[–] docksofthebay [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
FTA: "A court has ruled that Google has the right to legally manipulate searches in order to cause electoral interference and influence political results, rebuking a legal challenge from Democrat Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard.
Gabbard sued the tech giant after Google bottled up her campaign as it was rising following a strong performance in a presidential debate. She alleged that they denied her a crucial advertisement buy that damaged her campaign’s chances, and she also pointed out in her lawsuit that Google has manipulated their search results to help dictate political outcomes in the past.
“Since at least June 2019, Google has used its control over online political speech to silence Tulsi Gabbard, a candidate millions of Americans want to hear from. With this lawsuit, Tulsi seeks to stop Google from further intermeddling in the 2020 United States Presidential Election,” her lawsuit stated."
[–] Basballdude ago
Isn't that what the left was accusing Trump and the Russians of? Causing electoral interference?
[–] BarelyCoherent 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
This is a California Federal court, the first stop on it's way to the supreme court.
[–] HistoryQuest ago
That means it goes to the ninth circuit first, which our stable genius has already flipped. 😄
[–] RoundWheel 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Yep. Definitely not legal without a contract disclosure and warning they are manipulating results to promote a judeo-communist point of view.
[–] Swervish 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
OUTSTANDING!!
That means that they are a publisher, not a platform.
Publishers are responsible for the outcomes of their editorial decisions.
IOW, if they are allowed to control what appears on their page... they are liable for what they allow to appear on their page.
[–] mundania ago
The actual ruling is here: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.753634/gov.uscourts.cacd.753634.31.0.pdf
Read it, compare what’s there with what bigleaguepolitics.com said was there...