Shocking Internal Google Docs Prove Their Orwellian Goals and Desire to Squash Free Speech

Shocking internal documents from Google reveal their concern about “utopian” free speech and how it cannot truly be achieved while users are “behaving badly.”

The documents, obtained by Allum Bokhari at Breitbart News, are part of a presentation entitled “The Good Censor.” It focuses on if Google can “reassure the world that it protects users from harmful content while still protecting free speech.”

Google begins the presentation by saying early on that free speech has become “a social, economic, and political weapon.” They go on to ask “who should be responsible for censoring ‘unwanted’ conversation, anyway? Governments, users, Google?”

They acknowledge that free speech allows individuals to hold ‘the powerful’ to account and that censorship can give governments and companies the power to limit individuals. They state that the internet was founded on “utopian” ideas of free speech — and that the idea was instilled in companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google when they were founded.

“An important US Federal statute from 1996 supports this position of neutrality,” the document says of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This statute essentially gives platforms a waiver from liability over user posted content as it differentiates a “platform” from a “publisher.”

“Under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, tech firms have a legal immunity from the majority of the content posted on their platforms (unlike ‘traditional’ media publications),” page 15 reads. “This protection has empowered YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Reddit to create spaces for free speech without the fear of legal action or its financial consequences.”

Google explained that in some cases this freedom has had positive outcomes, using the Arab Spring as an example. The document then goes on to list the negative outcomes that have “undermined this utopian narrative,” listing the 2016 election (along with a photo of President Donald Trump), the trolling of actress Leslie Jones, YouTuber Logan Paul, and the rise of the alt-right as some examples of where free speech has went wrong.


The company followed that up by saying “as the ‘we’re not responsible for what happens on our platforms’ defense crumbles, users and advertisers are demanding action.” This seems to be an admission that they should no longer be protected under section 230.

Google determines that the problem is that users, governments and tech firms are all behaving badly.

It lists the ways in which users are “behaving badly” as hate speech, reprisals and intimidation, trolling, cyber harassment, cyber racism and venting.

“When they’re angry, people vent their frustrations. But whereas people used to tell their friends and family about bad experiences, the internet now provides a limitless audience for our gripes. As more and more people vent, online conversations fill with anger and nastiness,” Google asserts.

The “bad behavior,” Google believes, is caused by the fact that “human beings en masse don’t behave very well.”

One of the “problems” that they found is that “everyone has a voice.”

“The ‘little guys and girls’ can now be heard –– emerging talent, revolutionaries, whistleblowers and campaigners. But ‘everyone else’ can shout loudly too — including terrorists, racists, misogynists and oppressors,” Google notes. “And because ‘everything looks like the New York Times’ on the net, it’s harder to separate fact from fiction, legitimacy from illegitimacy, novelty from history, and positivity from destructivity.”

As far as governments go, Google says that they are behaving badly through the use of bots, troll farms and restrictions and cyber attacks. They claim that online manipulation and disinformation influenced elections in more than 18 countries in 2017, including in the US.

Google next looks internally, to figure out how they believe tech firms are behaving badly. They state that examples of this include incubating fake news, ineffective automation, and commercialized conversation are all problems.

They state that there has been inconsistent intervention, a lack of transparency about how their algorithms work, slow corrections, global inconsistency and reactionary tactics.

Google determined that this bad behavior and mismanagement from Big Tech causes many problems, including breeding conspiracy theories. They quote President Trump as an example of these “conspiracy theories.” In 2016, Trump said “Google’s search engine was suppressing the bad news about Hillary Clinton,” though Google referred to this as a “conspiracy theory,” it was true.

The document states that governments are now looking to media regulations for inspiration on how to control big tech.

“Traditional national media, such as radio and newspapers, has always been beholden to rules and regulations. In the UK, for example, impartiality and the need to present breadth and diversity of opinion is a requirement of the BBC. For the most part, the internet has side stepped much of that regulation,” Google explains. “Yet, as users and governments recognize that our online platforms hold as much power (if not more) sway over public opinions and the outcomes of elections, more people are asking ‘Isn’t ‘big tech’ really just ‘big media’ in disguise?”

They use backpage as an example.

“After several families waged a legal battle against for its facilitation of child sex trafficking, American politicians moved to amend Section 230 Communications Decency Act. While the proposed amends only cover illegal content — the move would open the door to ‘media company-like’ regulation online. Such a shift would redefine YouTube as we know it, and might do the same for Search and Reviews,” Google’s document states.

The document goes on to directly admit that big tech is no longer complying with section 230, saying that they have been moving from “passive facilitation to active curation.”

“In response to public outcries about the accessibility of unsavory and harmful content, tech firms have been adjusting their software to make it harder to stumble upon it,” the document reads.

They use the Daily Stormer as an example.

“In the wake of violence in Charlottesville, internet domain registrar Go Daddy, Google and website security company Cloudfare ended their relationships with alt-right site The Daily Stormer, effectively booting it off the internet. While some free speech advocates were troubled by the idea that ‘a voice’ could be silenced at its source, others were encouraged by the united front the tech firms put up,” Google asserts.

Google continues on to admit that tech firms are performing a “balancing act” between two incompatible positions,” creating an unmediated marketplace of ideas and creating well-ordered spaces for safety and civility. It says that 100% commitment to the American tradition of prioritizing free speech goes against commitment to the European tradition of favoring dignity over liberty and civility over freedom. One example of this that they use is censoring racial and religious hatred, even when there is no provocation of violence.

They explain that in the past, the position was clear and that tech companies preferred to be platforms that were neutral.

“But tech firms have gradually shifted away from unmediated free speech and towards censorship and moderation,” page 68 says. It admits that they now lean towards being “politicized,” having an “editor” and being a “publisher.”

For more on this Orwellian nightmare, check out Bokhari’s reports on Breitbart.

The Good Censor – GOOGLE LEAK by on Scribd


Thanks for sharing!