing.]

3. "This is why you get Trump's image when you Google 'idiot'"--Nairobi News 

Then about thirty minutes later I googled the word again--here's what came up:

4. "His worst nightmares: Trump's life under a legal microscope"--CNN

5. "Reasons to Worry? Trump Endures Turbulent Week"--The Guardian

6. "Trump's Interior Chief to Step Down as Pressure Mounts from Ethics Inquiries"--Bloomberg

I now ask, how is this not bias results? The wording of the headline's first article is clearly anti-Trump and it literally calls him an idiot.

Number two's wording speaks about trends and couples the word 'idiot' with Trump's photo taking away any doubts that the president and the word go together.

Three is just disgusting.

After thirty minutes CNN was the top site to respond about Trump's woes when you google the word 'idiot.' What the president's problems are, and what the word 'idiot' have in common is unclear, but CNN will use any opportunity to attack him and his administration.

Think of the Honduran father whose 7-year-old child died of malnutrion and dehydration after the dangerous journey to illegally cross the Mexican-U.S. border. The media is blaming Trump, when it's obvious the father should be put behind bars for not feeding or giving water to his child. But blame the U.S. Border Patrol and by extension, Trump.

Looking at 5 and 6, all you see is negative press about Trump and the administration, both having nothing to do with the word 'idiot.' But Google says that relevance is one of the main criteria for how results are displayed, and there is no obvious relevance in these articles. It's just a way to attack Trump.

The mainstream media are the real idiots and Google is their partner.

You may not like everything President Trump says or does, but it's appalling the way he is treated by those with the power to communicate and influence.

Also, it's damn scary because it works.

Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do. 

I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.

Tweet

Dem Ted Lieu wants to censor speech he doesn' like, is sorry he can't

Comrade Ted Lieu

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) spoke Wednesday on the Communist News Network (CNN) saying that he would like to censor speech, particularly speech he disagrees with but isn't allowed to because of that pesky First Amendment thingy preventing him from his fascistic wishes.

Lieu was talking to the far left-leaning fake news TV station about Google CEO Sundar Pichai's testimony before Congress about the issue of political bias in his company's search algorithm.

Pichai spoke with a thick malayali accent, being that he's from the Indian state of Kerala, and while his accent was cute and all innocent-sounding, he was lying like a Stormy Daniels trying to scrape up the money for Trump's attorney fees.

But this isn't about him, it's about Lieu, a politician who not only has sworn to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, but he wants to change it for his own political benefit.

"The CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai, testifying before your committee about a number of concerns," CNN lib-host Brianna Keilar said. "You took an opportunity to push back on Republican claims of bias in Google searches. In the middle of this hearing you Googled Republican Steve Scalise, you Googled after that Republican Steve King to show that there were favorable stories, including from conservative outlets about Scalise, negative coverage of King, and you made the point essentially, that's not because of a Google algorithm, it's because of what these members do and say."

Keilar was trying to also make the ridiculous point that Google actually favors conservatives.

"I will say, it was — it was clever. It caught some attention," Keilar continued. "But I wonder, have you thought that maybe you and other Democrats have missed opportunities to use your time to press Google's CEO at a time when these large tech companies are struggling to manage content perpetuating conspiracy theories, they're so vulnerable to outside interference? Isn't that a focus that could have been a missed opportunity?"

"So it's a very good point you make," Lieu said. "I would love if I could have more than five minutes, to question witnesses. Unfortunately, I don't get that opportunity." [That's because nobody does and you aren't special, Lieu. I also really detest people who start half their sentences with "So".]

"However, I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech," Lieu continued, sounding like a dictatorial schmuck. "The First Amendment prevents me from doing so. And that's simply a function of the First Amendment. But I think over the long run, it's better that government does not regulate the content of speech." [No kidding, genius.]

Lieu then suggested that the tech companies should do a better job of censoring free speech. Yes, any time a dweeb at a tech company doesn't like what someone is saying when exercising his or her free speech, the tech company must put an end to it.

You must be thinking you're living in Communist freaking China, Lieu.

"I would urge these private sector companies to regulate it better themselves," Lieu concluded. "But it's really nothing that I believe government can do. And so that's been my position all along."

It's frightening to find that people in government, people who are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, would want to scrap the most important Amendment in the Bill of Rights, which is why it's the First Amendment.

Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do. 

I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.

Tweet