Philip DeFranco put out a video covering the Project Veritas news and decided to deposit his credibility down the well of misinformation. He was then called out on this misinformation by fellow YouTuber Jeremy “TheQuartering” Hambly, who outlined what DeFranco purposefully got wrong and how it duly misrepresented Veritas’ work and the evidence that has been presented even outside of the documents, e-mails, and hidden camera footage revealing Google’s sociopolitical biases.
You can watch DeFranco’s original video that was published on June 27th, 2019. The timestamp is at the 11:00 minute mark where he discusses the Project Veritas findings, Google’s manipulation, the censorship claims, the government’s response, and his own thoughts for close to 12 minutes.
DeFranco attempts to portray an unbiased look at the situation, covering Project Veritas’ footage and the e-mails and documents presented by the anonymous Google employee, but then he proceeds to dabble in the misinformation machine by constructing some false comparisons in a bad attempt to debunk the information in the Project Veritas exposé.
More specifically, it centers around DeFranco’s attempt to cover for Google’s biases when it comes to search results.
TheQuartering called out DeFranco on this issue in his own rebuttal, which you can watch below.
As TheQuartering points out, DeFranco purposefully took the example from Veritas out of context regarding the CEOs by ignoring the fact that the example in the Veritas video was done in incognito mode. DeFranco was logged in when he gave the results, thus skewing the results according to his own search history (which may or may not have been stuffed with specific searches before he did the video to pad a certain outcome).
In DeFranco’s example of “CEO” his results pull up multiple images of male CEOs at the top image results. However, when TheQuartering did the same search in incognito mode, the results showed that the first row showed various females, black men, and groups instead of an accurate representation of CEOs, who realistically skew white.
But don’t take the examples in the videos at their word, do the test yourself. In fact, here’s an archive of the search results.
What does it show? Two rows of “diverse” CEOs, and not just an image listing of actual CEOs. Also notice the search tabs above the images, where it lists certain companies and also has “woman” in between “Uber” and “Facebook”.
This literally aligns with what the anonymous Google employee said about the machine learning fairness, where Google inculcated the algorithm with results not based on facts and reality, but based on what they want people to see. Essentially, “fairness” according to their ideological standards, otherwise known as social engineering.
DeFranco also attempts to cover for Google with the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal, claiming that the first page results show Wikileaks, as opposed to addressing the actual claim by the Google employee, who noted that Google’s staff removed search suggestions for “Hillary Clinton emails”, which does not auto-complete. This is true, if you attempt to go to the search bar and type “Hillary Clinton emails” you get no auto-complete returns, as pictured below.
You can also search up “Donald Trump emails” and there’s an actual auto-complete listing for Trump’s e-mails even though that isn’t an actual trending story, as mentioned in the original Project Veritas video. Yet the auto-complete listings are there as pictured below.
Google is giving the impression that there’s no interest in Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal, while there is interest in Donald Trump’s. You can literally compare the search engine interest rates between the two using Google Trends. The numbers don’t lie.
Again, you can test these for yourself, don’t just trust what someone else is telling you. Trust the facts.
Now some of you might be asking, “What difference does it make if you’re using incognito mode or not?”
Well, it makes a huge difference.
Incognito mode represents an average search from a user who hasn’t searched up certain terms or topics. This means if you’re going into a subject cold the incognito mode will show you what those results look like. So if you searched up “CEO” for the first time and you saw a mixture of minority females in with other males, you would assume that many CEOs are spread across the board in terms of race and gender based on Google’s suggestions.
But this doesn’t just apply to the “CEO” term, it applies to a lot of search terms and topics on Google.
Google’s “machine learning fairness” is based on what Google determines to be “fair” results for people to see, even if they’re fake, untrustworthy or untrue.
A perfect example is that last year in July of 2018 it was reported that Saudi Arabia had banned 47 games in response to two child suicides. Multiple articles had been written based on a Reuters report. This was highlighted in the Google News Stories coverage, as you can see in the archived search results.
It turns out this was all fake news, and only a couple of sites actually corrected it. The actual sites that initially reported that it was fake news were nowhere to be found in the Google News section. Even Snopes reported the fake news and they haven’t corrected the story even to this day.
To their credit, IGN was one of the only major websites to update and correct their article after being alerted that the games on the ban list had been there for years, and they were not banned in light of the child suicides.
However, all of the sites in Google’s News Stories category are considered trustworthy, so even if they publish fake news Google will still promote their content regardless of whether it’s true or not.
This isn’t to say that all of Google’s search results are tainted, but on certain topics, from certain outlets, you’re going to get the results Google wants you to see and not the results that should be seen.
Now that Google News example about the Saudi Arabia ban is just one many examples one could pull up in terms of Google promoting websites that publish fake news. You could just as well find similar results regarding the Overwatch Ellie situation, which was another fake news story propped up by activists at news media outlets.
Compounding matters further is the fact that Google has a “blacklist” of sorts that they use to suppress the results of certain websites. It’s called shadow-banning. This was covered in a video by PSA Sitch.
While some of these results will still appear from these websites, certain results won’t appear for certain topics. This was revealed months before the Project Veritas’ exposé, with a leaked memo that circulated Google where they described how to deal with “problematic” websites.
Google claimed that they didn’t manipulate the search results (but declined to mention if the memo itself was legitimate or not), but then it was revealed that Google does manipulate the search results with the machine learning fairness, and that multiple websites have been negatively impacted by this measure.
Philip DeFranco completely ignores all of the other surrounding evidence related to Google’s shadow-banning and search engine manipulation, in addition to the fact that YouTube censored Project Veritas’ video on the grounds of a privacy claim, showing clear intent to stifle the spread of the news.
DeFranco attempts to play both sides of the field while also completely ignoring the fact that a Google executive outright claimed they were going to try to stop President Donald Trump from being re-elected. They’ve already shown the motive, the means, and the evidence to frame a narrative about the President based on existing examples, and they were even openly dismayed at Trump winning back in 2016, as revealed in the leaked video that was spread by outlets like Breitbart.
This isn’t even getting into YouTube’s political biases; their algorithm that specifically targets and suppresses certain kinds of videos from certain kinds of content creators, or the fact that despite DeFranco trying to use Tim Pool’s figures as a scapegoat to undermine the information provided by the anonymous whisteblower, Pool himself came out and acknowledged that his recommendations were being purposefully stifled, just as the whisteblower had mentioned. Pool updates the audience on his recommended views being down at the 1:00 minute mark in the video below.
Essentially, DeFranco is purposefully covering up all of this mounting evidence to play a “two sides” situation and attempt to reframe the Project Veritas coverage as shady. Thankfully, even his commenters noted that he was being dishonest and spreading misinformation and fake news by calling him out on it in his comment section.
Will DeFranco make a new video and actually take into account all of the manipulation, malfeasance, censorship, suppression, and ideological bias that Google has displayed over the years and especially within the last few months? Or will DeFranco attempt to handwave it away and go about his business?
For the most part it’s good that TheQuartering called him out and put a proper story out there that covers the kind of misinformation that DeFranco is feeding to his subscribers, but ultimately it will require more persistence to get the YouTube heavyweight to correct the misinformation.
(Thanks for the news tip Kevin Backalive)