Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel

Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel

It's been known by many since Israel-loving Beijing Biden was "elected" with more votes than any other president in history, that YouTube has been removing down-votes from White House videos. While it is transparently obvious that the vast majority of people, and even many on the left, strongly dislike the war-mongering demented pedophile, and have been expressing their sentiments in large numbers by down-voting each and every video the White House uploads, YouTube clearly wants the world to imagine otherwise.

One curious person, 'Zoe Phin', decided to confirm YouTube's mass removal of down-votes by monitoring the White House YouTube channel using a simple Bash script. Zoe published the results of this effort in an article, White House Youtube Dislike Manipulation (archived here).

I've seen screenshots of YouTube modifying dislikes of White House videos. I decided I would do a thorough analysis myself. I wrote a script to check video stats every 80 seconds for 24 hours – for all videos on White House's YouTube channel.

Zoe tells us that many other videos were simply removed (delisted) within minutes of being published.

Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel
01/26/21: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki and Domestic Policy Advisor Susan Rice

What we see in the graph above is a massive decrease in dislikes for the video, 01/26/21: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki and Domestic Policy Advisor Susan Rice, at about the 6 hr. mark, followed by many smaller reductions at approximately 1 hr. intervals, the result of which limits the maximum number of dislikes to around 5000 (the number was at 4.4K at the time of writing this).

Following are more examples of down-vote manipulation by YouTube.

Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel
President Biden Delivers Remarks Outlining his Racial Equity Agenda and Signs Executive Actions
Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel
Vice President Harris will Ceremonially Swear in Dr. Janet Yellen as Secretary of the Treasury
Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel
President Biden Delivers Remarks on the Fight to Contain the COVID-19 Pandemic
Blatant YouTube vote manipulation for White House channel
President Biden Delivers Remarks and Signs Executive Orders

Zoe uploaded some of the collected to Pastebin, including a data set that contains the number of dislikes that were removed from the videos, as well as the times at which they were removed. This data tells us that 130,000 dislikes were removed in just 24 hours.

The disgust people feel regarding ding-dong Biden is also apparent on the White House videos hosted at BitChute, a popular YouTube alternative. Unlike YouTube, there is far less censorship at BitChute and, we might assume, no manipulation of voting statistics. A BitChute user created the channel, TheWhiteHouse, which i assume is not an official White House channel, but which seems to mirror the White House videos posted at YouTube. If Zoe's statistics are accurate, we might expect to find a similar result regarding user sentiment for the White House videos on BitChute, minus the vote manipulation, and indeed we do.

For the most recent White House video posted at BitChute, 01/29/21: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, at the time of this writing the video was viewed 1925 times. The video was liked by 3 viewers and disliked by 474. Another video, President Biden Signs Executive Actions, was viewed 4265 times, liked once and disliked 764 times. All of the other videos share very similar results regarding the like-dislike ratio.

Linux Hardening Guide

A reader sent me a link to what appears to be a very comprehensive Linux Hardening Guide by 'madaidan'.

I'm not exactly sure what to think about the author as far as their technical knowledge since they promote some stuff i do not necessarily agree with, such as using Tor instead of a VPN. The author is completely correct in that there are risks to be assumed with any VPN, however i believe, and i think the evidence dictates, that the same is true with the Tor network (see here and here for instance). Also the author complains about Firefox's security, yet the Tor browser is a fork of Firefox.

The author also makes some potentially sketchy claims regarding Android, stating that "The best option for privacy and security on Android is to get a Pixel 3 or greater and flash GrapheneOS".

From everything i understand, exactly none of the mainstream phones can be considered privacy or security friendly as long as the baseband firmware shares the same memory as the user-facing OS, nor can they be made to be so. Contrary to the authors advice, i would recommend, a) ditching your mobile if at all possible or, b) considering devices from PinePhone and Purism where the proprietary baseband firmware is isolated from the OS and which have hardware switches to actually (really) power off certain components. The author recommends to avoid these devices, but i'm not sure how strong of an argument they make and the arguments miss many other advantages of such devices.

Commenting in an area i know a bit more about, the author states, "You cannot configure your browser to prevent tracking either. Everyone will configure their browser differently so when you change a bunch of about:config settings such as privacy.resistFingerprinting and pile on browser extensions like Privacy Badger, you're making yourself stand out and are effectively reducing privacy."

That's a very crude statement in my opinion. First of all i personally don't recommend Privacy Badger. Secondly, standing out (appearing unique to a web server) is not a bad thing as long as the browser fingerprint isn't static. Firefox has many preferences other than privacy.resistFingerprinting which can be leveraged to make it more privacy and security complaint. I maintain two guides if interested.

All that said, the Linux Hardening Guide may indeed be a great guide and i think it's certainly worth a read.

Mozilla - from bad to left

I just added the following to my The Mozilla Monster article ...

We need more than deplatforming

In yet another stunning, radical left-sided display of utter contempt for free speech and mind-numbing hypocrisy, Mozilla published a blog post following the defeat of President Trump in the fraudulent 2020 U.S. presidential election.

There is no question that social media played a role in the attempted coup and take-over of the US Capitol on January 6.

Protestors were allowed to enter the capital building, there was no coup, nor any attempt at one, but for the radical leftists, facts don't matter.

Since then there has been significant focus on the deplatforming of President Donald Trump. By all means the question of when to deplatform a head of state is a critical one, among many that must be addressed. When should platforms make these decisions? Is that decision-making power theirs alone?

...says the corporation who claims to champion free speech, except of course when someone says something they don't agree with.

But as reprehensible as the actions of Donald Trump are, the rampant use of the internet to foment violence and hate, and reinforce white supremacy is about more than any one personality. Donald Trump is certainly not the first politician to exploit the architecture of the internet in this way, and he won’t be the last. We need solutions that don’t start after untold damage has been done.

The hypocrisy is unbelievable. The same bunch of radical left retards who support and fund violent, self-admitted Marxists and extremists like Antifa and Black Lives Matter who spent 2020 burning, looting, beating, killing and defunding the police, are now calling largely peaceful protestors who were permitted to enter the capital building, violent white supremacists, lumping in with them the many thousands who didn't enter the building and the 10's of millions who supported Trump.