
Google Program to Deradicalize Jihadis Will Be Used for American Extremists Next - etiam
https://theintercept.com/2016/09/07/google-program-to-deradicalize-jihadis-will-be-used-for-right-wing-american-extremists-next/
======
wamsachel
On the Media had a podcast that talked about this:
[http://www.wnyc.org/story/challenge-fighting-terrorism-
onlin...](http://www.wnyc.org/story/challenge-fighting-terrorism-online)

Essentially experts agree that this will do next to nothing to stop
individuals from radicalizing.

However, I bet that this program will prove to be a useful propaganda tool to
be used on everyone else though.

------
jimmywanger
I strongly disagree with this.

Private companies probably should not have political agendas.

Why don't they use this program against anarchists and Occupy Wall Street
extremists? They're focusing specifically on hard right extremists.

~~~
waqf
When you're the size of Google, it's not a question of you being interested in
politics: politics is interested in you.

~~~
jimmywanger
What happens then is you kick back.

Their motto is "Do no Evil". This is an active act of suppressing views that
don't fit their cultural narrative.

------
etiam
Apologies for the mangled title here. The original is much too long to fit in
the HN limit, and removing "American" instead of "Right-Wing" isn't enough to
solve that. The fact that Google and by extension its resources is involved
seems like important context, so I'm not inclined to remove that part. If
someone has a better solution I invite changing it.

~~~
ThrustVectoring
The "next" is redundant, and there are shorter words than "extremists". "will
be used for American extremists next" can get shortened slightly to "will be
used on the American hard-right". If it fits, you can add back in the "next"
on the end.

------
cryoshon
wildly disagree with this program; it will be used to propagandize the
american public further, if it hasn't already.

remember that hillary and google are tight. remember that they don't work for
you.

~~~
wamsachel
It's kind of interesting to think about the public concern that'd be generated
if this article was instead about the government and the New York Times
buddying up to use the Time's bestseller book list to deradicalize people.
People today can easily grasp the dangers of book censorship and propaganda,
so it's alarming and interesting that social media gets such a pass.

p.s. I'm not saying that the NYT's bestseller list is free of manipulation,
I'm saying they don't openly acknowledge such manipulations to the public.

