from: Robert W Malone MD from "Who is Robert Malone" <rwmalonemd@substack.com>
reply-to: Robert W Malone MD from Who is Robert Malone <reply+2cbg1n&doii8&&97bcfa23056ab003561c2c42833650538e19eb27e4505d30cdd231d8e937eaea@mg1.substack.com>
to: fchase@gmail.com
date: Feb 13, 2024, 4:22 PM
subject: Google has Usurped Democracy
mailing list: rwmalonemd@substack.com Filter messages from this mailing list
mailed-by: mg1.substack.com
signed-by: mg1.substack.com
View in browser
Google has Usurped Democracy
Across the globe, fair elections no longer exist.
ROBERT W MALONE MD, MS
FEB 13, 2024
[Warning: The more time you spend reading this, the more it sinks in. Plan to spend at least 20 minutes reading this. –F. Chase ]
We hear a lot about “election integrity” or lack thereof, particularly around the issues of counting the vote and the ballot box. But the truth is that elections are more likely to be stolen via search engine manipulation effects (SEME).
What is SEME?
SEME is an abbreviation for the search engine manipulation effect. In a series of randomized controlled experiments, it has been shown that more than 20% of undecided voters can be manipulated into voting one way or the other, by simply manipulating the rankings of search engine results.
These studies were published in an article titled “The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections”, which was published in the journal, PNAS in 2015. From the paper:
Internet search rankings have a significant impact on consumer choices, mainly because users trust and choose higher-ranked results more than lower-ranked results. Given the apparent power of search rankings, we asked whether they could be manipulated to alter the preferences of undecided voters in democratic elections.
Here we report the results of five relevant double-blind, randomized controlled experiments, using a total of 4,556 undecided voters representing diverse demographic characteristics of the voting populations of the United States and India. The fifth experiment is especially notable in that it was conducted with eligible voters throughout India in the midst of India’s 2014 Lok Sabha elections just before the final votes were cast.
The results of these experiments demonstrate that (i) biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more, (ii) the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups, and (iii) search ranking bias can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation.
We call this type of influence, which might be applicable to a variety of attitudes and beliefs, the search engine manipulation effect. Given that many elections are won by small margins, our results suggest that a search engine company has the power to influence the results of a substantial number of elections with impunity. The impact of such manipulations would be especially large in countries dominated by a single search engine company.
The principle investigator of these studies has gone on to show that the 2016, 2020 and 2022 elections were all manipulated by Google. After Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016, which shocked Google leadership, internal whistleblowers revealed that Google vowed that it wouldn’t happen again. Which is why Trump “lost” in 2020.
One of the most chilling interviews I recently listened was on the Bill Walton Show. Bill is a personal friend [of ROBERT W MALONE MD, MS ] , and together with another friend (Jenny Beth Martin) interviewed Dr. Epstein (the PI and author of the above paper) in 2023.
Below are some of the more important portions of that interview (the full transcript can be found here).
Robert Epstein: Google is actually surveilling you and your kids and your loved ones on over more than 200 different platforms, most of which people have not heard of. So, quick example, most websites, millions of websites use Google Analytics to track traffic to their website…
If you are using a Google service such as Google Analytics, then they have a right to track you. So, in other words, on all of those websites that use Google Analytics, which Google provides for free to companies around the world, if you visit any of those websites, Google is tracking every single thing you do on those websites. So, there are actually more than 200 different ways in which they're tracking us. They bought Fitbit a few years ago, so that gives them physiological data 24 hours a day. About seven, eight years ago, they bought the Nest Smart Thermostat company, and the first thing they did after they started making smart thermostats was they put microphones in them.
But the point is they did this without telling anyone. At the time, they also were filing for patents on how to interpret sounds inside the home, so they could tell whether the kids are okay, whether your sex life is okay. They literally got patents on methods for interpreting sound inside homes.
Bill Walton: we're talking about Google and Google's omnipotence and ability to monitor and manipulate. Let's talk about the people in Google. I'd like to put a human face on it because people in Google, what's the culture of Google? We got Sergey Brin and the other fellow is ... Larry Page, who actually met 12 years ago when they were children, but they were billionaire children. But what's the culture like and has that changed in the 12, 10 years since you started following and getting into the Google world?
Robert Epstein: Well, first of all, as you know, as a former corporate executive, corporations have a culture and some have very distinctive cultures. Google's is extremely distinctive. 96% of the donations of Google employees go to Democrats, which again, I'm all for that, but the point is it's very homogeneous culture leans extremely left and the two founders are utopians. Now, that's a problem, because it means you're going to be hiring people who think like you do. It also means that in your mind, you know what's best for the world. One of the fascinating items… an eight- minute video leaked from their advanced products division a couple of years ago, it's called the Selfish Ledger. It was never meant to be seen outside the company. If you look online, look up the Selfish Ledger and then put my name next to it, you'll get a detailed transcript with my annotations on it. This video is about the company's ability to re-engineer humanity according to... I kid you not. It's right in the video. ... company values. So, their culture is very, very strong. It's very utopian. “We know best. We are going to remake the world. We are going to reshape kids around the world”
Which is one of the things that now my research is looking at directly, is that indoctrination problem. We are going to put into office people we think should be in office, not just in the US but around the world. We are going to impact the thinking and behavior and emotions of right now, more than 4 billion people around the world the way we want to, generally speaking, without anyone knowing what we're doing and generally speaking, without leaving a paper trail.
It's gone way past experimentation because they have mastered techniques, which I've been discovering and naming and identifying and quantifying over the years, but they've mastered techniques which they use without any constraint. They use them to impact our kids. They use them to impact our elections. They use them to impact decisions that pretty much everyone makes, especially if you're using a lot of Google services, which I think you are.
If you've been using the internet for 20 years, which probably the people at this table have been, they have the equivalent of more than three million pages of information about you.
But it's very easy to switch off of Gmails. So, this is a little footnote, I guess, on our larger discussion, but it's worth bringing up. You can set your Gmail to forward emails that are coming in. What you want to do is set it to forward to your new Proton Mail account. You can sign up for Proton Mail in seconds because they don't ask you anything about yourself because they don't survive off of surveillance. They're based in Switzerland. They're subject to very strict Swiss privacy laws. They use end-to-end encryption. So, if you're writing from Proton Mail to Proton Mail, no one can see that message. Not even the people at Proton Mail.
At Google, it's just the opposite. Thousands of employees at Google have free access to your entire profile, your whole search history, all the emails you've ever written. Nothing within that company is encrypted because they're so focused on speed, so they don't encrypt anything. Once you set up that forwarding from your Gmail, everything's coming in now to your new Proton Mail. So, you're checking your Proton Mail, now you're replying from Proton Mail, so everyone immediately gets your new email address. You don't lose any of that. Your old archive of emails on Gmail is still there for you.
They never erase anything. They do, however, cut people off sometimes from their Gmails. They've done that to millions of people. You've probably heard of Jordan Peterson as a colleague of mine, psychologist up in Canada. He's one of millions of people who has been completely cut off from his accounts. When they cut you off from Gmail, they cut you off from all of your accounts. They can do this with or without cause. They have no customer service department.
Walton: Google's a private company.
Robert Epstein: That's right.
Bill Walton: No shareholders. I mean no public shareholders. So, the two young men, not so young now, control the company. A fair number of venture capitalists from Silicon Valley still got big stakes in Google. Of course, the venture capitalists in Silicon Valley share the values of the founders, don't they?
Robert Epstein: But see, two of the key funders who really got them going, one is Roger McNamee, another is Jaron Lanier. They're both billionaire tech guys… each of those has come out with public statements and each of them in the last few years has come out with a book. They've each written a book saying that if they had known what was going to happen to Google and Facebook, which they both invested in the early days, they would never have invested in those companies. These are very dangerous companies, especially for democracy. So, here are two of the biggest investors in these companies that got them going saying they have turned into monsters. So, it's not just me. There are people who are in the know, who really understand from the inside what's going on and who are terrified.
Robert Epstein: Okay, first of all, you think of Gmail like it's the United States Postal Service, right?
But it's not. The US Postal Service, they actually do preserve your privacy unless they get a court order and they also have to deliver the mail. They must deliver the mail. Okay. So, Gmail pretends it's a free postal service, except they're not subject to any rules or regulations of any sort, and they don't have to deliver your mail. If they want to, they can take millions of emails coming, let's say, from the Republican Party that are going out to constituents and they can send them right into people's spam boxes. So, no one ever sees those. In fact, the RNC sued Google last year, because in fact, they were doing just that.
They don't have to deliver mail. They can alter mail, believe it or not. Then of course, there's the surveillance. They read your emails. The Postal Service doesn't read everyone's emails and put all the information into everyone's profiles, but we're talking about massive surveillance on the one hand.
Number two, we're talking about massive censorship. A big article I wrote for US News and World Report a few years ago was on nine of Google's blacklists. I had never seen them, but I knew as a programmer that they existed. I described them in detail. They deny having blacklists. When I testified before Congress in 2019, right before me, Google executive was asked under oath, "Sir, does Google have blacklists?"He said, under oath, "No, Senator, we do not." A few weeks later, a Google whistleblower walked out of Google. His name is Zach Vorhies who I've gotten to know very well over the years. He walks out with 950 pages of documents from Google, three of which are labeled blacklists. I mean, talk about the arrogance of this company. Would you label your blacklist blacklists? Because I wouldn't. But the point is, of course, they have blacklists. A lot of the entities listed on those lists were conservative organizations or conservative personalities. So, again, they have very, very, very strong corporate culture, and they suppress content that they don't want people to see. So, you've got the surveillance, number one. Number two, massive censorship. Then number three, which is what I started studying more than 10 years ago, manipulation techniques. They have access to techniques of manipulation, which have never existed before in human history. They're made possible by the internet. Unfortunately, they're controlled almost entirely by a couple of tech monopolies.
What's wrong with that? What's wrong with that is if let's say you're running a political campaign and you put up a billboard, well, I can put up a billboard across the street and counter your billboard. You buy a TV commercial. I can buy another TV commercial. In other words, a lot of what happens in elections or for that matter in life is competitive.
That's a good part of democracy is that competitiveness. But if Google itself wants to support a party or a candidate using one of these new techniques that we study, there's nothing you can do. Generally speaking, you can't even see what they're doing. Even if you could, you have no way to counteract it. They can implement those techniques free of charge to them, costs them nothing, and they can implement them on a massive scale, not just around this country, but around the world. They do. They do this strategically and deliberately every single day. There is no one stopping them. There are no relevant regulations or laws. They have absolute free hand.
(Personally) Well, I've got more than pushback. I mean, I've paid a price. I was contacted by a DC journalist a couple of years ago. He was doing a piece about my work, and he said that he was going to try to get comments from Google. Calls me up a couple days later, said he had talked to a woman who he believed was the head of their PR department. He said, "And she screamed at me when I asked her questions about your work." He said, "I've never seen that before. It's very unprofessional." He said, "Based on what she was saying, I want to tell you two things. Number one, you've got their attention. Number two, if I were you, I would take precautions."
Now, summer of 2019, I had been working with AGs since 2015, but that particular summer, I gave a private briefing to a bunch of AGs. It was at Stanford University. I scared the heck out of everyone, lots and lots of detail, lots of tough questions. Went out into the lobby when I was done. Little while later, the meeting breaks up. One of these AGs, I know exactly who it was, he walked up to me, he said, "Dr. Epstein, I don't want to scare you." He said, "But based on what you've told us, I'm predicting that you're going to be killed in some accident in the next few months." Now, I wasn't killed, but my wife was. I'm still struggling with that, but there have been other incidents since then.
Well, she was in a car accident. I talked with a woman who was in the car behind her. It appeared that her brakes had failed as she was getting onto the freeway, but there were some aspects of this that were very suspicious. One was her vehicle, which I had bought for her, a little pickup truck, had never been examined forensically. It disappeared very quickly off of the impound lot, supposedly disappeared somewhere in Mexico. When I looked at her phone, I realized that her Android phone had a complete record of every single place she had been, the route she had taken, the number of minutes that she had spent at every place going back years. Then in fact, Google knew the night before, let's say, they knew exactly where her vehicle was.
In other words, they could easily have just contacted a security firm who then calls up a contractor. They could easily have tampered with her breaks, but that's not the only incident. Last year, our managing director, wonderful, very talented woman, married to an extremely handsome guy. I was always jealous of him. They're walking in Downtown San Diego, 2:00 in the afternoon on a Saturday. A man comes out of the blue, pulls out a knife, slashes her husband's face from the ear down to his mouth. He'll never look the same again ever. There was nerve damage as well. But that guy then looks at her straight in the eye and laughs and runs away.
She only stayed with us another two months. She was terrified. We've already had a third incident very recently, which I don't even want to talk about. But the point is I've received warnings and there have been events which are very disturbing. There's a lot at stake here. The fact is I'm a threat not just to Google, but to some other companies. But I'm an actual threat because I'm actually doing something about what they are doing to us. They left me alone pretty much until I testified before Congress. That was it.
Bill Walton: That was 2019.
Robert Epstein: That was 2019. The last few years have been, I'd say, practically the worst years of my life, but we're making tremendous progress on the basic research, understanding what they're doing. We're expanding to kids now. So, we're starting to look finally at the indoctrination problem.
Bill Walton: This is through the Institute for Behavioral Research?
Robert Epstein: Yes, AIBRT is the acronym. But we're also building systems, which have gotten bigger and bigger each year since 2016. We're building systems that are forcing these companies, Google especially, to back off on these manipulations. By the end of this year, 2023, we will have in place a large scale, self-sustaining, permanent system that will keep Google and the gang away from our kids and away from our elections, I believe, permanently.
Bill Walton: I want to talk about your solution, but I also need more context. We've got Google. The Twitter files were just dropped a few months ago or whatever, and that revealed that Twitter, in fact, had a lot of federal agencies inside the building instructing Twitter what to do, who to block, who to censor, who shut down. They're being quite direct about the behavior. There are people from the White House commanding Twitter to do certain things. Does that thing also happen at Google, or is Google in a different category?
Robert Epstein: Well, I've lectured in the building at Stanford where the two founders of Google built the early search engine. Back then, they were getting support from at least two intelligence agencies. The intelligence agencies have always been very interested in Google and really help them with their initial design. That's legitimate for national security. That's legit, because in other words, they recognized very early on that the search engine, if it would keep track of people and keep track of their searches, it could be very useful in identifying someone who's a threat to security. In other words, someone who goes online and types in, "How do you build a bomb?" Well, the intelligence agencies, they want to know who those people are and that's legitimate.
So, short answer to your question is, yes, Google has been working with government agencies, not just in the US but around the world since they were founded more than 20 years ago. So, they work very, very closely with governments, not just our government. That's one of the problems you see with the surveillance that they do. They're doing surveillance at a massive level that J. Edgar Hoover couldn't even possibly have imagined. It's 24 hours a day, and it's over many, many, many different kinds of platforms that, again, most people haven't even heard of.
But one of the problems there is you don't know who they're sharing the information with and you don't know how they're using it. We know they're using it for manipulation purposes, because the more you know about people, the easier it is to just nudge them in one direction or another. But the fact is, if you look at their terms of service, it says they have a right to share the information they're collecting with their unnamed business partners and as required by law.
Yes. They also share that information with thousands of outside consultants. So, you don't know where that information's going and you don't know how it's being used. They're subject to being hacked like anyone else. So, I mean that information, that massive amounts of information about everything you've ever bought, any website you've ever looked at, it's everything about you. It's everything about your family history, your sexual history, your disease history, even your genetics.
Bill Walton: So, it has access to medical records.
Robert Epstein: Well, that's one of the reasons why the COVID pandemic was very, very valuable to these companies, Google especially, because that gave them full access to medical information, which they had never had before.
I don't even have a normal phone, by the way. Your phones are all surveillance devices. I have a secure phone, and it doesn't do that. So, I have the kind of phone that people in intelligence agencies use. We actually build them for our staff members.
Bill Walton: Where'd you get it? What's the price point?
Robert Epstein: The price point's about the same as any other.
Bill Walton: Is there a brand? I mean, also, we're going to sell Proton. I mean, we're going to push iPhones or phones.
Robert Epstein: Well, what we do, we do for ourselves. But when people ask me, "Well, where can I get one?", the main place to go right now is a website called de-googled.com. Just be sure if you're going to buy a phone from them, don't buy a Pixel phone because Pixel is Google.
Bill Walton: Yeah. The thing about Google, I'm big on context. There's 500 billion of online ad revenues or sales every year. Google's at least half of that. I mean, they've got a 50, 60% share of the ad market online.
Robert Epstein: I think it's more than 60%. Yeah.
Bill Walton: Okay, higher. Google buys a company every week.
Robert Epstein: That's correct.
Bill Walton: If you see a fledgling company doing something different, particularly if Google thinks it might compete with its model, what they do is they go and offer somebody 100 million, 500 million, a billion. It doesn't really matter to them because it's play money.
Robert Epstein: It's pocket change.
Bill Walton: They're buying a company a week. Have they picked up pace? I mean, there's an incredible website with all the list of companies who are potential competitors who've now been either tucked into Google or purchased and killed.
Robert Epstein: That's right. They have about 200 billion in the bank, cash.
Robert Epstein: We're talking about truly a monster. Again, the more we've learned, the more concerned I have become. Now, with me, I don't know how I would show it to you. I could certainly do it when we're off the air. It would be easier, but this is brand new. This is just sent to me by one of our data scientists, but I have with me a one-minute animation. It's a graph and it just shows you-
Okay. In fact, this was suggested to me that I should take this animation and I should put myself into the lower left corner of it, talking people through it. It's just one minute long, but this is the way it goes.
So, what you're seeing is a very simple graph and it's showing you on Google's homepage on Election Day in 2022, November 8th. It's showing you on Google's homepage, first of all, with red dots and red lines, it's showing you the proportion of conservatives who are getting go vote reminders on Google's homepage, which as you said earlier, is seen 500 million times a day just in the United States. So, we're starting at 10:00 in the morning, and you're seeing a red dot come on there. It's showing you the proportion of conservatives that are getting those reminders. It's close to 100% at beginning of the day. For blue dots and then connected by blue lines, we're seeing the proportion of liberals who are getting go vote reminders on Google's homepage.
Bill Walton:Because of their database and all the information they have, they can reliably determine who's conservative.
Robert Epstein:
Exactly. They know everything.
Oh, there's not even a reason for us to have elections because they know who's going to vote, who's not going to vote, how they're going to vote. They know all that stuff in advance.
Bill Walton: Well, see, that's a big concern for us right now as we go into 2024. I mean, we're worried that we'll never see another free and fair election.
Robert Epstein: Well, let me tell you more about this graph.
To see what you're up against here. So, some people are getting these “go vote” reminders, and Google would claim maybe everyone is getting them, except we set up monitoring systems. We've been doing this since 2016, and our systems are getting more and more sophisticated. Through the computers of thousands of registered voters, we're actually looking over people's shoulders with their permission and we're actually recording what they're seeing on their screens. So, this is ephemeral content, [It] normally just appears. [And] There's a go vote reminder. [Then] It [all] disappears. It's gone forever. It's not stored anywhere. It can't go back in time. But we have come up with ways of storing, preserving, and analyzing ephemeral content.
So, it's 10:00 in the morning. Now the way this works is this animation lasts one minute. Every second is another 15 minutes go by. So, we're speeding up. What would happen in real time if we had this running on real time and it was online for everyone to see? So here come the two points. So, it's 10:00, it's 10:15, you get two more dots, it's 10:30. You get two more dots, and the dots are moving. You're seeing these curves, these lines build up, and you're seeing that through most of the day nearly 100% of conservatives and liberals are getting go vote reminders, which is fine. So, the line keeps moving, and now all of a sudden, it's 5:00, it's 5:30. Those two points are still very high near the top of the graph. Then around 6:00 or so, this is Pacific Time.
So, the poles [polls] are still open in lots of places. That's when a lot of people are getting off work. That's when a lot of people run to the polls. All of a sudden, the blue dots keep staying at the top. So, 100% of liberals are getting those go vote reminders. The red dots start going down and down and down, and they go all the way down to zero. The last couple of hours, you stay at zero.
Now, imagine if you're, let's say, Trump and you're running for president in 2024. Imagine if we gave everyone access to that information as we're collecting it in real time. Imagine if those dots start going down.
Wouldn't you have your lawyers who's literally standing there with all the paperwork ready to hand to a judge? Wouldn't you have your lawyer run to court and say, "Your Honor, we need an emergency injunction. We need to shut down Google. Google is doing something. Google is manipulating right now, millions of votes"?
That's just one example. The reason I mentioned, because we literally just created that graph, created that animation.
Jenny Beth Martin: The hypocrisy of the left to say they care about equity and equality. They don't. They're not giving fair and equal treatment at all. They're giving weighted treatment to decide who they want to win.
Robert Epstein: Well, the problem here though is this isn't just the left. This is a private company, and they're not asking for anyone's permission. They're not discussing it with anyone. They're doing whatever the heck they want to do. So, what we are collecting now is massive amounts of information that they are sending to practically everyone in the United States. We are collecting it. We're preserving it. We started out small in 2016. We preserved 13,000 ephemeral experiences on Google, Bing, and Yahoo. We were looking at search results. At the time, that was quite an achievement. We were monitoring through the computers of 95, we call them, field agents in 24 states. So, 95 field agents. We preserved 13,000 ephemeral experiences. We analyze it. It took a lot of time after the election.
We found tremendous bias on Google search results favoring Hillary Clinton, but not on Bing or Yahoo. So, you always have to have comparisons. Enough to have shifted, if that level of bias had been present nationwide, that would've shifted between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Hillary Clinton over a period of several months before the election. Whose votes are getting shifted? They're not shifting die hard Democrats and Republicans. They're shifting the undecided voters. Those are the people they go ask-
Bill Walton: What besides the go vote piece that they do? We talked about all the ephemeral ways to manipulate and what the search results are and what video shows up next when you look? How do they that?
Robert Epstein: Well, there's manipulation occurring on the search engine itself. There's a lot of manipulation, which we are also monitoring now on YouTube, those up next suggestions. First of all, 70% of the videos that people watch on YouTube around the world are suggested by that up next algorithm.
Bill Walton: When we're talking Google, we're talking YouTube. It's all one thing.
Robert Epstein: It's Google. That's right. In 2022, those days leading up to the midterm elections, 76% of those up next suggestions were from coming from liberal news sources. Now, Google would say, "Well, that's just what's out there. We're just reporting what's out there." But we calculated that and actually only 38% of the videos that are out there, the news videos are coming from liberal news sources, but 76% of the suggestions they're making are coming from liberal news sources. That's extremely biased.
Those have a tremendous impact on people, and we've measured that in experiments. That has a tremendous impact on people who are undecided, but it gets worse because now we're getting data from children and teens. Those up next suggestions on YouTube, it's 96% for children and teens are coming from liberal news sources. 96%.
Jenny Beth Martin: I think that there's just a sense from people who are plugged in and aware that what you're going to get might be manipulated, but then if they're searching something and they still click on the first thing that comes up, they understand it's manipulation, but they're still clicking on the first thing rather than digging into deeper into the results or really struggling to type in so many different words that you get what you're truly looking for and not what it wants to deliver to you.
Robert Epstein: That's where they get you because they know people are lazy.
Bill Walton: It finishes your word for you.
Robert Epstein: Those search suggestions, we know from our experiments-
Bill Walton: If you type in crooked, you don't get crooked Hillary.
Robert Epstein: Not on Google and Google is all that counts when it comes to search because 92% of search around the world is done in…
If you want to all in one place to get a summary of how you can get away from all the surveillance stuff, go to my article, which is at myprivacytips.com, myprivacytips.com. It begins with a sentence, I have not received a targeted ad on my mobile phone or computer since 2014. That's how I start out. So, it is possible to use tech and guard your privacy or at least most of your privacy, but most people just don't even think about these things, especially kids, especially young people. They don't think about these things at all. They've never known privacy.
But see, we're starting to monitor TikTok. We're monitoring not just Google, but YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram. We're adding more and more. So, these monitoring systems we're building are getting bigger and bigger, more and more sophisticated, and that is how you can stop these companies from these manipulations and even from the censorship. The problem with censorship is you don't know what they don't show.
Robert Epstein: That's a very, very dangerous kind of manipulative tool. But monitoring systems, that's a way to fight back because we're actually capturing all this ephemeral stuff. We're archiving it, so it can be analyzed either now or later. It can also be submitted to courts as well. This is court admissible evidence, and we do it very, very carefully. We're monitoring through a politically balanced group of registered voters around the country, and then in recent months, we've also been recruiting their children and their teens.
Jenny Beth Martin: So, you've talked a couple times about the indoctrination of children. One of the things that almost every time that I'm on an interview or just talking to parents and anything comes up about protecting children, I am constantly saying, "Parents, make sure you are logging into your kids' accounts and look at what they're seeing on their device." Because if you just look at their account, you have a completely different experience than what they actually are getting because of the way the feeds and the algorithms push information to you. What are you seeing? I'm glad that they're giving you permission to monitor the kids because I think that there are very bad things going on with kids and it's causing social contagions of very harmful behavior. What are you seeing?
Robert Epstein: Well, let's see. How do I explain this? First of all, I have five kids myself. Basically, parents really don't know what their kids are seeing, because most of what they're seeing is ephemeral, so there's no record of it. So, one of the things that we're going to be doing where it's the equivalent of Girl Scout cookies, we are actually going to be selling an app that parents can install on their kids' devices. That will keep track, make a record of all of this ephemeral content, and then the parents can look back and actually see what the kids were seeing. So, so far, parents really don't know, but I can tell you without any doubt that our children are being subjected to indoctrinations 24 hours a day, that it is so intense that I think it could legitimately be called brainwashing. A lot of the mysterious things that seem to be happening with the thinking of our kids, all these mysteries, this sudden use of all kinds of gender terms or sexual orientation terms or attitudes towards this or that and these massive changes in thinking among young people that seem to happen almost overnight, those are engineered.
They are engineered, and we are going to be able to show as our system gets large enough, we are going to be able to document that. More importantly, we are going to be able to expose it and I can give you one clear example if and when you're ready for it, where we show that by exposing what they're doing, we can get them to stop.
So, by exposing the indoctrination that's occurring, we're going to get them to stop. We know how to keep them away from our elections and away from our kids. It's just a question of scaling up the kind of monitoring systems that we've been building, and we're doing that right now.
(To find out more about Robert Epstein’s work, go to: mygoogleresearch.com )
Robert Epstein: It is very easy to remember. Mygoogleresearch.com and people can go there to look at videos, look at documents, and there's also information there for people who might want to support us, support the research.
Robert Epstein: Mygoogleresearch.com
“Who is Robert Malone” is a reader supported publication. To support our work, please subscribe!
On a personal note, Jill and I celebrate our 45th wedding anniversary on the 17th of February, and have taken a little vacation in warmer climes. Please forgive us if the Substack essays become a bit more erratic for a few days. And then we return to CPAC and the International Crisis Summit, and will be writing and broadcasting from the Gaylord hotel in Washington DC where both will take place. Please join us there!
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
|
101 Comments
Share
Top First
|
|
15 hrs agoAuthor I really like this search engine. Jan at Epoch Times told me about it. Way better than Brave.
REPLY (6) SHARE |
