Geen evolutie en ecolutie zonder revolutie!

Albert Einstein:

Twee dingen zijn oneindig: het universum en de menselijke domheid. Maar van het universum ben ik niet zeker.
Posts tonen met het label Yahoo. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label Yahoo. Alle posts tonen

dinsdag 9 februari 2021

ACM komt met dubbelzinnige klacht over bedrijven die een hoge plek voor zoekresultaten betalen en daarmee de consument belazeren

Volgens de Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM) zijn consumenten de dupe van het feit dat grote bedrijven fikse bedragen betalen om bovenaan te staan in de resultaten als consumenten naar bepaalde producten zoeken.... Onder andere Bol.com, Beslist.nl, Thuisbezorgd en Booking.com maken zich schuldig aan deze vorm van klantenoplichting..... Je snapt al niet dat dit is toegestaan, 'maar goed...'

Volgens de ACM kunnen consumenten daardoor de meer goedkope aanbieders missen. Echter dan komt de ACM met de wel heel vreemde opmerking dat het ook goed kan zijn als bedrijven zich een hoge plek hebben gekocht, daar de consument dan eerder wordt gewezen op nieuwe producten..... ha! ha! ha! ha! Om deze nonsens nog enigszins goed te kunnen praten stelt de ACM dat er ook andere mogelijkheden zijn om mensen op nieuwe producten te wijzen....... (je meent 't??!!!)

Verder stelt de ACM dat e.e.a wel zou mogen als er maar duidelijk wordt aangegeven dat deze hoge plek op de zoekmachine is betaald...... ha! ha! ha! ha! Alsof mensen die iets nodig hebben iets dergelijks zouden lezen, natuurlijk moet dit helemaal verboden worden!!!

Het voorgaande geeft nog eens aan dat de ACM een tandeloze* tijger is, die bovendien wel erg laat aan de bel trekt.......

Het volgende artikel komt van de Beurs.nl, dat haar artikel begint met de woorden: Consumenten dreigen er de dupe van te worden, enz.... Het lijkt me meer dan duidelijk dat de consument daar de dupe van is.....:

ACM: consument dupe van betaalde plek tussen zoekresultaten

Gepubliceerd op 2 februari 2021 09:27

 

DEN HAAG (ANP) - Consumenten dreigen er de dupe van te worden als sites tegen extra betaling bedrijven hoger tussen de zoekresultaten zetten. Bedrijven betalen vaak aanzienlijke bedragen om prominenter in beeld te komen op bijvoorbeeld bol.com, Beslist.nl, Thuisbezorgd of Booking.com, stelt de Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM). Als dit op voorhand niet duidelijk is, werkt dit volgens de toezichthouder misleiding in de hand.

Volgens de ACM betalen bedrijven sites zo'n 15 procent tot 40 procent meer om hoger in de resultatenlijsten te komen. Dit kan ertoe leiden dat klanten niet als eerste de meest relevante resultaten voor hun zoekopdracht te zien krijgen, maar vooral de best betalende bedrijven. Daardoor lopen ze mogelijk ook de beste aanbiedingen mis wat betreft prijs en kwaliteit. Op die manier dreigen zogeheten betaalde 'rankings' ook concurrenten dwars te zitten, schrijft de toezichthouder in een nieuw rapport.

De ACM wijst erop dat er voor sommige consumenten ook voordelen kunnen zitten aan de betaalde plekken bij de zoekresultaten. Het is bijvoorbeeld mogelijk om zo nieuwe producten te introduceren bij klanten, maar in haar rapport schrijft de ACM dat hier ook goede alternatieven voor zijn. Bovendien zouden bedrijven en sites transparanter moeten zijn over welke resultaten tegen extra betaling hoger zijn gezet. Nu ontbreekt zo'n waarschuwing nog vaak. Als die er wel is, gaat het volgens de ACM vaak om een erg onduidelijke melding. De toezichthouder eist dan ook dat het voor klanten meteen duidelijk wordt wanneer er is betaald voor een hogere plek in de zoekresultaten.

======================================================

* Raar dat je hier wel tandeloze moet schrijven, dus zonder de 'n' achter 'tande', wist niet dat er tijgers zijn die met maar één tand door het leven moeten......

woensdag 23 mei 2018

Palestijnse slachtoffers Israëlisch bloedbad in Gazastrook krijgen schuld in schoenen geschoven door VS massamedia.............................

Ongelofelijk hoe de reguliere westerse media hebben gereageerd op de slachting die het terroristische Israëlische leger aanrichtte onder ongewapende Palestijnse demonstranten op de dag dat de VS ambassade in Jeruzalem werd geopend. Bij dat geweld werden 61 mensen vermoord en viel er een enorm aantal (ook zwaar) gewonden...... Als je niet beter wist zou je warempel denken dat Israël het slachtoffer was van Palestijnse terreur, terwijl er aan Israëlische  kant slechts 1 lichtgewonde soldaat was 'te betreuren.....'

De media in de VS gingen wel het meest ver met hun smerige pro-Israël propaganda, nogmaals NB naar aanleiding van een ware slachting onder ongewapende Palestijnen en dat zijn toch echt ook mensen en niet een soort van plaagdieren, zoals Israël ze meer en meer ziet.......

Sinds 30 maart jl., toen de Palestijnen begonnen met de Great Return March zijn er meer dan 100 ongewapende mensen door Israël vermoord, waaronder: -11 kinderen, 2 journalisten en 4 mensen met een handicap..... (ja ja, 'echte helden' die Israëlische militaire scherpschutters....)

Nee in de ogen van de reguliere media in de VS zijn de Palestijnen barbaren die de 'heldhaftige' soldaten van Israël aanvallen. In een andere mediaorgaan, dat van Bloomberg werd zelfs gemeld dat de afscheiding tussen Israël en de Gazastrook het slachtoffer werd van Palestijnse agressie.... (je gelooft je ogen niet!)

Echter ook in de reguliere media in de rest van het westen, wijst men naar Hamas en de Palestijnen als de schuldigen voor deze slachting, alsof het één groot vakantieoord is in de Gazastrook, i.p.v. een openluchtgevangenis waar het de bewoners aan van alles ontbreekt, in de eerste plaats veiligheid tegen Israëlische terreur...... Een situatie die zo wanhopig is dat men toch gaat demonstreren ook al belooft Israël te zullen schieten op iedereen die een stap zet dichterbij dan 300 meter tot de afscheiding tussen de Gazastrook en Israël...... Ofwel: Israël schiet ongewapende demonstranten neer op het grondgebied van de Gazastrook, een enorme oorlogsmisdaad en een misdaad tegen de menselijkheid....

Lees het volgende artikel van Gregory Shupak, overgenomen van Anti-Media (de video's in het artikel werken niet, de wel werkende video's vind je onder het artikel):

How American Media Blames the Victims of Israel’s Gaza Massacre

May 19, 2018 at 2:53 pm
Written by Gregory Shupak

(FAIR— Israel massacred 60 Palestinians on Monday, including seven children, bringing to 101 the total number of Palestinians Israel has killed since Palestinians began the Great March on March 30. In that period, Israel has killed 11 Palestinian children, two journalists, one person on crutches and three persons with disabilities.

Monday’s casualties included 1,861 wounded, bringing total injuries inflicted by Israel to 6,938 people, including 3,615 with live fire. Israel is using bullets designed to expand inside the body, causing maximum, often permanent damage: “The injuries sustained by patients will leave most with serious, long-term physical disabilities,” says Médecins Sans Frontières (Ha’aretz4/22/18).

On the 70th anniversary of Israel’s so-called “declaration of independence,” the United States opened its new embassy in Jerusalem—a city Israel claims as its own, despite what international law says on the matter—and Palestinians undertook unarmed protests in reaction to the move and as part of the Great Return March. Although to this point, the only Israeli casualty during the entire cycle of demonstrations has been one “lightly wounded” soldier, considerable space in coverage of the massacres is devoted to blaming Palestinians for their own slaughter.

                  
NBC (5/14/18) mentions “what Palestinians refer to as their ‘right of return’”; actually, it’s what international law calls it, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights‘ proclamation that “everyone has the right…to return to his country.”*

Two of the first three paragraphs in an NBC report (5/14/18) provided Israel’s rationalizations for its killing spree. The second sentence in the article says that the Israeli military accused Hamas of “leading a terrorist operation under the cover of masses of people,” adding that “firebombs and explosive devices” as well as rocks were being thrown towards the barrier.

Washington Post (WaPo) narticle (5/14/18) devoted two of its first four sentences to telling readers that Palestinians are responsible for being murdered by Israel. Palestinian “organizers urged demonstrators to burst through the fence, telling them Israeli soldiers were fleeing their positions, even as they were reinforcing them,” read one sentence. “At the barrier, young men threw stones and tried to launch kites carrying flames in hopes of burning crops on the other side,” stated the next one, as though stones and burning kites released by a besieged people is violence remotely equivalent to subjecting people to a military siege and mowing them down.

The New York Times (5/14/18) said that “a mass attempt by Palestinians to cross the border fence separating Israel from Gaza turned violent, as Israeli soldiers responded with rifle fire,” painting Israel’s rampage as a reaction to a Palestinian provocation. Like FAIR (2/21/18) has previously said of the word “retaliation,” “response” functions as a justification of Israeli butchery: To characterize Israeli violence as a “response” is to wrongly imply that Palestinian actions warranted Israel unleashing its firing squads.

Yahoo headline (5/14/18) described “Violent Protests in Gaza Ahead of US Embassy Inauguration in Jerusalem,” a flatly incorrect description in that it attributes the violence to Palestinian demonstrators rather than to Israel. The BBC (5/15/18) did the same with a segment called “Gaza Braced for Further Violent Protests.”

           
In Bloomberg‘s account (5/14/18), the fence seemed to be the real victim.

One Bloomberg article (5/14/18) by Saud Abu Ramadan and Amy Teibel had the same problem, referring to “a protest marred by violence,” while another one (5/14/18) attributed only to Ramadan is headlined “Hamas Targets Fence as Gaza Bloodshed Clouds Embassy Move,” as though the fence were Monday’s most tragic casualty. Ascribing this phantom violence to Palestinians provides Israel an alibi: Many readers will likely conclude that Israel’s lethal violence is reasonable if it is cast as a way of coping with “violent protests.”

The second paragraph of the Bloomberg article solely written by Ramadan says that
Gaza protesters, egged on by loudspeakers and transported in buses, streamed to the border, where some threw rocks, burned tires, and flew kites and balloons outfitted with firebombs into Israeli territory.

This author—like the rest in the “Palestinians were asking for it” chorus—failed to note that Israel’s fence runs deep into Palestinian territory and creates a 300-meter “buffer zone” between Palestinians and Israeli forces, which makes it highly unlikely that the kites and balloons of the colonized will have an effect on their drone-operating, rifle-wielding colonizers, let alone on people further afield in Israeli-held territory.

The New York Times editorial board (5/14/18) wrote as though Palestinians are barbarians against whom Israel has no choice but to unleash terror:
Led too long by men who were corrupt or violent or both, the Palestinians have failed and failed again to make their own best efforts toward peace. Even now, Gazans are undermining their own cause by resorting to violence, rather than keeping their protests strictly peaceful.

The board claimed that “Israel has every right to defend its borders, including the boundary with Gaza,” incorrectly suggesting that Palestinians were aggressors rather than on the receiving end of 100 years of settler-colonialism.

Moreover, like the Times and Bloomberg articles discussed above, the editorial attempts to legitimize Israel’s deadly violence by saying that it is defending a border that Palestinians are attempting to breach, but there is no border between Gaza and Israel. There is, as Maureen Murphy of Electronic Intifada(4/6/18) pointed out, “an armistice line between an occupying power and the population living under its military rule” that Palestinians are trying to cross in order to exercise their right to return to their land.

The Washington Post (5/15/18) condemned the “cruel, cynical tactic” of trying to exercise the internationally guaranteed right of return.**

Washington Post editorial (5/15/18) called the Palestinians hunted by Israel “nominal civilians.” Apart from being a logical impossibility (one either is or isn’t a civilian), the phrase illuminates how too much of media think about Palestinians:  They are inherently threatening, intrinsically killable, always suspect, never innocent, permanently guilty of existing.

Business Insider piece (5/14/18) by columnist Daniella Greenbaum described “Palestinian protesters who ramped up their activities along the Gaza strip and, as a result, were targeted by the Israeli army with increasing intensity.” Greenbaum’s use of the phrase “as a result” implies that it was inevitable and perhaps just that Palestinians’ “ramped up activities” led to Israel mowing down a population it occupies, 70 percent of whom are refugees Israel refuses to allow to return to their homes.
Greenbaum then climbs into the intellectual and moral gutter, claiming that
absent from the commentary that children have unfortunately been among the injured and dead are questions about how they ended up at the border. On that question, it is important to recognize and acknowledge the extent to which Palestinians have glorified violence and martyrdom — and the extent to which the terrorist organization Hamas has organized the “protests.”

In her view, dozens of Palestinians died because they are primitive savages who take pleasure in sacrificing their own children, not because Israel maintains the right to gun down refugees in the name of maintaining an ethnostate.

In a rare instance of a resident of Gaza allowed to participate directly in the media conversation, Fadi Abu Shammalah wrote an op-ed for the New York Times (4/27/18) that offered an explanation of why Palestinians are putting their lives on the line to march. Life for the people of Gaza, including for his three young sons, has been “one tragedy after another: waves of mass displacement, life in squalid refugee camps, a captured economy, restricted access to fishing waters, a strangling siege and three wars in the past nine years. ” Recalling the concern for his safety expressed by his seven-year-old child, Shammalah concludes:
If Ali asks me why I’m returning to the Great Return March despite the danger, I will tell him this: I love my life. But more than that, I love you, Karam and Adam. If risking my life means you and your brothers will have a chance to thrive, to have a future with dignity, to live in peace with all your neighbors, in your free country, then this is a risk I must take.

Palestinians have a right to liberate themselves that extends to the right to the use of armed struggle, yet as Shammalah wrote, the Great Return March signifies a “nearly unanimous acceptance of peaceful methods to call for our rights and insist on our humanity.” Nevertheless, based on media coverage, readers could be forgiven for concluding that it was Palestinians, not Israel, who carried out what Doctors Without Borders called “unacceptable and inhuman” violence.

By Gregory Shupak / Republished with permission / FAIR.org / Report a typo

* De video in het artikel werkt niet hier de video waar men naar verwijst:


** Hetzelfde wat voor de video hierboven geldt is van toepassing op deze video, hier de link die wel werkt:


Hoe kan je mensen nog meer opzetten tegen het uitermate hypocriete westen...????

Zie ook: 'Israël vermoordde minstens 16 ongewapende demonstranten tijdens grootschalig protest'

        en: 'Pro-Israël propaganda in de reguliere westerse media, amper aandacht voor Palestijnse protesten'

        en: 'Nederland voorzitter VN Veiligheidsraad, maar heeft tegelijkertijd geen commentaar op Israëlische moorden op ongewapende demonstranten.........'

        en: 'Gazastrook 2018 - Sharpeville 1960 >> terreur tegen vreedzame demonstranten'

        en: 'Schieten op ongewapende vreedzame demonstranten volgens Israël uit zelfverdediging........')

        en: 'Israëlische terreur: niet alleen het schieten op ongewapende demonstranten, maar ook de vele andere standrechtelijke executies, ofwel moorden op bekende Palestijnen'

        en: 'Israël gebruikt nieuw chemisch wapen tegen Palestijnse demonstranten in de Gazastrook' (Wel aandacht voor 'Syrische gifgasaanval' in Douma, maar als Israël daadwerkelijk dit wapen inzet, blijft het doodstil....Israël, samen met Egypte, de twee landen die nog steeds chemische wapens ontwikkelen, produceren, opslaan en.... exporteren!! Wellicht leveren deze landen ook aan de terreurgroepen, ofwel de 'gematigde rebellen' in Syrië, die met instemming van het westen over voorraden gifgas beschikken...... Zowel Israël als Egypte staan achter de psychopathische terreurgroepen in Syrië, groepen die in het westen, zoals gezegd, 'gematigde rebellen' worden genoemd.....)

       en: 'Palestijnen en groot deel wereld rouwen om tweede door Israëliërs vermoorde journalist..........'

       en: 'VS ambassade Jeruzalem gedompeld in Palestijnenbloed........

       en: 'Israël test nieuwe smerige technologie op demonstrerende Palestijnen'


       en: 'Israël schiet 20 raketten af op openluchtgevangenis Gazastrook na wanhoopsdaad Palestijnen.......'


       en: 'Israel: White Phosphorus Use Evidence of War Crimes'


       en: 'Israëls wil tot vredesoverleg met Palestijnen': 2.500 nieuwe huizen op West Bank..............'

       en: 'Gazastrook: waarom vooral jongeren demonstreren en daar zelfs hun leven voor op het spel zetten'

       en: 'Israëlische 'heldhaftige' scherpschutters vermoordden 21 jarige verpleger, die bezig was eerste hulp te verlenen.........'

       en: 'Israël vermoordde nog eens 4 ongewapende Palestijnen over de grens met de Gazastrook, totale dodental ligt nu op 124'

       en: 'Moeder van vermoorde Palestijnse medisch hulpverlener Razan al-Najjar maakt werk dochter af'

      en: 'Israëlische scherpschutters vermoorden met opzet kinderen en de witte westerse wereld blijft wegkijken.......'

       en: 'At Least 525 Palestinians Wounded by Israeli Troops on Gaza Border'

       en: 'Israëlische advocaat benoemd tot voorzitter van het Mensenrechtencomité van de VN.......'

       en: 'Gaza Freedom Flotilla tegen de blokkade van de Gazastrook, met een overlevende van de USS Liberty'

       en: 'Israël verbiedt nu zelfs Palestijnen uit de Gazastrook het land te verlaten als zij een medische behandeling nodig hebben......'

PS: na plaatsing nog toegevoegd dat het om de Palestijnse demonstratie ging, op de dag dat de VS ambassade in Jeruzalem werd geopend.

vrijdag 13 april 2018

Ex-CIA agent legt uit hoe de VS schaduwregering en deep state werken, ofwel de machinaties achter de schermen......

Ex-CIA agent, Kevin Shipp, momenteel 'herstellend' (het is moeilijk om het standaard liegen binnen de CIA af te leren, aldus Shipp) heeft een boek opengedaan over hoe de regering zaken verbergt en hoe men klokkenluiders tot zwijgen brengt........

Volgens Shipp wordt het vierde amendement van de VS grondwet al bijna 60 jaar geschonden....... De grondwet is de hoogste wetgeving binnen de VS en deze schending is dan ook een grote misdaad. Een systeem van onconstitutionele machten heeft volgens hem in feite de echte macht in de VS..... Zoals je begrijpt en zoals gezegd is dit een enorme misdaad, waar helaas weinig tegen te doen is.......

De schaduwregering bestaat uit de (vele) geheime diensten in de VS en het draait op de macht van geheimen, angst en intimidatie........ De schaduwregering werkt innig samen met de deep state, die draait op geld, macht en hebzucht, maar bestaat uit bedrijven die behoren tot het militair-industrieel complex, plus natuurlijk het ministerie van defensie uh oorlogvoering en de militaire top. Beiden manipuleren (en sturen) de zittende regering. Als je dit systeem aan wilt klagen wordt je kapot gemaakt, desnoods letterlijk......

Het was al lang geleden duidelijk dat de regering van de VS twee kanten heeft, de kant die men laat zien aan het volk en de rest van de wereld en de nog veel grotere smeerpijperij achter de schermen, die veelal niet naar buitenkomt, al heeft Wikileaks daar voor een aardig deel verandering in gebracht........

Mooi te horen van een eertijds medeplichtige CIA agent dat wat men zogenaamde complottheorieën noemt als je spreekt over de deep state, wel degelijk blijkt te kloppen.......... Grote Silicon Valley bedrijven worden benaderd door de CIA en de NSA voor miljoenen projecten, waarbij deze bedrijven toegang krijgen tot grote internet bedrijven, echter waar men wel eerst voor geheimhouding moet tekenen. Daarbij wordt aangegeven dat degenen die uit de school klappen gevangenisstraffen opgelegd zullen krijgen, het leven onmogelijk zal worden gemaakt en zelfs letterlijk vermoord kunnen worden............

Shipp maakt in feite duidelijk dat de geheime diensten in de VS niet alleen de regering in de zak hebben, maar ook toegang hebben tot ieder account behorend tot een VS internetbedrijf....... (zoals Google en Facebook......)

Het gaat om een video van 55 minuten, maar meer dan de moeite waard! Kijken mensen, je weet niet wat je hoort (en ziet)........... 

A “recovering” CIA officer explains the reality
of the Shadow Government

THE FIRST VERSION OF THIS VIDEO HAD 2 MILLION VIEWS



GOVERNMENT COVER UPS AND HOW WHISTLE BLOWERS ARE SILENCED

Kevin Shipp, a “recovering” CIA officer, explains the reality of the Shadow Government in the United States.

He says recovery is a 24 – not a 12 – Step. The first 12 Steps involve learning how to tell the truth, something not easy for a CIA agent.

We’re not just at the 11th Hour. We’re at 11:59. We’re living in a Post-Constitutional government now.”


I give this speech to any group that will take the risk to do it.”

Zie ook:
''Russiagate': Intel-raport over Russische bemoeienis met verkiezingen opgebouwd met leugens en is politiek gemotiveerd, aldus Matlock, voormalig VS ambassadeur in Moskou'

'De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers.........' (zie ook de links in dat bericht)

dinsdag 5 september 2017

Google censuur en toch echt nieuws volgen? Gebruik een andere browser naast die van Google, of dump Google helemaal!!

Whitney Webb publiceerde op 25 augustus jl. een artikel op MintPress News, een bericht over het nieuwe censuur beleid van Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Microsoft en Twitter.

Webb geeft in het artikel de alternatieven waarmee je de censoren en geheime onderzoekers (geheime diensten) van de overheid en het bedrijfsleven kan omzeilen, zo kan u uw eigen 'Virtual Private Network' (VPN) opzetten, waarmee u zelfs uw IP-adres geheim kan houden.

Google heeft de laatste maanden diverse onafhankelijke mediaorganen geblokkeerd, die niet het algemene westerse politieke (neoliberale) beleid volgen en zich verzetten tegen de enorme berg leugens in de reguliere westerse massamedia......... Google en anderen doen dit in de strijd tegen 'fake news', waarbij men voor het gemak even vergeet dat vooral diezelfde massamedia verantwoordelijk zijn voor het brengen van nepnieuws, ofwel 'fake news..........' Anders gezegd: Google verzet zich tegen 'fake news', door juist de alternatieve media te blokkeren, die ditzelfde 'fake news' dag in dag uit aan de paal nagelen!!

'Fake news' (of nepnieuws zo je wilt) in de westerse massamedia >> neem de berichtgeving voor en tijdens de illegale oorlogen tegen: Afghanistan, Irak, Libie en nu weer Syrië........ Om over het tot voor kort lange zwijgen door die media over de oorlog tegen Jemen nog maar te zwijgen... (wat ik nu dus niet doe..) De smerige oorlog en genocide die de reli-fascistische dictatuur van Saoedi-Arabië tegen de sjiitische bevolking van Jemen voert/uitvoert, dit met behulp van een arabische coalitie, aangevuld met de hulp van de VS en Groot-Brittannië....... (en met de stilzwijgende goedkeuring die de meerderheid van westerse politici, als de mislukte PvdA sierkwast Koenders, aan deze oorlog en genocide geven..... Die goedkeuring geven ze door te zwijgen!)

Of wat dacht je van de totaal foute en valse berichtgeving in de westerse massamedia t.a.v. de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël......

Hier het bewuste artikel van Webb dat ik overnam van Anti-Media, doe er je voordeel mee!

Your Guide to Avoiding Internet Censorship of Independent News Journalism


August 25, 2017 at 10:43 am
Written by Whitney Webb
There are lots of good strategies for beating both corporate and government Internet censors and snoops. These range from alternatives to Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter — to direct subscriptions to authors and pubs — to setting up your own VPN. All are worth the effort.

(MPN) — While Google’s Information Age dominance has long been recognized to have some unsavory consequences, the massive technology corporation has, in recent months, taken to directly censoring content and traffic to a variety of independent media outlets across the political spectrum — essentially muting the voices of any site or author who does not toe the establishment line.

This new offensive has coincided with Google efforts to clamp down on “fake news” and “extremist” content, which – on its subsidiary, YouTube – led to the categorical blocking of videos portraying war crimes and other disturbing events of the Syrian conflict and Israel’s occupation of Palestine. Other independent media figures, such as Luke Rudowski and Carey Wedler, on the popular video streaming service, saw many of their videos demonetized.

Though the crackdown on YouTube was more obvious, the Google search engine – the most popular in the world – is now burying or blocking independent media sites from its search results.

Conservatives have long claimed that Google was selectively targeting their content due to the personal political bias of the company’s executives — but now, since Google announced its new guidelines, numerous progressive, transparency, and anti-war websites that act as watchdogs to the establishment have seen their traffic diminish substantially.

Counterpunch, World Socialist Website, MintPress News, Democracy Now, American Civil Liberties Union and Wikileaks are just a handful of the sites that have seen massive drops in their returns from Google searches. The World Socialist Website alone experienced a 67 percent decrease in returns from Google following the implementation of Google’s new algorithm targeting so-called “fake news.” MintPress News, however, has suffered the steepest decline, having seen a 76 percent decrease in traffic from Google since the new algorithm was put into effect.

Why has Google changed its search system to push down publications (left & right) critical of Washington DC?





Google has its reasons for choosing to censor viewpoints that clash with or even raise questions about the official narrative. Google shares deep connections with the U.S.’ political powerbrokers, notably with the CIA, which originally helped fund Google into existence with the intention of controlling the flow of information.

Understandably — in light of its deep connections to those who stand the most to lose from the actual free flow of information — Google has emerged as a leader of the “fight” against so-called “fake news.” The concept of “fake news” took on sudden weight following last November’s U.S. presidential election: in the tweets and rants of newly-elected President Donald Trump, media predictions of a Clinton victory were ridiculed as “FAKE NEWS,” while Clinton supporters also wound up blaming “fake news” for Clinton’s loss in the election.

In short order, the term became a term of derision and dismissal applied to any and all disagreeable reporting. With the “fake news” net cast so wide, the ground was fertile for a campaign against the official story-challenging work of independent media — dependent for its reach, to a far greater extent than its mainstream media counterparts, upon the good graces of monster Internet traffic cops such as Google.

The following guide offers a variety of solutions and options for those concerned with Google’s overreach and its decision to become the Internet’s unelected “Ministry of Truth.”

Dumping Google Search


Dominating over 80% of global searches made on the Internet, Google’s chokehold on the flow of information is undeniable. Now that its algorithm has been shown to target news sites critical of the establishment on both sides of the aisle, finding an alternative becomes an essential task irrespective of one’s political leaning.

However, don’t expect other brand name search engines like Microsoft’s Bing or Yahoo to come to the rescue, as these too have been caught censoring search results in the past. Microsoft, in particular, is very untrustworthy, given its eager participation in the NSA’s PRISM surveillance program — where it illegally shared the Internet user data, including search queries, of U.S. citizens without their knowledge.

Given its willingness to cooperate with the government against the interest of American citizens, Microsoft would be perhaps more willing even than Google to censor access to so-called “fake news.”

Yahoo is little better, as it too was an early adopter of the PRISM surveillance program, second only to Microsoft. Like Microsoft, they willingly cooperate with government censorship efforts – as well as the outing of dissidents – in other countries.

Thankfully, as far as search engines go, there are other options available that not only respect your privacy but also offer fairer searches, including some features that even Google doesn’t offer.

DuckDuckGo

Of all the viable Google alternatives, DuckDuckGo is the most well-known, having been promoted by PCMag.com, the Guardian, and The New York Times as a “long-term” threat to Google’s search dominance. It was even one of the top 50 sites of 2011, according to Time magazine.

However, the “mainstream” accolades are, in this case, well-deserved. DuckDuckGo is best known for its motto the search engine that doesn’t track you,” complete with Tor browser functionality. While this is a clear boon for privacy enthusiasts – or anyone concerned about illegal NSA spying – it also results in search results that are not filtered based on your search history. In other words, users are more likely to be presented with search results that challenge their existing ideas.

DuckDuckGo also boasts an impressive search algorithm that excludes Google results but includes results from other well-known search engines, mixed with the data obtained by DuckDuckGo’s own web crawler bot. The results are filtered for spam and re-ordered using its trademark “Instant Answers” platform, which places high-quality answers above other results and advertisements. The “Instant Answers” platform gathers answers provided by top popular websites, like Wikipedia, in addition to community-built answers.

For those tech-savvy users who don’t trust the spam filtering or even the “Instant Answer” platform, these functions — as well as DuckDuckGo itself — is open-source and also offers DuckDuckHack, where users can create their own plug-ins for use in DuckDuckGo and even help improve the search engine overall.

For less savvy tech users, DuckDuckGo conveniently functions like any other search engine, in addition to providing several features even Google doesn’t offer. It also has a search app for both iPhone and Android, as well as plug-ins for Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox, and offers support in several languages.

Ixquick/StartPage

Ixquick is an American/Dutch meta-search engine, meaning it simultaneously searches multiple databases and other search engines, including Google, across the Internet. It uses a “star system” to rank search results, placing a star next to each result for every search engine that ranks that result as one of its 10 best for a given search. A five-star result, for example, means that five search engines considered that result to be among the 10 most relevant.

Ixquick — which has now merged with its subsidiary, StartPage — also tackles the issue of privacy by not storing user-specific details such as cookies or past search results. Like DuckDuckGo, Ixquick offers unfiltered search results generated by Google’s “personalized” searches. Privacy enthusiasts may recognize Ixquick as the default search engine for the Tor browser.
Ixquick is supported in 17 languages and offers a plug-in for Mozilla Firefox. They also offer a privacy-minded, encrypted email server called StartMail.

Gibiru

Gibiru, like the aforementioned search engines, prides itself on offering maximum privacy. It avoids tracking its users by providing anonymous and encrypted searches. It describes itself as “the preferred Search Engine for Patriots” and offers non-personalized, anonymous web results while emphasizing the disdain of its developers for the NSA. Part of what sets Gibiru apart is its claim to offer “uncensored” searches, as their web crawlers intentionally include pages that Google has blocked or buried in its search results.

Gibiru also has a unique feature called “Uncensored News.” In addition to aggregating results from other search engines, Gibiru adds its own algorithm that specifically looks for results from independent media outlets, particularly those that tend to “promote ‘alternative’ views from the mainstream.”

Recognizing that mainstream media results are picked up by Google and Bing, Gibiru does not use its bandwidth searching through these results. Even up-and-coming independent media sites can gain inclusion in Uncensored News results by communicating with the Gibiru team.
Gibiru offers both a toolbar and a plugin for Mozilla Firefox.

Subscribe directly to your favorite pages

Though the above search engines can assist in more accurate and less censored internet searches, the best way to get news you trust is directly from the source. Anyone who reads independent media eventually develops preferences for certain sites and authors whose content they consistently find reliable and interesting.

If you are concerned with Google’s clampdown on independent media, the most surefire way to ensure your access to the sites you enjoy is by subscribing directly to them via email. Most independent media pages offer you the option to subscribe to their mailing lists, where you receive their top stories on a daily basis. Some pages charge for subscriptions, but most – such as MintPress News’ Daily Digest – are free and allow you to unsubscribe at any time. Some websites, including MintPress, also offer apps for Android or iPhone, which allow users direct and convenient access to the content of those pages.

If you are concerned that all of the newsletters and stories of the pages you want to follow will clutter your email, there are several good options. Some mail servers allow you to label certain types of incoming mail, and creating a specific label for “news” can streamline the process of following all of your favorite pages in one place. Alternatively, you can create an email account dedicated to news in order to keep it separate from email accounts more focused on work or socializing.

In some cases, however, your favorite writers may not regularly publish in the same place, making their work difficult to follow via email subscription. Many authors have either their own web pages dedicated to their work or publish on websites such as Medium — a site offering both free and premium membership options, that hosts the writings of many big names in independent news from across the political spectrum.

Signing up for Medium allows you to follow any writer you like, even mainstream ones – a boon, for instance, if you like a certain writer at, say, The Wall Street Journal but don’t trust the paper as a whole. Certain popular writers in independent media — such Nafeez Ahmed’s Insurge Intelligence — even publish some of their biggest stories exclusively on Medium.

Dump social media for news

The Wrath Of Facebook: ‘God’ Smote With 30-Day Ban For Criticizing US Military Spending
Facebook’s moderation system, which combines an automated flagging system with limited human oversight, has consistently drawn criticism, once banning a satirical account which criticized U.S. military spending.(AP/Czarek Sokolowski)

Though some may value their Facebook account for keeping in touch with friends and family, the social media giant is quickly becoming unreliable for receiving news content posted by your friends as well as the people or pages you follow. Facebook and Twitter have each been caught censoring on several occasions and both now openly patrol for “fake news” and “hate speech” — burying stories that users would otherwise see, based on the recommendations of Facebook or Twitter-approved flaggers. Many of these flaggers have been found to publish “fake news” themselves or have a strong bias against particular viewpoints, particularly those critical of conservative politics.

Just as with Google, Facebook and Twitter users can no longer be sure that their newsfeeds contain the news they want to read, just as content creators and publishers can no longer expect the same scope and reach they once enjoyed on social media.

Unfortunately, the alternatives to Facebook and Twitter are few and lack the large user communities that make a social network successful. However, there are two notable sites that are attempting to change that.

One of those sites is Steemit. Steemit is a social media platform that runs a blogging and social network website built on top of a blockchain database. Steemit now boasts a decently sized community, though it hardly compares to Facebook in terms of daily users. Part of its success has been due to the site’s commitment to paying users for creating and curating popular content on the site. Per the site’s system, users receive digital points (“Steem”) depending on the success of their posts, which they can exchange for more tangible rewards or payment via online exchanges. With $1 of Steem now worth just over $4 USD, some people have found using Steemit to be both socially and economically beneficial.

Another potential Facebook competitor is Minds — an open source, encrypted, and community-owned social network site that values free speech and doesn’t bow to government or advertiser pressure. It hosts individual user profiles and blogs and creates an unfiltered newsfeed for its users.

Members can even be paid for posting their content if it garners a significant number of views and upvotes. Although at present the Minds community is tiny compared to that of Facebook, it may in years to come become a more popular alternative, as Facebook continues to disappoint.

Avoiding outright censorship if and when It happens

While censorship has long been a reality in countries like China, Western governments like to tout themselves as being the guardians of freedom and the free flow of information. But many of these governments, particularly the United States, have come to realize in recent years that they are on the losing side of the “information war,” as trust in the corporate-owned media and the government itself has sunk to historic lows.

Though Western governments have, so far, outsourced censorship to technology companies like Google and Facebook, there is little reason to believe that these governments will refrain from demanding the outright censorship of information that doesn’t toe the official line.

Take, for example, the recent rhetoric of U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May who, in the wake of the Manchester bombing, has pushed for censoring “extremist propaganda” online. May’s assertion concerned internet watchdog groups, who likened her proposals to China’s widespread censorship of the Internet.

If official government censorship comes to your country – or if you suspect that it is already there – the easiest workaround is setting up a virtual private network, or VPN. A VPN allows you to use your computer as though it were connected to a network other than the one you actually use. In the event of government censorship in your country, a VPN allows you to virtually connect to a network set up in another country where such censorship is not in effect. Using a VPN has the added bonus of greater Internet privacy — as effective VPN protocols encrypt your traffic, helping to protect you from government surveillance as well as censorship.

VPNs are provided by VPN service providers, not all of whom are created equal. VPN providers with good reputations include Strong VPN, SurfEasy, and TunnelBear.  Of these, TunnelBear is the least expensive – offering a free service – and SurfEasy the most expensive at $11.99 per month. However, the Opera browser now includes SurfEasy’s VPN services for free. A comprehensive guide on how to choose the best VPN service provider for your needs can be found here.

By Whitney Webb / Creative Commons / MintPress News / Report a typo
==================================================