Is Google the DNC's data-mining tool?

[Veritas]

Google: The Democrat’s Private Intelligence Agency | RedState

The threat isn’t just that Google openly supports left wing politicians and policies. That’s obvious, and that relationship goes both ways. Google+ hosted Joe Biden for a “fireside chat” about gun control and Obama is doing a Google+ “hangout” immediately following his State of the Union speech tonight.

The real threat is that Google, or perhaps just a few people within the leadership of Google, may be quietly operating as a private intelligence agency for the left.

And every time you use Google or Gmail you could be contributing just a little bit more of your behavioral data to the left.

 

[katautumn]

Oh noez! It's the Illuminati!

 

[revanneosl]

Wait wait wait. The Libertarian is complaining about a private corporation doing what they like with the assets of their own business? Dude! You have to warn us before you pull those bootlegger 180s. I'm getting whiplash over here!

 

[Rion]

They're probably referring to this quote:

The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life, that’s going to be very, very powerful. That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.

What is she talking about?

Dubbed the “nuclear codes” by campaign aides, the Obama campaign database is widely described as one of the most powerful tools ever developed in American politics. According to published reports, it contains the names of at least 4 million Obama donors – as well as millions of others (the campaign has consistently refused to say how many) compiled from voter registration rolls and other public databases. In addition, the campaign used sophisticated computer programs — with code names like “Narwhal” — to collect information through social media: Anybody who contacted the campaign through Facebook had their friends and “likes” downloaded. If they contacted the campaign website through mobile apps, cellphone numbers and address books were downloaded. Computer “cookies” captured Web browsing and online spending habits.

Obama campaign gives database of millions of supporters to new advocacy group - News - MSN CA

 

[Veritas]

This is how the plan to forever destroy the opposition and have liberal democrats in power eternally. I think it will eventually backfire. These kinds of things always do.

 

[Maynard Keenan]

This is how the plan to forever destroy the opposition and have liberal democrats in power eternally.

You mean figuring out what people like, what concerns them, what they want, essentially trying to measure the will of the people and appealing to that will? Scandalous.

 

[Bubbahotep]

Wait wait wait. The Libertarian is complaining about a private corporation doing what they like with the assets of their own business? Dude! You have to warn us before you pull those bootlegger 180s. I'm getting whiplash over here!

We also believe in privacy.

 

[Bubbahotep]

According to published reports, it contains the names of at least 4 million Obama donors – as well as millions of others (the campaign has consistently refused to say how many) compiled from voter registration rolls and other public databases. In addition, the campaign used sophisticated computer programs — with code names like “Narwhal” — to collect information through social media: Anybody who contacted the campaign through Facebook had their friends and “likes” downloaded. If they contacted the campaign website through mobile apps, cellphone numbers and address books were downloaded. Computer “cookies” captured Web browsing and online spending habits.

And this isn't illegal, why?

I once remember hearing the liberals were concerned about privacy and not having the government know everything about you.

But then again they support a massive, all-intrusive federal government so I've come to consider them all fools or liars.

 

[variant]

You mean figuring out what people like, what concerns them, what they want, essentially trying to measure the will of the people and appealing to that will? Scandalous.

You almost made me do a spit take.

 

[variant]

We also believe in privacy.

Get a script blocker.
http://noscript.net/

Lot's of private entities are mining personal data for all sorts of reasons.

 

[Bubbahotep]

My favorite is NICE.com. Came about them from putting random words in google, funny enough.

 

[Veritas]

You mean figuring out what people like, what concerns them, what they want, essentially trying to measure the will of the people and appealing to that will? Scandalous.

If you read the link, it talks about using the data to manipulate......which is apparently rather easy with the Low Information Voter as exemplified by the last election.

And this isn't illegal, why?

I once remember hearing the liberals were concerned about privacy and not having the government know everything about you.

But then again they support a massive, all-intrusive federal government so I've come to consider them all fools or liars.

Everything has flip-flopped. I use to be a liberal and democrat way back when they were such things. Now, they have moved away from the traditional D platform and on to socialist/extremism. Odd that today Kennedy would be an R.

 

[tulc]

If you read the link, it talks about using the data to manipulate......which is apparently rather easy with the Low Information Voter as exemplified by the last election. (emph. added)

Does someone get to be a Low Information Voter by not voting how you'd vote?

Everything has flip-flopped. I use to be a liberal and democrat way back when they were such things. Now, they have moved away from the traditional D platform and on to socialist/extremism. Odd that today Kennedy would be an R.

LOL! I remember when Kennedy was running how often I heard the Republicans screaming how communist and socialist the Democrats had become!
tulc(needs more coffee)

 

[GoodGuy32]

Google is Janet's right hand man. In an platonically sense; of course.

 

[USincognito]

Does someone get to be a Low Information Voter by not voting how you'd vote?

Ironically, being a negative information voter makes some think that others are low-information voters.

 

[rambot]

We also believe in privacy.

pffft. No you don't. If you own membership cards to any store, your privacy has been farmed out and used for profit (with FAR more information than any governing party can access).

If you're on Facebook, forget it.

There are SOOOOO many agencies out there who have managed to get your private data it's ludicrous to believe that a political party is the "only" one doing it.


That said, I LOVE the subject of this thread! More conspiracies please!

 

[morningstar2651]

We also believe in privacy.

Anything within the database is information you have made public.

Anything you publish on facebook is public.

There is a difference between believing in privacy, and understanding privacy.

 

[nightflight]

Wait wait wait. The Libertarian is complaining about a private corporation doing what they like with the assets of their own business? Dude! You have to warn us before you pull those bootlegger 180s. I'm getting whiplash over here!

Weird, I didn't see where he was complaining.

 

[TomCS]

Does someone get to be a Low Information Voter by not voting how you'd vote?

...that term seems like dog-whistle for something ugly.

 

[Maynard Keenan]

Low Information Voter isn't a dog whistle for anything. It's a pretty standard term for people who vote but who have limited knowledge of the issues and the candidates' positions. There are many low information voters on both sides.