This post...claiming that they are not accusing anyone of any crime, is doing just that. They are accusing Hillary Clinton of crimes because Google- they say- is manipulating its search engine in Hillary's favor.
Here is my question...are false accusations and downright misleading propaganda ( numerous committees have already vindicated Mrs. Clinton of lying and of the slanderous accusations of wrongdoing on both Benghazi and her personal e-mail ) against a presidential candidate supposed to hold the same weight in a browser search engine as stories and posts based on legitimate news stories?
Is propaganda's(whose sole purpose is to destroy an honorable reputation) value the same as purposeful journalism, or is its value more akin to a paid advertisement (whose sole purpose is to try to sell you something whether you want it or not)?
If it is the former, then Google has to deal with these stories as fitting to its work model, just like Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and their ilk have their duty to report fair and balanced,and non-judgmentally as they claim.
But, if it is the latter, if the propaganda of destroying the Hillary campaign through various means falls more under the supposed purpose of advertisement, then Google is totally within their rights not to give these sites and postings anything unless they have agreed beforehand to the purchase of said spots.
For Google to intentionally allow propaganda (ie false and / or misleading) sites the preferred top spot access in something as big and possibly world changing as the United States presidential race, it could be seen as an attempt to influence the outcome of the race via manipulation.
Surely, the party that believes in the free market will stand with Google on this issue. No press is bad press, but advertisements are gonna cost ya.
Fair and balanced...you decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment