Ted Cruz vs. Youtube (Project Veritas vs. Google)
26 June 2019 [link youtube]
Yeah, Ted Cruz is my hero, all of a sudden. His youtube channel gets suspiciously few views, and you can find it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1YENAvOveE
I give you two options: support this channel on Patreon, or else it will cease to exist. It will cost you $1 per month: if you really think that the meaning brought into your life by this channel (past, present or future) isn't worth $1, then I'm not in a position to disagree with you, I'm just in a position to quit. https://www.patreon.com/a_bas_le_ciel/
Youtube Automatic Transcription
we're gonna jump straight into a bangin
new video from American senator Ted Cruz Ted Cruz is a terrible reputation within the Republican Party and with the Democrat Party but that's been changing just lately a lot of Americans have concerns that big tech media companies and Google Google in particular are engaged in political censorship and bias as you know Google enjoys a special immunity from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act the predicate for that immunity was that Google and other big tech media companies would be neutral public fora are you familiar with a report that was released yesterday from Veritas there's a video from a woman Gen John I it's a secret video that was recorded Gen John I as understand it is the head of quote responsible innovation for Google as I understand it she is shown in the video saying and this is a quote Elizabeth Warren is saying that we should break up Google and like I love her but she's very misguided like that will not make it better it will make it worse because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation it's like a small company cannot do that do you think it's Google's job to quote prevent the next Trump situation so a different individual a whistleblower identified simply as an insider at Google with knowledge of the algorithm as quoted on the same report as saying Google quote is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again you think it's Google's job to make sure quote somebody like Donald Trump never comes to power again no sir I don't think that is Google's job and we build for everyone including every single religious belief every single demographic every single region and certainly every political affiliation well I have to say that that certainly does not appear to be the case of the senior executives at Google do you know of a single one who voted for Donald Trump the public records show that in 2016 Google employees gave to the Hillary Clinton campaign 1.3 1 5 million dollars that's a lot of money care to venture how much they gave to the Trump campaign I would have no idea sir well the nice thing is it's a round number $0.00 not a penny according to the public reports let's talk about one of the powerpoints that was leaked the Veritas report has Google internally saying I propose we make machine learning intentionally human-centered and intervene for fairness google according to this whistleblower deliberately makes recommendations if someone is searching for conservative commentators deliberately shifts the recommendation so instead of recommending other conservative commentators it recommends organizations like CNN or MSNBC or left-leaning political outlets is that occurring thank you sir I can't comment on search algorithms or recommendations given my purview one of these documents that was leaked explains what Google is doing and it has a series of steps training data are collected and classified algorithms or program media are filtered ranked aggregated and guaranteed and that ends to with people parentheses like us are programmed does Google view its job as programming people with search results me this is partly personal partly professional partly political in a highly emotive issue just a few days ago I made a video on this channel announcing my conclusion after years of being a YouTube content creator that what most people perceive as the automated result of an algorithm is in my educated opinion in fact the work of human hands intentional decisions made by human beings even though those decisions may well be enabled by software in the same way that when you're writing an essay you're enabled by a word processor a better comparison perhaps people who work on the stock market buying and trading shares their work is enabled by computer technology but the decisions are still being made by human beings and one skeptical response I received was that you can't possibly imagine human beings are micromanaging the videos that are being promoted and the videos that are being suppressed on YouTube to this extent that they're micromanaging these kinds of fine points of political distinction and I say to that if you visit any house that's for sale you might say it's impossible it's impossible that a real estate agent is micromanaging the furniture in this house but guess what it's completely standard in the real estate agency to be staging houses for the real estate agent to pay attention to the tables and chairs in the room and minor details now that appears and why because that is the core of their business what we're talking about here with Google is right at the center of what they do it's the value added it's the value that presents the world their whole competitive struggle has everything to do with selecting what they consider quality content and making sure that's pushed to the floor and suppressing content the type of content that used to be infamous for like a video of two kids in the schoolyard having a fistfight just 10 years ago when you said YouTube that was what people thought about YouTube has fought very very hard for the veneer of respectability they now have and it's a real tech credit it's a real credit to Ted Cruz that he's now standing up and he is tearing that illusion down guys one of the most underrated principles in the American Constitution is the principle of equal protection under the law and I like to expand that by saying equal protection under the law and equal that fit under the wall one of the reasons why that's not quoted and discussed as often that it's a later amendment to the Constitution it's not part of the original debates of the founding fathers in American jurisprudence it's also even embarrassingly quite a bit later than the u.s. Civil War home it sort of comes into American history later than it should but it's really the most fundamental principle fairness is too vague what you need are standards that can apply to everyone equally so said this before about censorship I'm completely comfortable with censorship as long as the standards are transparent simple and forcible and apply to everyone equally so if YouTube decides that there's absolutely no nudity on YouTube and they define nudity so nobody can show their nipples fine then that's the rule there are no nipples on YouTube in the past that actually wasn't their rule if you've been around YouTube for a few years they used to allow nudity under you on YouTube under certain conditions and they change their mind on that one um the problem is that YouTube has been enforcing impossibly biased and one-sided standards I was talking in a forum literally lately where everyone was more left-wing than me everyone in this room was here on the internet was voice chat and I pointed out to them what YouTube is doing right now is enforcing a standard against the right-wing that they have not and would never enforce against the left-wing well what do you mean well it seems to me that right now anyone who makes excuses for or voices their opinion in support of right-wing violence or who states shall we say revisionist history lies about last 200 years of history in favor of a right-wing position those voices are suppressed and banned outright often vary dramatically banned outright lifetime bans for the user shutting down channels not just the monetization and of course we have a somewhat ridiculous example that's caught the public imagination so I'm talking here up to this point of doing movie extreme politics political extremism on the right wing but what the public is currently focused on is a comedian steven crowder who made disparaging comments about homosexuals and although those are despair although they are offensive if you consider it within the context of what a stand-up comedian like Chris Rock says how offensive are they what is the standard that's supposed to be applied to stand-up comedy on YouTube is it the case that what Chris Rock says on HBO what Chris Rock says on broadcast television is not permissible on YouTube and if so why and if so if if there's one standard that standard has to be applied to right-wing people left-wing people it has to be applied the same to Japanese people and people in India people in Japan tell lies about World War two also right if this is you know this is getting into a really difficult to enforce area that's not as simple as the binary question between nudity and no nudity nipples and no nipples so steven crowder gets demonetized for making offensive jokes but being offensive is integral to stand-up comedy case in point Chris Rock case point innumerable stand-up comedians many of whom are intentionally offensive that's an aspect in comedy you could have a rule if you want to you could have a rule for all of YouTube no stand-up comedy the stand-up comedy is banned and then some other website could compete with YouTube by saying hey there the website that has videos where comedy is allowed to encouraged even if it's offensive and if YouTube wants to they can have very strict standards of censorship and they can be open about it if they apply it fairly and consistently equal protection under the law and equal benefit right but that is not what's going on now and it never has been and never will be I have raised this again and again when I talk to left wingers if you believe that a voice like a valiant extreme right winger especially when she started extreme extreme right winner if you think that a valiant should be shut down for lying about history what do you think about Richard Wolfe Richard wolf just as a brand-new series of videos lying about the history of the Soviet Union lying about the history of communism every stage his newest video is 1917 to 1975 why is it that the left wing can lie about the massacres of millions of people in some cases tens of million people why is it they get to lie about history with impunity why isn't the left-wing makes calls for violence actively advocating and making excuses for radical left-wing violence I made a video calling out maxy maxy is a communist extreme left-wing youtuber and a whole bunch of my supporters on patreon like denounced me some of them quit and stuff because I would point the finger to so you know this is over the line this is not acceptable she was she was a perfect of a YouTube channel left-wing extremist communist YouTube Jim were they literally we're showing film in support of this with men in masks holding assault rifles and and these men they weren't just posing for the camera some of them like the Naxalites in India they're going out and murdering people they're going on murdering police officers and factory owners that's a form of communism with an ongoing body count anyone actually was talking about this in a room with a bunch of left-wing people they'll reply to me was this shows how brainwash people on the Left are especially people here on YouTube there were plenty was will you know the difference is that the right wing is attached to real-world violence whereas in the left wing to talk about the revolution violence is only hypothetical that shows just what a dangerous delusion is currently ruling over people left-of-center and these people have never even heard of the Naxalites they've never even heard someone like me criticized the extreme violence of communism yes historically learning lots of history and yes present and ongoing in our history okay communism is dangerous left-wing violence is just as extreme and shocking and terrible as right-wing violence and YouTube has a really tough decision to make here either they can go back to the way things were like seven years ago when the right wing the left wing and the people in the middle are all free to criticize each other where the truth gets to emerge amidst a cacophony of contrasting voices or or or YouTube is gonna try to become the next CNN YouTube is gonna try to become the next MSNBC it's gonna try to come the next BBC it's gonna become the next tightly-controlled on message propaganda mainstream news and opinion platform we all know where the money is we all know which way this is going terms of government regulation YouTube needs to be split up into at least three different companies one of them should be super censored only presenting children's entertainment one of them should be way less censored and have comedy edgy comedy offensive humor or swearing one of them should maybe have standards more like HBO HBO is it mainstream to be and allow nudity and some degree of sexy drama I mean on HBO there's so much less censorship than you're on YouTube and sure let's have one two three four let's have many YouTube's competing in the political arena and let's have all of them at least some of them allowing that cacophony of contrasting opinions [Music]
new video from American senator Ted Cruz Ted Cruz is a terrible reputation within the Republican Party and with the Democrat Party but that's been changing just lately a lot of Americans have concerns that big tech media companies and Google Google in particular are engaged in political censorship and bias as you know Google enjoys a special immunity from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act the predicate for that immunity was that Google and other big tech media companies would be neutral public fora are you familiar with a report that was released yesterday from Veritas there's a video from a woman Gen John I it's a secret video that was recorded Gen John I as understand it is the head of quote responsible innovation for Google as I understand it she is shown in the video saying and this is a quote Elizabeth Warren is saying that we should break up Google and like I love her but she's very misguided like that will not make it better it will make it worse because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation it's like a small company cannot do that do you think it's Google's job to quote prevent the next Trump situation so a different individual a whistleblower identified simply as an insider at Google with knowledge of the algorithm as quoted on the same report as saying Google quote is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again you think it's Google's job to make sure quote somebody like Donald Trump never comes to power again no sir I don't think that is Google's job and we build for everyone including every single religious belief every single demographic every single region and certainly every political affiliation well I have to say that that certainly does not appear to be the case of the senior executives at Google do you know of a single one who voted for Donald Trump the public records show that in 2016 Google employees gave to the Hillary Clinton campaign 1.3 1 5 million dollars that's a lot of money care to venture how much they gave to the Trump campaign I would have no idea sir well the nice thing is it's a round number $0.00 not a penny according to the public reports let's talk about one of the powerpoints that was leaked the Veritas report has Google internally saying I propose we make machine learning intentionally human-centered and intervene for fairness google according to this whistleblower deliberately makes recommendations if someone is searching for conservative commentators deliberately shifts the recommendation so instead of recommending other conservative commentators it recommends organizations like CNN or MSNBC or left-leaning political outlets is that occurring thank you sir I can't comment on search algorithms or recommendations given my purview one of these documents that was leaked explains what Google is doing and it has a series of steps training data are collected and classified algorithms or program media are filtered ranked aggregated and guaranteed and that ends to with people parentheses like us are programmed does Google view its job as programming people with search results me this is partly personal partly professional partly political in a highly emotive issue just a few days ago I made a video on this channel announcing my conclusion after years of being a YouTube content creator that what most people perceive as the automated result of an algorithm is in my educated opinion in fact the work of human hands intentional decisions made by human beings even though those decisions may well be enabled by software in the same way that when you're writing an essay you're enabled by a word processor a better comparison perhaps people who work on the stock market buying and trading shares their work is enabled by computer technology but the decisions are still being made by human beings and one skeptical response I received was that you can't possibly imagine human beings are micromanaging the videos that are being promoted and the videos that are being suppressed on YouTube to this extent that they're micromanaging these kinds of fine points of political distinction and I say to that if you visit any house that's for sale you might say it's impossible it's impossible that a real estate agent is micromanaging the furniture in this house but guess what it's completely standard in the real estate agency to be staging houses for the real estate agent to pay attention to the tables and chairs in the room and minor details now that appears and why because that is the core of their business what we're talking about here with Google is right at the center of what they do it's the value added it's the value that presents the world their whole competitive struggle has everything to do with selecting what they consider quality content and making sure that's pushed to the floor and suppressing content the type of content that used to be infamous for like a video of two kids in the schoolyard having a fistfight just 10 years ago when you said YouTube that was what people thought about YouTube has fought very very hard for the veneer of respectability they now have and it's a real tech credit it's a real credit to Ted Cruz that he's now standing up and he is tearing that illusion down guys one of the most underrated principles in the American Constitution is the principle of equal protection under the law and I like to expand that by saying equal protection under the law and equal that fit under the wall one of the reasons why that's not quoted and discussed as often that it's a later amendment to the Constitution it's not part of the original debates of the founding fathers in American jurisprudence it's also even embarrassingly quite a bit later than the u.s. Civil War home it sort of comes into American history later than it should but it's really the most fundamental principle fairness is too vague what you need are standards that can apply to everyone equally so said this before about censorship I'm completely comfortable with censorship as long as the standards are transparent simple and forcible and apply to everyone equally so if YouTube decides that there's absolutely no nudity on YouTube and they define nudity so nobody can show their nipples fine then that's the rule there are no nipples on YouTube in the past that actually wasn't their rule if you've been around YouTube for a few years they used to allow nudity under you on YouTube under certain conditions and they change their mind on that one um the problem is that YouTube has been enforcing impossibly biased and one-sided standards I was talking in a forum literally lately where everyone was more left-wing than me everyone in this room was here on the internet was voice chat and I pointed out to them what YouTube is doing right now is enforcing a standard against the right-wing that they have not and would never enforce against the left-wing well what do you mean well it seems to me that right now anyone who makes excuses for or voices their opinion in support of right-wing violence or who states shall we say revisionist history lies about last 200 years of history in favor of a right-wing position those voices are suppressed and banned outright often vary dramatically banned outright lifetime bans for the user shutting down channels not just the monetization and of course we have a somewhat ridiculous example that's caught the public imagination so I'm talking here up to this point of doing movie extreme politics political extremism on the right wing but what the public is currently focused on is a comedian steven crowder who made disparaging comments about homosexuals and although those are despair although they are offensive if you consider it within the context of what a stand-up comedian like Chris Rock says how offensive are they what is the standard that's supposed to be applied to stand-up comedy on YouTube is it the case that what Chris Rock says on HBO what Chris Rock says on broadcast television is not permissible on YouTube and if so why and if so if if there's one standard that standard has to be applied to right-wing people left-wing people it has to be applied the same to Japanese people and people in India people in Japan tell lies about World War two also right if this is you know this is getting into a really difficult to enforce area that's not as simple as the binary question between nudity and no nudity nipples and no nipples so steven crowder gets demonetized for making offensive jokes but being offensive is integral to stand-up comedy case in point Chris Rock case point innumerable stand-up comedians many of whom are intentionally offensive that's an aspect in comedy you could have a rule if you want to you could have a rule for all of YouTube no stand-up comedy the stand-up comedy is banned and then some other website could compete with YouTube by saying hey there the website that has videos where comedy is allowed to encouraged even if it's offensive and if YouTube wants to they can have very strict standards of censorship and they can be open about it if they apply it fairly and consistently equal protection under the law and equal benefit right but that is not what's going on now and it never has been and never will be I have raised this again and again when I talk to left wingers if you believe that a voice like a valiant extreme right winger especially when she started extreme extreme right winner if you think that a valiant should be shut down for lying about history what do you think about Richard Wolfe Richard wolf just as a brand-new series of videos lying about the history of the Soviet Union lying about the history of communism every stage his newest video is 1917 to 1975 why is it that the left wing can lie about the massacres of millions of people in some cases tens of million people why is it they get to lie about history with impunity why isn't the left-wing makes calls for violence actively advocating and making excuses for radical left-wing violence I made a video calling out maxy maxy is a communist extreme left-wing youtuber and a whole bunch of my supporters on patreon like denounced me some of them quit and stuff because I would point the finger to so you know this is over the line this is not acceptable she was she was a perfect of a YouTube channel left-wing extremist communist YouTube Jim were they literally we're showing film in support of this with men in masks holding assault rifles and and these men they weren't just posing for the camera some of them like the Naxalites in India they're going out and murdering people they're going on murdering police officers and factory owners that's a form of communism with an ongoing body count anyone actually was talking about this in a room with a bunch of left-wing people they'll reply to me was this shows how brainwash people on the Left are especially people here on YouTube there were plenty was will you know the difference is that the right wing is attached to real-world violence whereas in the left wing to talk about the revolution violence is only hypothetical that shows just what a dangerous delusion is currently ruling over people left-of-center and these people have never even heard of the Naxalites they've never even heard someone like me criticized the extreme violence of communism yes historically learning lots of history and yes present and ongoing in our history okay communism is dangerous left-wing violence is just as extreme and shocking and terrible as right-wing violence and YouTube has a really tough decision to make here either they can go back to the way things were like seven years ago when the right wing the left wing and the people in the middle are all free to criticize each other where the truth gets to emerge amidst a cacophony of contrasting voices or or or YouTube is gonna try to become the next CNN YouTube is gonna try to become the next MSNBC it's gonna try to come the next BBC it's gonna become the next tightly-controlled on message propaganda mainstream news and opinion platform we all know where the money is we all know which way this is going terms of government regulation YouTube needs to be split up into at least three different companies one of them should be super censored only presenting children's entertainment one of them should be way less censored and have comedy edgy comedy offensive humor or swearing one of them should maybe have standards more like HBO HBO is it mainstream to be and allow nudity and some degree of sexy drama I mean on HBO there's so much less censorship than you're on YouTube and sure let's have one two three four let's have many YouTube's competing in the political arena and let's have all of them at least some of them allowing that cacophony of contrasting opinions [Music]