But I'm even more curious, would you not describe Tucker Carlson as far right in his views?
Dubious.
On what social issues are excatly Euros more left wing compared to Americans?
> ask any non-European person who has lived on both continents where he feels more welcome.
I gladly concede this, but this is just one element of social issues.
> Universal healthcare, unemployment benefits, workers' rights, LGBTQ rights, prison policy, police behavior and control, social safety net, lack of religion in politics, free or extremely cheap education including higher education
> Matter of a fact in Eastern Europe...
Thats why my first answer was: Certainly not Western Europe. My knowledge of Easter Europe is nonexistent, so I won't dare say anything about their circumstances.
which ones ?? russiagate hrc lies ??
Liz Cheney
Mitt Romney
David French
Reason media (Libertarian)
Andrew Sullivan
These all tend to fall under the more 80s/90s Neoconservative or Liberalism banner instead of the more aggressive New Right
It also has a Washington Post article[4] discussing a (since-deleted) video that purportedly showed potentially-manipulated differences between how Bing and Google autocompleted "Hillary Clinton" searches. But none of the 3 main sources cover what the impact of autocomplete could be.
Do you have any links about Google being caught red-handed politicizing ranking order?
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547273/
[2] https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-c...
[3] https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.9.2019.0370#m...
[4] https://archive.is/fHzW8. Is Politifact trustworthy? They investigated this and found "Google’s suggested searches, for the most part, avoid offensive suggestions for everyone, not just Clinton." That isn't a total debunk, of course. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jun/23/andrew-nap...
>>A preliminary analysis of the data shows that Google search results (but NOT search results on Bing or Yahoo) had a significant liberal bias – enough to have shifted at least 6 million votes in the months leading up to the election.
You need to know the methodology being used to understand the results, as they tracked ephemeral experiences using surveillance software with volunteers.
This guy needs a website team in the biggest way. It's hard to find the information and it's scattershot. It's very frustrating because the work he's doing is solid. Don't let the shitty web presence deter you.
The Rogan podcast was awkward af but he does provide a lot of substantive content if you're open to listening.
https://www.aibrt.org/index.php/internet-studies is probably the most coherent site, but there's no salient tldr breakdown, to learn more you'll need to watch the videos.
https://youtu.be/-7qT_38iRSc is the most comprehensive video, but I'll need to spend more time later to gather better links.
>Google's been caught red handed deliberately manipulating political content.
>https://mygoogleresearch.com/
There's no research on that page. Many of the linked articles that this individual has written also are vague on actual details/proof and only contain vague "this could happen!" comments. Beyond that, many of them also end with a plea for more fundraising.
>This guy needs a website team in the biggest way. It's hard to find the information and it's scattershot. It's very frustrating because the work he's doing is solid. Don't let the shitty web presence deter you.
All he needs to do is spend a little more time uploading data and evidence, and less time shoving as many "DONATE" buttons onto his page as he can. None of this looks like solid work, even his television appearances; it looks like someone who goes around throwing out lots and lots of loose speculation while asking to be paid to do so.
He submitted a paper on this in June 2021 to the AABSS but they have yet to publish it. He also has 5 other, earlier SEME papers submitted for publication.[1]
I appreciate you going the distance on providing these links but I'm loath to trust this data until it's been peer-reviewed.
His AIBRT presentation[2] has some seemingly spurious logic. Here's one slide: https://i.imgur.com/t4rGv3e.png
The graph depicts 300k undecided voters resolving to a party over time. Here's Epstein talking about it:
> ...by the time we hit election day, we have an enormous gap - more than 100,000 people - between the conservatives and liberals. And we've created that gap with our biased search results.
Assigning that movement to a single cause seems unlikely to me.
His presentation does include a relevant WSJ article titled "Google Workers Discussed Tweaking Search Function to Counter Travel Ban."[3] That's not "red-handed," since they didn't do it, but it's very relevant. HN at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18036353
[0] https://hackernoon.com/taming-big-tech-5fef0df0f00d
[1] https://drrobertepstein.com/pdf/vita.pdf
[2] Video: https://www.aibrt.org/downloads/EPSTEIN_et_al_2021-Large-Sca...
Put another way, you can't expect me to spend my time listening to a podcast just to be able to guess at what your argument is.
Sorry, do you have a better link handy? This primarily looks like a fundraising page.