EU Investigating Google’s Anti-Competitive Practices; US Silent on Google Election Meddling Plot

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
December 1, 2018

I’m sure Google does actively downrank competitors.

Why would they not do that?


EU antitrust regulators have asked Google’s rivals if the internet search giant unfairly demotes local search competitors, according to a questionnaire seen by Reuters, a move which could lead to a fourth case against the Alphabet (GOOGL.O) unit.

Google has been fined a total 6.76 billion euros ($7.7 billion) in the last 17 months for favoring its comparison shopping service and for using its dominant Android mobile operating system to reinforce its search engine market power.

The European Commission, which took the world’s most popular internet search engine to task for these two anti-competitive practices, is wrapping up a third case which involves Google’s AdSense advertising service.

The EU competition authority’s interest in local search services followed a complaint by U.S. search and advertising company Yelp (YELP.N) and rivals in the travel, restaurant and accommodation industries.

Regulators also wanted to know if rivals experienced an impact in the operation of their local services as a result of major search algorithm changes by Google, including the introduction of its Panda 4.0 algorithm.

Introduced in 2014, this algorithm determines what appears in Google search results.

I mean, yeah, okay – whatever.

But what I’m more concerned about is the fact that Google has a political agenda which they are forwarding.

Daily Caller:

Google employees debated whether to bury conservative media outlets in the company’s search function as a response to President Donald Trump’s election in 2016, internal Google communications obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation reveal.

The Daily Caller and Breitbart were specifically singled out as outlets to potentially bury, the communications reveal.

Trump’s election in 2016 shocked many Google employees, who had been counting on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton to win.

Communications obtained by TheDCNF show that internal Google discussions went beyond expressing remorse over Clinton’s loss to actually discussing ways Google could prevent Trump from winning again.

“This was an election of false equivalencies, and Google, sadly, had a hand in it,” Google engineer Scott Byer wrote in a Nov. 9, 2016, post reviewed by TheDCNF.

Byer falsely labeled The Daily Caller and Breitbart as “opinion blogs” and urged his coworkers to reduce their visibility in search results.

“How many times did you see the Election now card with items from opinion blogs (Breitbart, Daily Caller) elevated next to legitimate news organizations? That’s something that can and should be fixed,” Byer wrote.

“I think we have a responsibility to expose the quality and truthfulness of sources – because not doing so hides real information under loud noises,” he continued.

“Beyond that, let’s concentrate on teaching critical thinking. A little bit of that would go a long way. Let’s make sure that we reverse things in four years – demographics will be on our side.”

lol imagine a Republican group talking about “demographics will be on our side.”

That is literal Nazism.

But yeah as far as manipulating search results to favor their favored politicians – again it’s like, why would they not do that?

You have a situation where the most powerful company in the world is allowed to do whatever they want with no consequences, and the US government is simply expecting them to behave like upstanding gentlemen. And there is no definition of “upstanding gentlemen.”

So it’s basically just the US government telling Google they can do whatever the hell they want, there won’t be any consequences. They won’t even enforce basic antitrust laws like the EU is attempting to do.

This gets into the argument of like, blaming the migrants for crossing the border. No one is actually blaming the migrants for trying to get into America – if they’re allowed, then why would they not do so? People want the government to tell them they’re not allowed.

Just so with Google.

Anyone should always be assumed to be acting in their own best interests, and if those own best interests conflict with the general health of the general society, then it should be on the government to figure that situation out.

I don’t even think Google should be subjected to antitrust. I think this is a natural monopoly, which should be regulated as all other natural monopolies have been regulated throughout American history.