@@shanedurcan2805 Mueller affirmed the three required elements to establish Trump's crimes of Obstruction of Justice. For example: 1) By the Obstructive Act of attempting to remove the Special Counsel (as the Act is not required to be successful), 2) which was connected with the Official Proceeding of the subpoena-and-search warrant granting Grand Jury that Trump knew was investigating him, he showed 3) Corrupt Intent by holding a secret meeting with a non-government person (Lewindowsky) to try circumventing the justice system in order to commit that crime.
@@mitchyoung9484 I totally understand your concern over turkey and EU part, but i like the fact that she raise about these social jaint that these big companies can really affect our democracy and political system.
Facebook nor any form of social media is a threat. Rather, the threat to democracy remains the same as it always has: stupidity and greed. And there is plenty of that in all levels of society.
"its not about left or right, leave or remain, trump or none. its about whether its possible have a free and fair election ever again. because as it stands i don't think it is."
No it's about stupid people that don't do their own research and the fact that the planet is full of dolts that vote even though they don't follow politics or put forth effort to become informed before voting. Anyone using facebook for the news is a complete waste of human organs. Anyone that comes out and says a Russian Ad on facebook pushed them into voting for Trump or Brexit should be recycled. The majority of voters are ignorant and are spoon fed information because they only want to be fed information that agrees with their ideologues, but I'd say 99% have enough brains to not be swayed by an advertisement. Uninformed voting is why the US had two giant piles of bescumbering refuse garner the majority of the votes. The two/three lesser parties received almost no votes. Disinformation has always been part of politics and it actually takes effort, time, and intelligence to see through the rouses. IF YOU DON"T PUT IN THE TIME TO FIND OUT THE FACTS THEN DON"T VOTE!!!
@@johnmulligan455 Do you have an actual example other than that poor one and the obvious those in insane asylums can't vote either, and neither can a foreigner?
America is advertised as A Democracy. It is not, We are a Constitutional Republic. Our Predident is elected by our Electoral College. Those that make up the Electoral College cast thrir ballot for the Candidate the majority of the State's people voted for.
Until she finds herself in court (happening right now) for defamation and uses ‘free speech’ as a defence. Free speech for me and not for thee I assume.
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better.
Political add's 's, should be banned period . Think about it, they are legally forbidden from lobbying military personnel, and considering the amount of lying, or how much commercials cost, it's impossible to find one who is not bought and paid for, how dangerous is that! So maybe if it was illegal to lobby citizens like it was to lobby servicemen, we would have to do our own research and find one who is honest.
@Tony Cole You are missing the point; ads and posts are treated in a fundamentally different manner on social media. If I were to post something on Facebook, you would need to have some connection to me to even see it, but if a political campaign deems you persuadable they will force their propaganda into your feed ad nausea. It's metaphorically the difference between a single person preaching on a soapbox in a city square compared to a thousand people chanting a slogan outside your doorstep. One of those is free speech, the other is harassment.
In 2020 the UK Information Commission concluded a three-year investigation and found no evidence that Cambridge Analytica had misused data during the Brexit referendum. Cadwalladr then admitted when she was embroiled in a libel case with Aron Banks, that there was no evidence for these claims. It's a shame people in the comment section are being mislead by nonsense.
They also printed an article about Obama using the exact same methods. Only difference being when Obama did it they wrote a puff piece on how great it was Obama was reaching users on Facebook and Social Media through data collection. It's still on their website right now if you are willing to open your eyes to the truth. Of course... orange man bad, black man good.
crocodile2006 Obama actually was good. His immediate successor did little to benefit the people of the United States, but quite a bit that benefited Vladimir Putin. His only quality is his consistency. (Comment updated after his defeat in the 2000 election to avoid confusion.)
Just seen the news. Carole won her libel trial against against Brexit banker Banks. She's a legend and will hopefully now get some awards. In fact, give her all of the awards. 😁
So stupid she thinks the reason we voted for independence, isn't because we no longer wished to be led along the path to becoming an EU puppet state treaty by treaty without our consent overruled & overrun, but because of Facebook 🤔 And they wanted rule from Brussels yet worry about Foreign influence? Insane beyond words. There's no such thing as EU money. It's our money the EU hands back after they've taken a fat cut from it. 6m EU migrants have taken jobs, driven down wages & expanded council house queues to 12yrs in many Cities. I speak first hand from living in Shirley in Southampton. This deluded woman is in denial. Globalism only benefits the rich 1% who want to be able to shunt labour round like a commodity with no regard for the native workforce. Everyone else has to endure competing with more & more migrants for homes & jobs & everything else Yet the left are too stupid to grasp this🤔
The greater problem is that too many of the rich and powerful don't really believe democracy is necessary or even that useful to them. And they are largely correct. They have enough money and influence that democracy oftentimes is more a hindrance than an aid to them.
The real question is why are people so easily influenced by ads. Why do we lack the ability to debunk false info and use our own mind? Why do we lack sound judgment? Controlling ads is not the answer. Developing our critical and analytical thinking is.
@@zoejay there are a lot of people with incredible educations but still think like robots. Because education nowadays is feeding the mind information instead of teaching people how to think. You don't need a Phd to not fall victim to facebook hoaxes.
ankontini its easy to try to blame ads and i dont think many would have been that interested in them, nearly all the people i know in my area were wanting leave for a very long time at least going back to 2005/06. The overloading of our local infrastructure wasnt responded to by government at all and still hasnt been. Just a small correction to the video that those projects were our own money being spent by the EU whilst they keep a high percentage to spend elsewhere.
Duncan Craig Do you have a high amount of EU immigration in your area or is it non EU immigration that was overloading your infrastructure? UK has complete independence to respond its domestic issues. I wonder if this is known by general public.
Subliminal messages works extremely well on all people, no matter how well informed or intelligent they are. The actual adverts, pictures, sounds and text are just the tip of the iceberg.
I came back to listen to this brave and knowledgeable lady once more after her court victory. Keep up the good work Carole you are on the right side of history.
@@CmdrTobs Wrong he lost get over it. Below is cut and paste from judgement. 416. For the reasons I have given, I conclude: i) The claimant has proved that the publication of the TED Talk has caused and/or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. The TED Talk is defamatory of Mr Banks for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. ii) The claimant has failed to prove that publication of the Tweet caused or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. The claim in respect of the Tweet is therefore dismissed on the ground that the Tweet is not defamatory for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. iii) The defendant has established a public interest defence in relation to the publication of the TED Talk pursuant to s.4 of the 2013 Act. iv) There was a significant change of circumstances once both the NCA’s statement and the Joint Statement had been published on 29 April 2020, such that the public interest defence in s.4 of the 2013 Act ceased to apply. v) The claimant has failed to prove that the publication of the TED Talk from 29 April 2020 caused and/or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. In respect of that period, the TED Talk is not defamatory for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. vi) Accordingly, the claim is dismissed.
@@CmdrTobs Not really. Banks is now trying to relitigate and having no luck. She actually doesn't say definitively he got his money from Russia, she says he was referred to the NCA by the EC because they didn't know where his money was from, and that's true. He got away with it, but people with his money can afford better lawyers and accountants than the NCA. She did a great thing exposing these vicious creeps for the corrupt, manipulative and self-serving parasites they are.
Sure but here you are on the internet. Do you really think f-book is not just another internet site where you express yourself or don't or listen to others, as we do here?
Rob Robi wrote: "Do you really think f-book is not just another internet site where you express yourself or don't or listen to others, as we do here?" No, it isn't. It really isn't (are you 10 years old?).
So it turns out that Carole Cadwalladr is not only brave, bright, humane and a superb journalist. She is also an orator of the first rank. We are so lucky to have her.
Utter nonsense. She is talking unadulterated drivel. She's self-serving just like the rest of the remainiacs - they have been duped into believing that the EU is good for the UK and don't have the independent intelligence to work out that it is in fact a total scam.
Have you noticed how none of those who've replied to you have said WHY she's wrong? It's so pathetic. They've been groomed so convincingly that they're afraid of the truth. Tragic.
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better.
@@gamos6698 And you do understand that the court found that what she had said about Banks was untrue. She lied, but convinced the court that she did so in the public interest or some nonsense. She is a fabricator of tales and the fact the 29 000 people are happy to finance her grifting is their problem and not mine. You, Sir are a gullible clown 🤡
@@gamos6698 Arne is incorrect, Carole actually admitted what she said was untrue. The judge deemed Banks was not damaged by this defamation. he is appealing.
Brave lady! It's been two years plus and the gods of Silicon Valley have now understood what you are saying here. Keep working with them. They need input on on what happened when and how.
Here after watching the great hack yes, and I got really emotional watching her speech, because she is so right and I applaud her and others for bringing this to ones attention and letting us know we must fight back!!!!
And I pity you for falling for her subversive propaganda. She's in the process of getting bankrupted for the lies she told here. The Court of Appeal just ordered her to pay Arron Banks £35,000 damages for her lies and the legal fees she will have to pay will be over £1million. Arron Banks took your advice and fought back. Well done!
Delighted to learn that Arron Banks has lost the Russia libel case against Carole Cadwalladr - the contentious phrase is here at 7:44. Without people like her, carrying on her work, we wouldn't even know about all this dark, dark stuff... We depend on her and similar brave, hard-working journalists. We're on the cusp of giving up any control we had and fought so hard to gain. As CC points out at 3:53, their lies and deceit literally disappears from view, after the event. They *must* be held to account! Thank-You, Carole and Keep Up The Good Fight, please !!
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better. She lost Arron won and now she has to pay damages for lying to gullible people like you
So many people seem keen on getting off Facebook, but I believe it's a bit deeper than that. And here you are, selecting videos on RUclips, which I'm sure has the same power as FB
RUclips still hosts quite a lot of good alternative content- for now. Sure, it's obviously heading towards a corporatist's platform, but the demonitized and censored content is where it's at. Get down the rabbit holes here whilst you still can I say.
People use YT very differently than fb as you can actively pursue content and aren't just consuming what fb decides to show you. All of the ads I am shown on YT are for products or services not BS about Turkey about to join the EU (one must be pretty ignorant to have believed that one). Might as well include the Google search engine too then. ... In anyway, can't be that bad because you are still here, Chris Ross ;)
I've deleted my Facebook account a couple months ago, because i don't feel right being with it, it's kind of illegal creepy hack or something. I wish other people do it too.
@@duckymonguy2715 the saying is if you can't stop them join them but the one you said suits better this topic and I do believe 100%limiting them is a good direction to be taken toward Facebook and the others like fb or similar to it
I've been in the IT industry, which means I read IT publications. For many years before Cambridge Analytica, various Internet civil rights groups and activists have been raising alarm bells about privacy issues with social media in general, that those social media companies were violating our privacy, selling info about us to whoever without our knowledge, and that this could all have devastating impacts on us. It turns out that all of those who were yelling about privacy issues with regards to social media was right all along. I enjoyed connecting with long-lost friends and relatives on Facebook, so I'm sorry to say that I didn't heed the warning of all those activists until after the Cambridge Analytica thing. Now it may be too late to save democracy in the West. PS -- please give money to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They're one of the groups we should have been listening to.
Indeed, people who aren't computer professionals often don't understand the power of information and how you can put together random bits of data to learn things about a person they may never admit in public. CA and other groups took advantage of this and the populace had no idea they were being manipulated. Saw it myself in friends who turned into militant Brexit obsessives but couldn't actually explain why or how it was going to work. Same thing happened with covid where they'd be talking about topics they didn't understand but learnt about through conspiracy memes and dubious Internet stories.
Man....., I have just felt in love...... I'm from Brazil, and I'm sure that Bolsonaro's summit in Moscow a few days before the beginning of war in Ukraine, was for ask for help, because this year we will have elections, and he needs to keep the power..... Yes! Amazing talk!!!!!!
I think online censorship would be the dark age of technology. Then free speach online would be dead and you won't be allowed an opinion that goes against the government. They have already got all the newspapers and news channels in their pockets, now they want to control the main way we can find out about the truth. We cant let this happen but we dont get an opinion or vote on it. A TED talk i recently watched mentioned that soon enough, we will all be on the dark web instead. Very interesting if you haven't seen it.
The idea of the dark age is definitely interesting. How would you imagine the solution to pierce that dark veil to be? For my part, I Think for this to happen it would inquire an international law that identify the Identity of the internet as a shared space with secure legal routes and ethic code. I dont think it has anything to do with censorship. I think on the contrary that the mass cancerous in its present form is censoring the real persons.
@@planter13 So wanting huge tech companies to be accountable to our government is online censorship? If you are afraid of not being able to have an opinion that goes against the government you should be very worried about the rise of authoritarianism all around the world.
FB was never meant to be a social media platform where you connect with friends. We had Skype for that. More like a data syphoning platform to know about consumer taste and preference, sell it to big firms and 3rd parties so they can increase profit margins and political agenda. In the case of UK is pushing for private 'healthcare' US style, cheaper GMO food, American companies and more. Forcing the UK out of EU is essential for that to happen.
Yeah, that does seem very absurd.. that FB started out on the right foot but somewhere along the line it got derailed. I'm sure at its inception, a firm agenda was already in place.
I was at an academic conference shortly before the election. Every academic was pro-remain, whilst every taxi driver, hotel worker, and bartender was for Brexit. Kudos to the folks in the town in Wales for thumbing their noses at the EU even though they built a bridge or two.
PIcoAirBearings Now airhead.....watch what you say to the Welsh. They've just lost the Ford plant at Bridgend, and the writing is on the wall for the LAST Iron and Steel plant in the UK. Which election are you referring to ? The referendum wasn't an election, so I'm a bit sceptical about your attendance at any academic conference.....but let's agree on one thing. The referendum was 3 years ago. We still haven't left the EU and we all know why. You wouldn't object to a second referendum would you ?
@@californiadreamin8423 why do you think that, because I have a mind of my own and don't believe everything I see on the fake new and papers. You're in so deep you can't see out. God love you
Great point made but the British do not care about being lied to, they even go as far as defend the lies they've been told in order to keep their pride.
What boggles my mind is that I can easily create an ad that would be rejected by Facebook for using incorrect or misleading information. Yet this happens on a much larger scale and it's fine.
They are practicing a selective censorship, AKA brainwashing us into their agenda. Watching news on conflicts from 5 yrs ago is the only way to understand where the conflict originated. Everything current is BS to sell us wars.
It's not an issue of how much was spent. The issue is whether or not it was legal (and some of Leave's wasn't), and what they actually said (i.e. verifiable untruths in order to convince weak minds).
Great talk. Never understood how so many countries have similar sort of government--turkey, USA, the Philippines-- a slow reduction of laws protecting privacy and other civil rights--Google and FB, using the same techniques, have succeeded in their goals. World is not a happy place except for the 1%.
6:07 "Turkey is not joining the European Union. There is not even any discussions of it joining the European Union" ; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union
mate did you even read the link you sent ‘On 26 June 2018, the EU's General Affairs Council stated that "Turkey has been moving further away from the European Union. Turkey’s accession negotiations have therefore effectively come to a standstill and no further chapters can be considered ‘
@@vwgl1169 the Brexit election was in June of 2016, they were serious accession talks back then. The talks stalled in November of 2016, months after the election.
What if we imposed a rule on social media that all adverts can only advertise a product or a service. This would mean that they could not push out political adverts of any sort.
It probably wont be seen by your friends, I've had most things politically hushed by farcebook. A dodgy rancid info pit for the paying owners of banks.
I realized what Facebook was doing to me and others years and years ago. I deleted my account and never looked back. If you find Facebook is stirring negative feelings and you feel like you're being pushed towards hate and distrust of people in general, DELETE IT! Just delete your Facebook account and go out for coffee with friends instead! Talk to your relatives... you don't need to know everything that's happening in everybody's lives.
very strange , facebook that owns peoples privacy, break every privvacy of the ' common man' protect heavely the privacy of the powerfull i have no facebook , never had , never will everyone, and i mean everyone, please shut down your account , thanks P
Never had an Facebook, I'm educated in cyber security and old enough to have seen the start of fb. I had an understanding of what they would do to your data but I never thought it would end up like this.
How can one be educated in cyberspace security and not understand the platforms that need to be secured ? I’d be more like Cambridge Analytica ASAP and ghost Facebook ! Just take it offline and take your winnings and hide - everyone who codes is responsible for this mess - in reality I am pretty sure this is true:/ seems the larger percent just makes apps and la la la laughing all the way to the bank only if you source data - that’s the revenue - not to put you on front street zuckerberg - aren’t you rich enough ? I am sincerely saddened there is not one smart person could eliminate this blip of social media ERROR
The rich believe threatening to sue the poor is going to scare the poor the same way law suits scare the rich. But we are immune to fear of being sued because we are already broke and have nothing to lose. We are the 99%. If the 1% would hand over half of their wealth, the whole world would be flush with enough cash for everyone to live comfortably and still solve all of the world's environmental problems. We need a US citizens' Brexit from the Federal Reserve Bank.
Its cool to see in a large point of view how society is constantly rebalancing between multiple wills, acidentaly showing a behaviour that seeks for the stability of the wills. And how the most tiny of the wills end up creating a large aspect of the society. Its like when you left something fall, and it keep bouncing arround until it finally stop.
Carole Cadwalladr has just conceded her court case v Arron Banks as baseless. Cadwalladr has avoided the humiliation of appearing in court this morning by submitting in writing an amended defence which, “… removes the Truth Defence and the Limitation Defence”
SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH
You got a new sport centre and a bridge and you are surprised that people voted to leave in an area where industry is declining and people feel left behind by the Londoners who preach and tell everyone how wonderful everything is. This woman just went "Home" to write a report sneering at people. Then she went back to London.
I didn't know that you were born in Enw Vale.. Explains why you are so courageous, intelligent and passionate about social justice. I am familiar with the South Wales valleys and worked there for a few years but not like being brought up there. Waaaw I am so impressed with you and had been following you on Twitter for years. I'd never seen this talk and hadn't realised who your audience was. The psychological profiling of online users of any system has been going on for a long time but used as marketing tools to convince you to buy certain products. Seems like buying a certain set of well placed political viewpoints and untruths was a very short step from there. No wonder Boris and Co were swept up by it all. Fantastic. Mr Bevan would have been very proud of you..
you don't have to be stupid to be susceptible to ads (and other form coercive media). Some parts of the human brain work independently of your consciousness.
@@FUN144 Because London isn't Ebbw Vale. It's a completely different way of life between the two, and London has more exposure to what the EU brings - foreigners, money, and big business. The two places are like chalk and cheese in their outlook, expectations, and history. They would be less likely to fall for the FB fibs. The population is probably younger and better educated too. Note that in terms of age, they was a generational split between Leave and Remain voters in the Referendum. Leavers tend to be a bit older. So, the split was always there but Brexit made it visible.
@@BigHenFor In summary I cant think for myself, just like 17.4 million and Tony Benn another thicko. I look forwarrd to the day when other European countries have their first referendum.
These are moments that convince me that I want to learn psychology/neuroscience. The subtle yet powerful effects such as group polarization, confirmation bias, and priming so prevalent on the internet scare me. This speech teaches me that they're incredibly effective, yet they permeate through our lives so deeply and so much of it is unconscious that we can't immediately break loose from them. (This also brings terrifying implications about whether we are truly, intellectually free, a premise that democracy bases upon so much.) Researching on these effects, especially regarding the internet, is key, and I can't say I'm excited (I'm scared to see what we may find), but I certainly want to look further into this.
Start with Kahneman’s lectures on System 1 (emotional shorthand, autopilot) and System 2 (systematic, careful evidence based) thinking. Then look at perception, particularly visual and auditory illusions. If those things are old hat there is a wonderful lecture series from Robert Sapolsky. I’d always heard about game theory but what I had heard wasn’t making sense to me. He covers this really well.
There is a simple solution to the problems Facebook is causing. Pursue criminal litigation where the company has or is breaking the law. There is no excuse for the things that Facebook has knowingly allowed.
It works both ways. Either Facebook allows everything or it blocks everything which is political. It currently is not unbiased in its approach and so will cause a problem if it continues in such a way.
@@iain5615 I think you missed the part about criminal litigation and the law. The suggestion wasn't to stop anything and everything that's political, it was to stop things that are illegal, or rather to prosecute those who have broken the law. This isn't a Catch-22 situation, it's actually pretty straightforward.
@@iain5615 - While that is true, the allegations here (IIRC) is that something illegal is being done. If something illegal is being done, then investigate and if warranted prosecute. No different from anything else. Many people do not realize this, but all broadcasters have legal restrictions on what they are allowed to broadcast, including the advertising. It varies by country, but all countries have some sort of restrictions.
The UK electorate should have prosecuted its entire Parliament and senior civil servants within Whitehall over 40 years ago. Now they definitely did break the law then and and they've been doing it ever since. They are so illegal and illegitimate its almost comical. But because they are untouchable in our so called "democracy" we have the kind of battle this know-nothing TED presenter is unable to comprehend. Her non-existent mind just can't cope with its conclusions.....so it must be Facebook. Facebook. Isn't that the company the EU fanatic Clegg now toady's for? Oh yes I can see the Brexit connection now. Seriously some people (and there are quite a few commenting here are no different to National Socialist or Soviet fanatics. This TED presenter is just one such person.
As presenter says part of problem is that much isn't covered by existing laws. We don't know how many or what ads were shown by whom to who and zuckerberg won't supply that info. There's no law to force him to. Current EU Data protection laws were enacted post brexit referendum. The exact algorithms FB uses for advertising arent known, what it's possible to do with 50million account details isnt known. It is legal for FB to sell user data, it's legal for political parties to advertise on FB. We don't know how much user data + dodgy use + dodgy ads skews an electorate. Read (the presenter) Cadwallader's articles on brexit and cambridge analytica - they cover issues in more depth than here.
I appreciate your work ted and i really enjoying during watching your videos different people come and share their their 💡 ideas in front of whole world 🗺
@Dzooky P2P So the govt can tell you what you can see? Facebook and youtube are already trying to get regulations out on themselves. The more regulation the more they can control what people see. And the better their sole control over information because new start ups will never be able to keep up with the regulations like FB and themtube can. They have the money the programmers the lawyers. Thentube used to be for anyone to add a video. Now they decide what can be added. most 9.11 videos are now demonetised and anything else that points out how bad the mass media get stories wrong.
There's evidence to back up everything she says. There's no exaggeration in this video - she's a reporter for a highly respected outlet, she wouldn't risk her career
@@oluwatobidavid8773 "The Gods of the Silicon Valley", "we, in Britain, are the canary" (this one I take personally as the real canary was the war in Chechnya and then in Georgia and then, most recently, and this time with the help of social media - in Ukraine), "this technology, that you have invented... is now a crime scene", "illegal cash from god knows where" (clearly a non-factual statement!) these are some of the examples of what I call exaggerations
@@Spikeygal being a reporter for a highly respected outlet usually doesn't affect my perception on what the person is saying as that alone is not a good enough reason for me to take someone's word for granted (this is, of course, a huge plus to one's credibility, I'm not arguing that point)
@@oluwatobidavid8773 I really can't escape the urge to point out that the phrasing you've chosen ("so called exaggeration") clearly doesn't play well with the hashtag that followed your request as being of a form that suggests not only your disagreement (which is fine) but also an active dismissal of the facts you are asking me to provide (which is NOT fine)
Well then you weren't the type of person who was going to be easily persuaded to vote for Brexit, therefore they didn't spend their money advertising it to you?
I live in the US, but if I had to guess, they may target those that are more on the fence about politics, and they do have algorithms for trying to guess where you stand on the political spectrum, at least they do in the US. advertisers can just say they want to target independent and somewhat left/right leaning, and exclude the extremely left/right
Wow, there it is. The undeniable TRUTH. I think I'll share this to FB. Hopefully it will bring some awareness about this before they remove and bury it.
I've been asking myself this question since the referendum. I have to conclude that it's because our politicians are utter cowards who'd rather protect their own careers and political parties than admit the electorate were conned and that they allowed it.
I think this too but it reveals that is isn't actually about what is right and fair, powerful rich people pay to control us and direct us as theu see fit. It replaces how religion used to be used to control us or keep us orderly. They manipulate us to get what they want and it is working now with dictatorial and ignorant, hateful leaders all over the world #peaceandlove
Ignore the responses, they will be as polarised as usual. The reason it continues is that all the political parties know that to try and reverse the decision will cause civil unrest. After years of pressure Corbyn has finally come out on the side of a new referendum, but only once the chances of getting back into power were gone. The current election process worldwide is now destroyed and it will never be fixed again.
@@mattheworton5701 Good luck with that. I genuinely mean it. I really hope your convictions bear out. I don't think they will. If you think Boris is the man to bring back power to the UK and to alleviate the perceived injustices visited by the EU then I hope you are right. Tell you what, when you are proven right, by all means message me. I will gladly buy you a couple of pints.
Funny I never saw one FB ad before the referendum. I saw a literature (booklet) in a church saying something wrong about EU. So I looked into more of it and decided we should leave EU.
She's basically saying 'People who voted leave are stupid and were influenced by ads targeted to them, but those on the remain side were too smart to be influenced'. What a moronic and bias take.
@@mrroams5812 Exactly. TED should stay out of politics, and this lady is only telling half the story. What a joke. What about all the remain propoganda that was unfairly used? For example the BBC giving more airtime to proremain politicians. I guarantee more of the older population watch the BBC than use facebook yet they still voted to leave.
@@pvpherthen2981 I'm sorry, but the two sides aren't even remotely comparable. The Leave.EU campaign used fraudulent practices and illegal funds to get the job done. How in your silly mind can this be compared to x more minutes on the BBC?
@@mrroams5812 you realize how these ad campaigns work, do you? There is an algorithm that selects ideal targets for the ad. If the algorithm classifies you as pro-remain, you do not qualify as target and your profile is ignored. They are not going to waste their money trying to convince people who are strongly on the opposite side. This campaign was mostly directed at those whose mind could be changed. Based on your low level of understanding, I should say that the only one affected by moronic bias is you.
It's not a question of how much Facebook you use. It is about the type of ads they feed you. This campaign was aimed at convincing people who weren't taking sides, so not everyone saw the same things.
- *Proceeds to act like nothing happened* - *Hey look Labour is having antisemitism rows, lets focus on that for the next 7 - 14 days* British public: What about brexit? - *Yeah we got bored of May talking about that, we are going to get rid of her* British public: .... - *Hey guys remember Boris???* - *Hey guys how about Boris for PM??* British public: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo just get on with it - *Hey guys how about a debate* - *Hey guys about raising the taxes* - *Har har har har har har har har*
People make the assumption that hate is the opposite of love. It is not. Those adds have nothing to do with hate. They are about fear, which is also not the opposite of love, but it's very effective.
So what she’s saying is that there wouldn’t have been any progress in Wales if this country had self determination? What is she saying about Wales and it’s population?
South Wales was doing just fine manufacturing steel which required the coal mined locally until the EU decided both coal & steel were "dirty" so to save the planet they decided to kill off these industries & instead buy the steel from Asia...yet last time I checked, we all live inside the same jam-jar biosphere. The decline of manufacturing in South Wales where I come from is shocking, everywhere are vacant factory sites & no new work for the people. In Britain only 2.6 million people out of a working age population of around 40 million now work in manufacturing yet we consume ever increasing quantities of manufactured goods...When I see film of Chinese factories with thousands of workers I think to myself that those jobs used to be in our countries...& this all happened under the control of the incompetent EU.
@@davidbrewer7937 Did Americans complain when Ford opened up their factories here? When General Electric did, and all the other American firms that first came here then went to China because they were cheaper and less regulated. I'd live to see you manage on £130 a month for 60 hour weeks.
@@BigHenFor Nobody should be working for the wages they pay in China but these earnings are relative to the place where they are paid. Everything costs a lot less in China than it does in the UK so earning what we see as low pay is a good pay packet there. As for Americans complaining when their factories moved to the UK they probably should have, but the reason the factories like Ford built their engine plant in Bridgend was to support the local manufacturing which was located there to gain access to the market in the country of purchase for sales of their vehicles.
That is correct. Britain hands over something like 16bn euros to the EA each year & they then hand back something like 11bn but with rules on where Britain can spend the money so for instance, the government can spend on the HS2 project which uses millions of tonnes of steel rail tracks but was unable to help prevent Scunthorpe British Steel going bankrupt costing 2500 direct manufacturing jobs because the EU said they were not allowed to...LUNACY....
@@davidbrewer7937 And again someone who fell for the anti-EU propaganda. Its not the EU its the WTO that prevented the UK from saving British steel. Then they decide how much anyone is allowed to subsidies certain industries. The EU just enforces the rules set by the WTO.
I don't use Facebook for over 3 years now. Any other intersection is minimum, not unless it is extremely important. Data is our right, a human right. Keep fighting for it guys. Save it from companies and governments. Don't mKe yourself vulnerable to manipulation.
This is true for the UK, but the examples were from Wales, which is a net beneficiary of the EU (£79 per capita annual benefit vs. £151 per capita annual contribution for the UK in 2014 - see the 2016 Cardiff University report "Estimating Wales' Net Contribution to the European Union")
@@joelhall5124 no sleight of hand intended - all the figures are there. While the UK on average indeed makes a net contribution (-£151pppy), as one of the wealthier member states, those funds are partly redistributed via stimulus packages etc. among poorer regions of the bloc. Wales is one of these regions: when the individual countries of the UK are held against other EU member states, Wales' GDP per capita is in the bottom 10 countries, below, e.g., Slovakia (see, for example, Discourse .scot's page on 2015 GDP per capita for the EU27 and regions of the UK). As such, tax payers in Wales, on the whole, get more back from the EU than they put in (+£79pppy). The people interviewed for the original piece mentioned in the talk were Welsh taxpayers, so this is relevant when discussing their motivations, as the talk does. If you think I've missed or overlooked something, let me know! We could all do with more discussion and exchange.
@@mrfacetious I certainly do think you've overlooked something, and still maintain that it's sleight of hand. The UK hasn't broken up yet, and regions are not members of the EU in their own right. What is actually happening here is the EU is making decisions about where UK tax money should be spent in the UK, while also taking a cut for itself. Scotland claim that their net contributions to central government are positive, and the same could be said here for England and Scotland via the EU. Wales is gaining an advantage on the backs of the other UK regions.
@@joelhall5124 I’m not advocating for a pro- or anti-EU stance, merely maintaining that the speaker’s reasoning is correct regarding the voting considerations within the post-industrial communities of Southeast Wales, which is the main discussion point of the talk. You are correct - Wales is a part of the UK, and the UK is on the whole a net contributor. But the people of Ebbw Vale mentioned in the video see more money return to their community than leave it. Given that they are more likely to consider their local economy than that of the nation as a whole, there isn’t a reasonable argument for them to vote to leave on purely economic grounds. The talk argues that they voted due to misleading targeted advertising. You argue instead that they could have voted on ideological grounds - even if there is a benefit, the EU decides where UK tax money is spent. This is also correct, although is perhaps better worded as “the EU decides where the EU budget, partly funded by UK taxes, is spent”. An interesting breakdown of this spending is presented in Daniel Dunford’s 01/06/2016 article in The Telegraph. The projects such as the sports centre shown in the video are paid for by funding from the EU regional development fund - rather than the EU proposing these projects, the funding is available to and applied for by local government. Details of the process are discussed in a RUclips video series from the SE Wales Specialist European Team channel. It should be noted that Wales also receives more in public spending from the UK government than it spends in taxes - its fiscal deficit is 5 times larger than the UK as a whole (see the FullFact discussion on Wales’ fiscal deficit). Voters elsewhere in the UK who are unhappy with Wales receiving more funding would be better off targeting their disapproval at Westminster at the ballot box. Ultimately, the decision of how to distribute money, for example regarding local project applications, is made, and can be vetoed by elected British representatives, both in the EU and UK parliaments (the RUclips channel Kurzgesagt has an excellent recent video describing the pros and cons of democratic representation in the EU).
Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005.[5] Progress was slow: out of the 35 chapters necessary to complete the accession process, only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.[6] The early 2016 refugee deal between Turkey and the European Union was intended to accelerate negotiations after previous stagnation and allow visa-free travel through Europe for Turks.[7] Oops - thought Carole was a journalist lol + Wales not Ebbw Vale received £585 from the EU and the UK Gov gave Wales £20Billion in 2021 rising to £24Billion in 2023.
Jerome Potts Given actual evidence, I would gladly believe it. But it’s incumbent on those making claims to provide the evidence. Otherwise we can claim anything, no? The queen is a lizard. The moon is made of cheese. RUclips comments are a fine place to participate in reasoned debate.
Bruce Edwards if you believe the FG is “For The People,” it would be my pleasure sending them your way... ALL of them... EVERY Branch! We no longer need their services anymore as far as I’m concerned. I’ve done vast amounts of research on the FG. They are, without question, the World hub of child trafficking, responsible for more homicides then ANY other Organization or person, responsible for more addicted human beings than anything else, they spy on every person in the Nation which they Govern, they actually work alongside Zuckerberg and Facebook. This is the reason why they would NEVER shut Facebook down and Zuckerberg was not forced to comply with their Parliament, etc... They are responsible for the 100’s of Physicians who treated their patients Holistically who were found dead mysteriously. If you haven’t been paying attention to all the indictments occurring {cough} Comey, Strzok and Paige (amongst many others) in the FG {cough} they are HIGHLY responsible for meddling the elections, period! Yes!! You can have the FG but please take the ENTIRE FG Organization and please, while your at it, take our entire Judiciary & Congressional and every Lawyer here in America too. They aren’t here for The People either. Any person who is licensed/Certified or has completed the BAR is NOT for the American People. BAR is an acronym for British Accredited Registry! As much as I’ve already revealed, it’s probably not even necessary to reveal that nearly EVERY Congressional leader is also educated in Psychology too because I guess here in America we need Psychologists too. I’ve performed my research too 😉
@@shanedurcan2805 Show your name if you dare to call TED TALK fake news. Everything shall be based on facts backed by evidences, not based on what you, a no name faked guy, called.
Wow! What a powerful speech. Seeing her trying not to tear up was making me tear up. She is right. I love being able to communicate with people all over the world just as much as anyone, but allowing these companies and individuals to manipulate us and the governments of the world in this manner needs to be stopped.
How is Zuckerberg influencing people any different to your government introducing one law after another that not a single person asked for or wanted? Wake up!
«Turkey signed a Customs Union agreement with the EU in 1995 and was officially recognised as a candidate for full membership on 12 December 1999, at the Helsinki summit of the European Council.» «Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005.[5] Progress was slow, and out of the 35 Chapters necessary to complete the accession process only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.[6] The early 2016 refugee deal between Turkey and the European Union was intended to accelerate negotiations after previous stagnation and allow visa-free travel through Europe for Turks.[7]»
Sorry, have they joined? I must have missed it. For the avoidance of doubt, there's 30-odd tests they need to pass to be able to be admitted. To date, they've passed 3. They're not joining any time soon. If they pass the 30-odd tests, they would have become a fully functioning democracy. And that would be a brilliant thing, so what would be the problem? Would it be that you don't like brown people coming to the UK to live, work and love? Sparking fear of Turkey joining the EU any time soon is not only a lie, it's racist.
You've missed the point. She said there haven't even been talks. There have been talks. It doesn't matter how improbable final success is. She said no talks and there have been talks.
If the EU did fund those buildings it was because they fully expected to own the UK and so would be spending the money on it's self. Like someone renovating a property they don't yet own.
I must admit, I wondered at the Money put in by us as she said that too. I'm not sure on the figures though as to whether we put more in or get more out. So much miss information its difficult to know.
@@clairewheeler2937 Do you get more out of your ISP than you put in? You pay a monthly subscription for a service that in turn allows you to access other services. You can within limits negotiate a discount, but all in all you still pay up. The EU, like its predecessor is a service for Trade and Business, and more so than business, it puts money into the societal aspect of the relationship instead of keeping it for profit. The UK's financial contribution is minor in comparison to what we get out of it by not having to spend money on customs posts, or paperwork. By having common standards it actually saves us money. For example, if you eat meat, you might know that it has to be inspected after stsughtering to check for disease. Your Danish bacon sandwich, has bacon that was inspected in Denmark before export by a Danish vet according to standards the whole of the EU agreed, so there is no need for a UK vet to inspect it on entry to the UK. That saves the Taxpayer at a minimum £30,000-£45000 per vet, per year we we have to employ at each entry point. I was listening to Farage's show on LBC, and a young vet named Sue phoned in. She asked him what the UK was going to do as there weren't enough trained vets in the country to inspect meat imports if we left the EU with no deal. As usual, Farage blustered a bit, and eventually had to take pause before blowing her off. That is the crux of the problem. There are now many new civil servants that will have to be employed to cover tasks like these if we leave with no deal, those will all add up over time. Yes, there may be technological solutions for some, but as we can see by the the issue of the Backstop, there are circumstance where it can't, and so money will have to be found for all these additional costs. The contribution that we pay saves us money because it reduces our costs of trading with our nearest neighbours. That means our prices for our exports to the EU can be cheaper, and we can compete. Arguably, looking only at our annual subscription ignores the cost of getting those services it gives us elsewhere if we leave with no deal. Until someone is brave enough to quantify that in detail, we are flailing about in the dark. All we do know is that there is no undertaking by the present government to replace the EU Social Fund contribution. Why should they? We've sat on our hands while huge swathes of the country was deindustrislised, and left to rot by Central government for the last 40 years . Why should anything change now?
I don't personally eat meat, and would prefer that someone in the UK were inspecting it as overseas standards can often be poor. It stands to reason that leaving will be a logistical nightmare sorting out each new department that was centralized but sometimes we need to tear down the old to bring in the new improved. But as you say, relying on the UK government to then be fair of course is unlikely with thier track record. I just feel we probably have a bit more chance of getting some change in certain areas that we now have no control over, as I said in a previous comment, horrific live animal exports being one of them.
I only just saw it today. It's like everything that Edward Snowden warned everyone about what they government was doing, but a private company is getting away with doing the exact same thing.
So, the EU is like the Roman Empire? I'll concede that. The EU sucks money out of local economies, then returns a small portion of it in very visible ways.
@@ronaldjohnson7905 so how much money has the EU sucked out of South Wales compared to what it has paid out? I'm not being conceited, I'm genuinely interested to know because I don't know myself.
Andrew Higginbottom I don't have numbers for South Wales. However, I do know that the EU takes in more than it sends out. Something has to go to the beauracracy. If it is anything like the US, the percentage of return is low. By the time you pay the salaries for the legislators, administrators, consultants, etc. there is a fairly low return . I think your analogy to the Roman Empire is spot on. You sir, are brilliant.
@@ronaldjohnson7905 The headline figure is £126 per person. However, in return for that we get reduced costs on shared services such as Science research, international terrorism prevention, medical research, international trade negotiations. Now the UK is going to have to replicate all those shared services. Going to cost us a lot more than it does now. This is before you add in the other benefits we gained whilst being in the EU: frictionless trade, freedom to work, live or retire anywhere in the EU, cleaner beaches, improved air quality, improved employee protection (2 million of us got paid holidays for the first time) etc etc.
Very weird editing cut at 7:46 - I've watched a lot of videoconferences from TED and it's the first time I see this !! On such a sensitive topic, it's unfortunate to say the least... Can the TED team investigate and try to explain what happened there? Thanks in advance! What a great speech though!! I honestly cannot believe it has barely made more than a million views - makes me sad...
9 месяцев назад+1
It's because she told a complete lie and got sued for telling said lie and part of the sentence meant that Ted had to cut the part where she tells the lie. Google Aaron Banks and Carole Cadwalladr libel case.
Thats one version. Some other say, it was a SLAPP suit* “intended to silence Cadwalladr's courageous investigative journalism” * a "Strategic lawsuit against public participation" is a lawsuit intended to censor, intimate and silence critics by burdening someone with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
How many are here after watching the great hack on netflix !!!
I am watched it yesterday
I am one of them. A Venezuelan writing from my country, who feels appalled by the global implications of that film.
No.
+
@@shanedurcan2805 Mueller affirmed the three required elements to establish Trump's crimes of Obstruction of Justice. For example: 1) By the Obstructive Act of attempting to remove the Special Counsel (as the Act is not required to be successful), 2) which was connected with the Official Proceeding of the subpoena-and-search warrant granting Grand Jury that Trump knew was investigating him, he showed 3) Corrupt Intent by holding a secret meeting with a non-government person (Lewindowsky) to try circumventing the justice system in order to commit that crime.
Sadly it's easier to con people than to convince people that they have been conned.
Cynical but wow, you have nailed it.
That's really makes sense
You've been conned if you believe this lady. She outright lies about EU talks with Turkey -- that's easily checkable.
@@mitchyoung9484 I totally understand your concern over turkey and EU part, but i like the fact that she raise about these social jaint that these big companies can really affect our democracy and political system.
Facebook nor any form of social media is a threat. Rather, the threat to democracy remains the same as it always has: stupidity and greed. And there is plenty of that in all levels of society.
"its not about left or right, leave or remain, trump or none. its about whether its possible have a free and fair election ever again. because as it stands i don't think it is."
Buildings1772 Very succinct .... but nobody here seems to understand that
No it's about stupid people that don't do their own research and the fact that the planet is full of dolts that vote even though they don't follow politics or put forth effort to become informed before voting. Anyone using facebook for the news is a complete waste of human organs. Anyone that comes out and says a Russian Ad on facebook pushed them into voting for Trump or Brexit should be recycled. The majority of voters are ignorant and are spoon fed information because they only want to be fed information that agrees with their ideologues, but I'd say 99% have enough brains to not be swayed by an advertisement. Uninformed voting is why the US had two giant piles of bescumbering refuse garner the majority of the votes. The two/three lesser parties received almost no votes. Disinformation has always been part of politics and it actually takes effort, time, and intelligence to see through the rouses. IF YOU DON"T PUT IN THE TIME TO FIND OUT THE FACTS THEN DON"T VOTE!!!
@@johnmulligan455 Do you have an actual example other than that poor one and the obvious those in insane asylums can't vote either, and neither can a foreigner?
America is advertised as A Democracy. It is not, We are a Constitutional Republic. Our Predident is elected by our Electoral College. Those that make up the Electoral College cast thrir ballot for the Candidate the majority of the State's people voted for.
She has no evidence so she can say what she likes. Wow! What an amazing insight into modern joirnalism.
THE MOST IMPORTANT TED TALK I HAVE EVER SEEN - TO THE POINT OF OUR AGE
Until she finds herself in court (happening right now) for defamation and uses ‘free speech’ as a defence. Free speech for me and not for thee I assume.
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better.
@@sim5847 Can you be more specific on what (in particular) was made up? I'm trying to learn, so whatever input you have would help.
I came here after watching The Great Hack on Netflix. This is exactly why I left Facebook and deleted it forever.
Eric Rossoni Best thing I ever did was leave fb 10 years ago.
@318226
Propaganda indoctrination like the “deep state”?
What! you just got indoctrinated! I've just set up a Facebook. You just need to be able to use it PROPERLY! If you ain't no child lol
Same here. Killed it 5 years ago.
@@shanedurcan2805 > is this you real name? I guess not.
It's official. We're living in a Black Mirror episode.
oh hi there xoxox
@@CamimalFPV haha areet
Appearently Hydra is a real thing
What does this mean? A black mirror episode??
@@MichaelCook84 If you've never heard of black mirror then you've wasted your whole life.
Political add should be banned from social media
that is a political viewpoint, you shouldn't be expressing it on social media
see what i did there?
Political add's 's, should be banned period . Think about it, they are legally forbidden from lobbying military personnel, and considering the amount of lying, or how much commercials cost, it's impossible to find one who is not bought and paid for, how dangerous is that! So maybe if it was illegal to lobby citizens like it was to lobby servicemen, we would have to do our own research and find one who is honest.
@@nmarbletoe8210 he said *add not *comment
@Tony Cole You are missing the point; ads and posts are treated in a fundamentally different manner on social media. If I were to post something on Facebook, you would need to have some connection to me to even see it, but if a political campaign deems you persuadable they will force their propaganda into your feed ad nausea.
It's metaphorically the difference between a single person preaching on a soapbox in a city square compared to a thousand people chanting a slogan outside your doorstep. One of those is free speech, the other is harassment.
@@kindredspirit9703 it is reported as News and deliberately send to people as news feed. It is invisible from regulator.
Why doesn't this have more views?! It is such an important topic!
In 2020 the UK Information Commission concluded a three-year investigation and found no evidence that Cambridge Analytica had misused data during the Brexit referendum. Cadwalladr then admitted when she was embroiled in a libel case with Aron Banks, that there was no evidence for these claims. It's a shame people in the comment section are being mislead by nonsense.
A million views is quite alot
We have to post more comments to get people to see this. Otherwise, we only see 60 million targeted bullshit adds and articles
Get off Facebook. Boycott it. I did after I heard about the Cambridge Analyitica deeds. The best thing I ever did. Make Mark Zuckerberg a pauper.
I won’t do that. I’ve got loads of idiot ‘friends’ that pick up and share these adds. I’ve got to tell them the truth!
You don't have to join Facebook to be tracked by it. Many many websites embed Facebook hooks into the web pages you visit. You don't even see them.
Paul Humphreys please send out multiple mailings and tell everyone
All social media platforms are contributing to this. Leave them all. Listen to Jaron Lanier!
@HKZ P You didn't understand a single word i said and yet you call me a "psychotic". The typical civil discourse in social media era.
"We did it anyway."
What a powerful sentence
They also printed an article about Obama using the exact same methods. Only difference being when Obama did it they wrote a puff piece on how great it was Obama was reaching users on Facebook and Social Media through data collection. It's still on their website right now if you are willing to open your eyes to the truth. Of course... orange man bad, black man good.
@@crocodile2006 don't talk like the orange man! it is all about what Cambridge Analytica did.
crocodile2006
Obama actually was good. His immediate successor did little to benefit the people of the United States, but quite a bit that benefited Vladimir Putin. His only quality is his consistency.
(Comment updated after his defeat in the 2000 election to avoid confusion.)
@@crocodile2006 doesn't make it OK.
These liberals applaud when their guys do this
Scary to rewatch this after The Storming Of The Capitol. Shivers.
Now you realise it was all lies and spin by the media I wonder how you feel now……
Just seen the news. Carole won her libel trial against against Brexit banker Banks. She's a legend and will hopefully now get some awards. In fact, give her all of the awards. 😁
AMAZING NEWS!
And she's just lost on appeal!
So stupid she thinks the reason we voted for independence, isn't because we no longer wished to be led along the path to becoming an EU puppet state treaty by treaty without our consent overruled & overrun, but because of Facebook 🤔
And they wanted rule from Brussels yet worry about Foreign influence?
Insane beyond words.
There's no such thing as EU money. It's our money the EU hands back after they've taken a fat cut from it.
6m EU migrants have taken jobs, driven down wages & expanded council house queues to 12yrs in many Cities.
I speak first hand from living in Shirley in Southampton.
This deluded woman is in denial.
Globalism only benefits the rich 1% who want to be able to shunt labour round like a commodity with no regard for the native workforce.
Everyone else has to endure competing with more & more migrants for homes & jobs & everything else
Yet the left are too stupid to grasp this🤔
Nope. She's been shown - in Court - to be a liar.
😂😂😂😂 she has to pay Banks £35k plus costs which are likely to exceed £1M 😂😂 she's utterly discredited and most likely bankrupted. 😂😂😂
Thank you, Carole. I'm spreading this far and wide.
Is idiocy infectious?
Telcontar1962
It would seem so
The greater problem is that too many of the rich and powerful don't really believe democracy is necessary or even that useful to them. And they are largely correct. They have enough money and influence that democracy oftentimes is more a hindrance than an aid to them.
Democracy works on the hope that people know what's best for them. 96% of people believe they have above average intelligence....
Never before has this been so true.
The real question is why are people so easily influenced by ads. Why do we lack the ability to debunk false info and use our own mind? Why do we lack sound judgment? Controlling ads is not the answer. Developing our critical and analytical thinking is.
ankontini Critical and analytical thinking can only happen if you receive a good education.
@@zoejay there are a lot of people with incredible educations but still think like robots. Because education nowadays is feeding the mind information instead of teaching people how to think. You don't need a Phd to not fall victim to facebook hoaxes.
ankontini its easy to try to blame ads and i dont think many would have been that interested in them, nearly all the people i know in my area were wanting leave for a very long time at least going back to 2005/06. The overloading of our local infrastructure wasnt responded to by government at all and still hasnt been. Just a small correction to the video that those projects were our own money being spent by the EU whilst they keep a high percentage to spend elsewhere.
Duncan Craig Do you have a high amount of EU immigration in your area or is it non EU immigration that was overloading your infrastructure? UK has complete independence to respond its domestic issues. I wonder if this is known by general public.
Subliminal messages works extremely well on all people, no matter how well informed or intelligent they are. The actual adverts, pictures, sounds and text are just the tip of the iceberg.
I came back to listen to this brave and knowledgeable lady once more after her court victory. Keep up the good work Carole you are on the right side of history.
@@CmdrTobs Wrong he lost get over it. Below is cut and paste from judgement.
416. For the reasons I have given, I conclude: i) The claimant has proved that the publication of the TED Talk has caused and/or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. The TED Talk is defamatory of Mr Banks for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. ii) The claimant has failed to prove that publication of the Tweet caused or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. The claim in respect of the Tweet is therefore dismissed on the ground that the Tweet is not defamatory for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. iii) The defendant has established a public interest defence in relation to the publication of the TED Talk pursuant to s.4 of the 2013 Act. iv) There was a significant change of circumstances once both the NCA’s statement and the Joint Statement had been published on 29 April 2020, such that the public interest defence in s.4 of the 2013 Act ceased to apply. v) The claimant has failed to prove that the publication of the TED Talk from 29 April 2020 caused and/or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation. In respect of that period, the TED Talk is not defamatory for the purposes of s.1 of the 2013 Act. vi) Accordingly, the claim is dismissed.
@@CmdrTobs Not really. Banks is now trying to relitigate and having no luck. She actually doesn't say definitively he got his money from Russia, she says he was referred to the NCA by the EC because they didn't know where his money was from, and that's true. He got away with it, but people with his money can afford better lawyers and accountants than the NCA. She did a great thing exposing these vicious creeps for the corrupt, manipulative and self-serving parasites they are.
@@CmdrTobs and today lost on appeal
@@richy69ify and today, she needs to pay, and that’s just the down payment.
@@arnesaknussemm2427 £35k plus costs 😂😂😂 she's utterly discredited, not that the sheep will believe it.
I got off of Facebook!! it is some sense of freedom. Just don't need it. and the benefits of one more saying no to Facebook is a reward in itself.
Your leaving doesn't solve the problem. How do you convince the brain dead?
Sure but here you are on the internet. Do you really think f-book is not just another internet site where you express yourself or don't or listen to others, as we do here?
Freedom says it all. Try it for just 0ne day and you may continue off Free, free.
Rob Robi wrote: "Do you really think f-book is not just another internet site where you express yourself or don't or listen to others, as we do here?" No, it isn't. It really isn't (are you 10 years old?).
just came here after watching the great hack on netflix. its truly scary
@Anurag Anand
Same here lol
Me too. I voiced my outrage on F/B and they refused to publish the post because it broke their "rules"
Same here
Me too
Obama used the same tricks. This is nothing new. People are only crying because their side lost.
So it turns out that Carole Cadwalladr is not only brave, bright, humane and a superb journalist. She is also an orator of the first rank. We are so lucky to have her.
Utter nonsense. She is talking unadulterated drivel. She's self-serving just like the rest of the remainiacs - they have been duped into believing that the EU is good for the UK and don't have the independent intelligence to work out that it is in fact a total scam.
She sucks. "You, the Gods of Silicon Valley." Give me a break.
Have you noticed how none of those who've replied to you have said WHY she's wrong?
It's so pathetic. They've been groomed so convincingly that they're afraid of the truth. Tragic.
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better.
Thank god’ there’s decent people like Carole left in the world willing to expose liars & cheats!
Well done Carole, your AMAZING.
You do understand that the court ruled that what she said was untrue, don’t you?
@@arnesaknussemm2427 you do understand she won? It’s worth noting that over 29,000 individuals funded her defence too
@@gamos6698 And you do understand that the court found that what she had said about Banks was untrue. She lied, but convinced the court that she did so in the public interest or some nonsense. She is a fabricator of tales and the fact the 29 000 people are happy to finance her grifting is their problem and not mine. You, Sir are a gullible clown 🤡
@@gamos6698 Arne is incorrect, Carole actually admitted what she said was untrue. The judge deemed Banks was not damaged by this defamation. he is appealing.
🤮🤑shame to criminal globalists. They bought you all 💀👺🤮
Brave lady! It's been two years plus and the gods of Silicon Valley have now understood what you are saying here. Keep working with them. They need input on on what happened when and how.
Here after watching the great hack yes, and I got really emotional watching her speech, because she is so right and I applaud her and others for bringing this to ones attention and letting us know we must fight back!!!!
Amen!
And I pity you for falling for her subversive propaganda. She's in the process of getting bankrupted for the lies she told here. The Court of Appeal just ordered her to pay Arron Banks £35,000 damages for her lies and the legal fees she will have to pay will be over £1million. Arron Banks took your advice and fought back. Well done!
Delighted to learn that Arron Banks has lost the Russia libel case against Carole Cadwalladr - the contentious phrase is here at 7:44.
Without people like her, carrying on her work, we wouldn't even know about all this dark, dark stuff... We depend on her and similar brave, hard-working journalists. We're on the cusp of giving up any control we had and fought so hard to gain. As CC points out at 3:53, their lies and deceit literally disappears from view, after the event. They *must* be held to account! Thank-You, Carole and Keep Up The Good Fight, please !!
What is so appalling is that Carol Cadwalladr simply made the whole story up. She presented no evidence of any wrongdoing by Mr Banks because there is none. That she initially defended herself with the 'it is true' argument is bizarre. That she then claimed it was in the public interest (to tell outrageous lies) isn't any better. She lost Arron won and now she has to pay damages for lying to gullible people like you
So many people seem keen on getting off Facebook, but I believe it's a bit deeper than that. And here you are, selecting videos on RUclips, which I'm sure has the same power as FB
Thank you.
Truth
RUclips still hosts quite a lot of good alternative content- for now. Sure, it's obviously heading towards a corporatist's platform, but the demonitized and censored content is where it's at. Get down the rabbit holes here whilst you still can I say.
People use YT very differently than fb as you can actively pursue content and aren't just consuming what fb decides to show you. All of the ads I am shown on YT are for products or services not BS about Turkey about to join the EU (one must be pretty ignorant to have believed that one). Might as well include the Google search engine too then. ... In anyway, can't be that bad because you are still here, Chris Ross ;)
We are all stuck in our bubble ;-)
I've deleted my Facebook account a couple months ago, because i don't feel right being with it, it's kind of illegal creepy hack or something. I wish other people do it too.
kinda like google
I deleted it bc I never use it and dont like my infos öaying around anywhere and ESPECIALLY there
@@irimac1806 i feel it ruining Journalism industry and Democracy ideology. It's a scam money sucker.
@@duckymonguy2715 as you said so; i feel dark and haunted now.
@@duckymonguy2715 the saying is if you can't stop them join them but the one you said suits better this topic and I do believe 100%limiting them is a good direction to be taken toward Facebook and the others like fb or similar to it
I've been in the IT industry, which means I read IT publications. For many years before Cambridge Analytica, various Internet civil rights groups and activists have been raising alarm bells about privacy issues with social media in general, that those social media companies were violating our privacy, selling info about us to whoever without our knowledge, and that this could all have devastating impacts on us.
It turns out that all of those who were yelling about privacy issues with regards to social media was right all along.
I enjoyed connecting with long-lost friends and relatives on Facebook, so I'm sorry to say that I didn't heed the warning of all those activists until after the Cambridge Analytica thing. Now it may be too late to save democracy in the West.
PS -- please give money to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They're one of the groups we should have been listening to.
Indeed, people who aren't computer professionals often don't understand the power of information and how you can put together random bits of data to learn things about a person they may never admit in public. CA and other groups took advantage of this and the populace had no idea they were being manipulated. Saw it myself in friends who turned into militant Brexit obsessives but couldn't actually explain why or how it was going to work. Same thing happened with covid where they'd be talking about topics they didn't understand but learnt about through conspiracy memes and dubious Internet stories.
Brexit saved democracry in the UK. No more laws in perpetuity from unelected Commisioners = Dictatorship
Carole C finally brought it all into crystal clear focus. Thank-you - I hope it's not too late!
Man....., I have just felt in love......
I'm from Brazil, and I'm sure that Bolsonaro's summit in Moscow a few days before the beginning of war in Ukraine, was for ask for help, because this year we will have elections, and he needs to keep the power..... Yes! Amazing talk!!!!!!
It is happening in India... These decades will be remember as the dark age of technology in the history
I think online censorship would be the dark age of technology. Then free speach online would be dead and you won't be allowed an opinion that goes against the government. They have already got all the newspapers and news channels in their pockets, now they want to control the main way we can find out about the truth. We cant let this happen but we dont get an opinion or vote on it. A TED talk i recently watched mentioned that soon enough, we will all be on the dark web instead. Very interesting if you haven't seen it.
The idea of the dark age is definitely interesting. How would you imagine the solution to pierce that dark veil to be? For my part, I Think for this to happen it would inquire an international law that identify the Identity of the internet as a shared space with secure legal routes and ethic code. I dont think it has anything to do with censorship. I think on the contrary that the mass cancerous in its present form is censoring the real persons.
@@planter13 So wanting huge tech companies to be accountable to our government is online censorship? If you are afraid of not being able to have an opinion that goes against the government you should be very worried about the rise of authoritarianism all around the world.
FB was never meant to be a social media platform where you connect with friends. We had Skype for that. More like a data syphoning platform to know about consumer taste and preference, sell it to big firms and 3rd parties so they can increase profit margins and political agenda. In the case of UK is pushing for private 'healthcare' US style, cheaper GMO food, American companies and more. Forcing the UK out of EU is essential for that to happen.
Yeah, that does seem very absurd.. that FB started out on the right foot but somewhere along the line it got derailed. I'm sure at its inception, a firm agenda was already in place.
Damn. 😮 I’m copying your post for reposting, it’s major.
I was at an academic conference shortly before the election. Every academic was pro-remain, whilst every taxi driver, hotel worker, and bartender was for Brexit. Kudos to the folks in the town in Wales for thumbing their noses at the EU even though they built a bridge or two.
PIcoAirBearings Now airhead.....watch what you say to the Welsh. They've just lost the Ford plant at Bridgend, and the writing is on the wall for the LAST Iron and Steel plant in the UK.
Which election are you referring to ? The referendum wasn't an election, so I'm a bit sceptical about your attendance at any academic conference.....but let's agree on one thing. The referendum was 3 years ago. We still haven't left the EU and we all know why. You wouldn't object to a second referendum would you ?
Yeah they built us a bridge with our own money!!! Everyone is so very grateful!! Lol
planter13 Yes, you're definitely not an academic !!
@@californiadreamin8423 why do you think that, because I have a mind of my own and don't believe everything I see on the fake new and papers. You're in so deep you can't see out. God love you
@@californiadreamin8423 yes what? That you are not welcome in the UK lol.
Great point made but the British do not care about being lied to, they even go as far as defend the lies they've been told in order to keep their pride.
Not the British, mostly the English (and many Welsh)
What boggles my mind is that I can easily create an ad that would be rejected by Facebook for using incorrect or misleading information. Yet this happens on a much larger scale and it's fine.
I got a month ban for posting a pic of Adolf when i was already banned and couldnt post anything again🤣🤣🤣
These companies deep pockets allow red carpet treatment to post whatever they want sadly..~
They are practicing a selective censorship, AKA brainwashing us into their agenda. Watching news on conflicts from 5 yrs ago is the only way to understand where the conflict originated. Everything current is BS to sell us wars.
How much did the "remain" campaign spend? Of course, she only presents one side.
Monsieur P. Probably way too less than they should.
It's not an issue of how much was spent. The issue is whether or not it was legal (and some of Leave's wasn't), and what they actually said (i.e. verifiable untruths in order to convince weak minds).
Facebook is only useful for private meme groups.
There is no such thing as a FB private group. Don't be naive.
Public meme groups then.
Check out "Classical Art Memes" for example.
World leaders, allong with other leaders are one side, their own
Keeping in touch with world wide friends is great, but I only use messenger now
Agreed. Tag and meme groups are most of why I'm still on there.
Just in case you’re wondering why the 2024 election in the US went the way it did. Nothing much has changed in five years.
what a scary thing I never seen before, I literally did not know the reality I faced it..
thanks for reminding us!
Does anyone even use Facebook anymore?
TED used to it post this video and spread lies. How ironic.
My grandparents
It's quite popular for the 50+ age group, who have low digital literacy.
Great talk. Never understood how so many countries have similar sort of government--turkey, USA, the Philippines-- a slow reduction of laws protecting privacy and other civil rights--Google and FB, using the same techniques, have succeeded in their goals. World is not a happy place except for the 1%.
Tiger Lucas Sorry, but now you come across exactly like those ads she spoke about.
6:07 "Turkey is not joining the European Union. There is not even any discussions of it joining the European Union"
;
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union
The other great part is Arron Banks just got aquitted of all wrongdoing the other day! this video aged like warm milk 😂
mate did you even read the link you sent
‘On 26 June 2018, the EU's General Affairs Council stated that "Turkey has been moving further away from the European Union. Turkey’s accession negotiations have therefore effectively come to a standstill and no further chapters can be considered ‘
@@vwgl1169 the Brexit election was in June of 2016, they were serious accession talks back then. The talks stalled in November of 2016, months after the election.
This is why we can't have nice things.
What if we imposed a rule on social media that all adverts can only advertise a product or a service. This would mean that they could not push out political adverts of any sort.
who is "we"? Social networks don't care about what your "we" thinks
@@Bongo2k The "we" is powerful political sturctures such as the EU.
Yep I need to see what the next Pfizer product is….
Why don’t we make laws that hold social media platform executives criminally responsible for misinformation and political overspending?
They insist on immunity deals with the NSA in exchange for,err,shall we say 'back door access' !
Just posted a link to this on Facebook. 🤝
You really are a dullard
bestoca maybe the same could be said of you!
LOL - good one!
@@monty5692 i did too ;-)
It probably wont be seen by your friends, I've had most things politically hushed by farcebook.
A dodgy rancid info pit for the paying owners of banks.
So what can we do to protect ourselves?
Amazing speech. Thank you Carole. You did an amazing job 🧡
💝
I realized what Facebook was doing to me and others years and years ago. I deleted my account and never looked back. If you find Facebook is stirring negative feelings and you feel like you're being pushed towards hate and distrust of people in general, DELETE IT! Just delete your Facebook account and go out for coffee with friends instead! Talk to your relatives... you don't need to know everything that's happening in everybody's lives.
very strange , facebook that owns peoples privacy, break every privvacy of the ' common man'
protect heavely the privacy of the powerfull
i have no facebook , never had , never will
everyone, and i mean everyone, please shut down your account , thanks P
It’s happening in America today
The globalist weeps as she sees their grand plan falls apart.
Never had an Facebook, I'm educated in cyber security and old enough to have seen the start of fb. I had an understanding of what they would do to your data but I never thought it would end up like this.
How can one be educated in cyberspace security and not understand the platforms that need to be secured ? I’d be more like Cambridge Analytica ASAP and ghost Facebook ! Just take it offline and take your winnings and hide - everyone who codes is responsible for this mess - in reality I am pretty sure this is true:/ seems the larger percent just makes apps and la la la laughing all the way to the bank only if you source data - that’s the revenue - not to put you on front street zuckerberg - aren’t you rich enough ? I am sincerely saddened there is not one smart person could eliminate this blip of social media
ERROR
“Because you set out to connect people and you are refusing to acknowledge that the same technology is now driving us apart”
The rich believe threatening to sue the poor is going to scare the poor the same way law suits scare the rich. But we are immune to fear of being sued because we are already broke and have nothing to lose. We are the 99%. If the 1% would hand over half of their wealth, the whole world would be flush with enough cash for everyone to live comfortably and still solve all of the world's environmental problems. We need a US citizens' Brexit from the Federal Reserve Bank.
Its cool to see in a large point of view how society is constantly rebalancing between multiple wills, acidentaly showing a behaviour that seeks for the stability of the wills. And how the most tiny of the wills end up creating a large aspect of the society. Its like when you left something fall, and it keep bouncing arround until it finally stop.
Not sure how your comment is "cool" when what you're essentially saying is chaos in action.
Carole Cadwalladr has just conceded her court case v Arron Banks as baseless. Cadwalladr has avoided the humiliation of appearing in court this morning by submitting in writing an amended defence which,
“… removes the Truth Defence and the Limitation Defence”
The case currently is still ongoing.
SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH SHE WON HAHAHAHAH
You got a new sport centre and a bridge and you are surprised that people voted to leave in an area where industry is declining and people feel left behind by the Londoners who preach and tell everyone how wonderful everything is. This woman just went "Home" to write a report sneering at people. Then she went back to London.
athleticdiv1 - never mind the ad hominem nonsense. Do you have any reason or evidence to suggest she is wrong in what she says?
@@billoliver5222 what she says being that Facebook ads had an effect on the outcome of the referendum?
@@athleticdiv1 sorry I don't understand that
I didn't know that you were born in Enw Vale.. Explains why you are so courageous, intelligent and passionate about social justice. I am familiar with the South Wales valleys and worked there for a few years but not like being brought up there. Waaaw I am so impressed with you and had been following you on Twitter for years. I'd never seen this talk and hadn't realised who your audience was. The psychological profiling of online users of any system has been going on for a long time but used as marketing tools to convince you to buy certain products. Seems like buying a certain set of well placed political viewpoints and untruths was a very short step from there. No wonder Boris and Co were swept up by it all. Fantastic. Mr Bevan would have been very proud of you..
Sour Grapes. People like me in South Wales are not stupid. Why didn't the same facebook tactics work in London
you don't have to be stupid to be susceptible to ads (and other form coercive media). Some parts of the human brain work independently of your consciousness.
Why didn't the ads wodk in London or other areas that voted remain?
Nobody thinks they are stupid.
@@FUN144 Because London isn't Ebbw Vale. It's a completely different way of life between the two, and London has more exposure to what the EU brings - foreigners, money, and big business. The two places are like chalk and cheese in their outlook, expectations, and history. They would be less likely to fall for the FB fibs. The population is probably younger and better educated too. Note that in terms of age, they was a generational split between Leave and Remain voters in the Referendum. Leavers tend to be a bit older. So, the split was always there but Brexit made it visible.
@@BigHenFor In summary I cant think for myself, just like 17.4 million and Tony Benn another thicko. I look forwarrd to the day when other European countries have their first referendum.
These are moments that convince me that I want to learn psychology/neuroscience. The subtle yet powerful effects such as group polarization, confirmation bias, and priming so prevalent on the internet scare me. This speech teaches me that they're incredibly effective, yet they permeate through our lives so deeply and so much of it is unconscious that we can't immediately break loose from them. (This also brings terrifying implications about whether we are truly, intellectually free, a premise that democracy bases upon so much.) Researching on these effects, especially regarding the internet, is key, and I can't say I'm excited (I'm scared to see what we may find), but I certainly want to look further into this.
Enjoy your travels. Can I also suggest formal logic. It is an incredibly useful tool when navigating information warfare.
Start with Kahneman’s lectures on System 1 (emotional shorthand, autopilot) and System 2 (systematic, careful evidence based) thinking. Then look at perception, particularly visual and auditory illusions. If those things are old hat there is a wonderful lecture series from Robert Sapolsky. I’d always heard about game theory but what I had heard wasn’t making sense to me. He covers this really well.
There is a simple solution to the problems Facebook is causing. Pursue criminal litigation where the company has or is breaking the law. There is no excuse for the things that Facebook has knowingly allowed.
It works both ways. Either Facebook allows everything or it blocks everything which is political. It currently is not unbiased in its approach and so will cause a problem if it continues in such a way.
@@iain5615 I think you missed the part about criminal litigation and the law. The suggestion wasn't to stop anything and everything that's political, it was to stop things that are illegal, or rather to prosecute those who have broken the law. This isn't a Catch-22 situation, it's actually pretty straightforward.
@@iain5615 - While that is true, the allegations here (IIRC) is that something illegal is being done. If something illegal is being done, then investigate and if warranted prosecute. No different from anything else. Many people do not realize this, but all broadcasters have legal restrictions on what they are allowed to broadcast, including the advertising. It varies by country, but all countries have some sort of restrictions.
The UK electorate should have prosecuted its entire Parliament and senior civil servants within Whitehall over 40 years ago. Now they definitely did break the law then and and they've been doing it ever since. They are so illegal and illegitimate its almost comical. But because they are untouchable in our so called "democracy" we have the kind of battle this know-nothing TED presenter is unable to comprehend. Her non-existent mind just can't cope with its conclusions.....so it must be Facebook.
Facebook. Isn't that the company the EU fanatic Clegg now toady's for? Oh yes I can see the Brexit connection now.
Seriously some people (and there are quite a few commenting here are no different to National Socialist or Soviet fanatics. This TED presenter is just one such person.
As presenter says part of problem is that much isn't covered by existing laws. We don't know how many or what ads were shown by whom to who and zuckerberg won't supply that info. There's no law to force him to. Current EU Data protection laws were enacted post brexit referendum.
The exact algorithms FB uses for advertising arent known, what it's possible to do with 50million account details isnt known. It is legal for FB to sell user data, it's legal for political parties to advertise on FB. We don't know how much user data + dodgy use + dodgy ads skews an electorate.
Read (the presenter) Cadwallader's articles on brexit and cambridge analytica - they cover issues in more depth than here.
3.4 thousand people still are unwilling to admit they got conned
A little more than that
I appreciate your work ted and i really enjoying during watching your videos different people come and share their their 💡 ideas in front of whole world 🗺
That's one of the biggest debates/challenges of nowadays world.
It is. Even though I feel that she could have sensationalized it less. But nobody will care in that case, I suppose.
Why do you think information a problem in a democracy?
@Dzooky P2P Haha. Ikr..
@Dzooky P2P So the govt can tell you what you can see?
Facebook and youtube are already trying to get regulations out on themselves. The more regulation the more they can control what people see. And the better their sole control over information because new start ups will never be able to keep up with the regulations like FB and themtube can. They have the money the programmers the lawyers.
Thentube used to be for anyone to add a video. Now they decide what can be added. most 9.11 videos are now demonetised and anything else that points out how bad the mass media get stories wrong.
@Dzooky P2P critical thinking a is critical survival tool
Well this comment section is going to be entertaining.
You sound like Wario
Matthew Morton Well I should probably give you snaps for the most “peculiar” response I’ve ever received to a post on YT. 😉
@@spencerarnot ;)
im gettin some popcorn u want any
Very good!! :-) :-) :-)
Stunned
Initially I had a "thumb up" but then the exaggeration and a slogan-talk started so I took it down
There's evidence to back up everything she says. There's no exaggeration in this video - she's a reporter for a highly respected outlet, she wouldn't risk her career
I would like you to point out the so called exaggeration you heard. #factchecknotopinions
@@oluwatobidavid8773 "The Gods of the Silicon Valley", "we, in Britain, are the canary" (this one I take personally as the real canary was the war in Chechnya and then in Georgia and then, most recently, and this time with the help of social media - in Ukraine), "this technology, that you have invented... is now a crime scene", "illegal cash from god knows where" (clearly a non-factual statement!) these are some of the examples of what I call exaggerations
@@Spikeygal being a reporter for a highly respected outlet usually doesn't affect my perception on what the person is saying as that alone is not a good enough reason for me to take someone's word for granted (this is, of course, a huge plus to one's credibility, I'm not arguing that point)
@@oluwatobidavid8773 I really can't escape the urge to point out that the phrasing you've chosen ("so called exaggeration") clearly doesn't play well with the hashtag that followed your request as being of a form that suggests not only your disagreement (which is fine) but also an active dismissal of the facts you are asking me to provide (which is NOT fine)
Thank you so much for this, I have been saying this for years well done!
All I’ve seen come up on my Facebook was anti brexit.
Well then you weren't the type of person who was going to be easily persuaded to vote for Brexit, therefore they didn't spend their money advertising it to you?
Really? Such as what? All I have seen is anti europe and pro europe. What did you see that was anti brexit?
Mad Parrot the evidence is there but still no, no, no!
I live in the US, but if I had to guess, they may target those that are more on the fence about politics, and they do have algorithms for trying to guess where you stand on the political spectrum, at least they do in the US. advertisers can just say they want to target independent and somewhat left/right leaning, and exclude the extremely left/right
Mad Parrot ok boomer
Wow, there it is. The undeniable TRUTH. I think I'll share this to FB. Hopefully it will bring some awareness about this before they remove and bury it.
How can they continue the Brexit plan knowing that the referendum was biased? Mindblowing
I've been asking myself this question since the referendum. I have to conclude that it's because our politicians are utter cowards who'd rather protect their own careers and political parties than admit the electorate were conned and that they allowed it.
@@Infundibular we were not conned - we are sensible British people who can see through the lies if the BBC, Guardian and the EU
I think this too but it reveals that is isn't actually about what is right and fair, powerful rich people pay to control us and direct us as theu see fit. It replaces how religion used to be used to control us or keep us orderly. They manipulate us to get what they want and it is working now with dictatorial and ignorant, hateful leaders all over the world #peaceandlove
Ignore the responses, they will be as polarised as usual. The reason it continues is that all the political parties know that to try and reverse the decision will cause civil unrest. After years of pressure Corbyn has finally come out on the side of a new referendum, but only once the chances of getting back into power were gone. The current election process worldwide is now destroyed and it will never be fixed again.
@@mattheworton5701 Good luck with that. I genuinely mean it. I really hope your convictions bear out. I don't think they will. If you think Boris is the man to bring back power to the UK and to alleviate the perceived injustices visited by the EU then I hope you are right. Tell you what, when you are proven right, by all means message me. I will gladly buy you a couple of pints.
Wow. This is such a well presented talk.
A talk that will have cost her in excess of £1M 😂
Funny I never saw one FB ad before the referendum. I saw a literature (booklet) in a church saying something wrong about EU. So I looked into more of it and decided we should leave EU.
Wrong think is illegal, according to this harlot.
Then you weren't being targeted. Millions of others were though.
In the end she’s blaming Facebook for the leave result, as if every leave voter and no remain voters use Facebook that much
She's basically saying 'People who voted leave are stupid and were influenced by ads targeted to them, but those on the remain side were too smart to be influenced'. What a moronic and bias take.
@@mrroams5812 Exactly. TED should stay out of politics, and this lady is only telling half the story. What a joke. What about all the remain propoganda that was unfairly used? For example the BBC giving more airtime to proremain politicians. I guarantee more of the older population watch the BBC than use facebook yet they still voted to leave.
@@pvpherthen2981 I'm sorry, but the two sides aren't even remotely comparable. The Leave.EU campaign used fraudulent practices and illegal funds to get the job done. How in your silly mind can this be compared to x more minutes on the BBC?
@@mrroams5812 you realize how these ad campaigns work, do you? There is an algorithm that selects ideal targets for the ad. If the algorithm classifies you as pro-remain, you do not qualify as target and your profile is ignored. They are not going to waste their money trying to convince people who are strongly on the opposite side. This campaign was mostly directed at those whose mind could be changed. Based on your low level of understanding, I should say that the only one affected by moronic bias is you.
It's not a question of how much Facebook you use. It is about the type of ads they feed you. This campaign was aimed at convincing people who weren't taking sides, so not everyone saw the same things.
Do you want to leave Europe, yes ! that's not the answer we wanted !
- *Proceeds to act like nothing happened*
- *Hey look Labour is having antisemitism rows, lets focus on that for the next 7 - 14 days*
British public: What about brexit?
- *Yeah we got bored of May talking about that, we are going to get rid of her*
British public: ....
- *Hey guys remember Boris???*
- *Hey guys how about Boris for PM??*
British public: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo just get on with it
- *Hey guys how about a debate*
- *Hey guys about raising the taxes*
- *Har har har har har har har har*
You can’t buy love. You can pay for hate, though...
@David Charles Francis Topham de Vere Beauclerk Err....did you not watch the video?
This is beautifully put.
PS Only a troll would try to infuriate people by asking "where is the hate"
I think you actually helped found the wrecked hole of the broken system...
People make the assumption that hate is the opposite of love. It is not. Those adds have nothing to do with hate. They are about fear, which is also not the opposite of love, but it's very effective.
@@williamgreene4834 science would disagree with you on two of the three points you made above :)
FB is a drug, getting sober is like leaving the Truman Show for real.
I'm off over a year now, have lost nothing and read twice the amount of books as the year before
@@jacobjorgenson9285 But you have now found 'the intellectual dark web' You Tube et al and this is way more interesting and informative!
Great talk. Very informative. Power corrupts. Human morality is hijacked by the few.
So what she’s saying is that there wouldn’t have been any progress in Wales if this country had self determination? What is she saying about Wales and it’s population?
South Wales was doing just fine manufacturing steel which required the coal mined locally until the EU decided both coal & steel were "dirty" so to save the planet they decided to kill off these industries & instead buy the steel from Asia...yet last time I checked, we all live inside the same jam-jar biosphere. The decline of manufacturing in South Wales where I come from is shocking, everywhere are vacant factory sites & no new work for the people. In Britain only 2.6 million people out of a working age population of around 40 million now work in manufacturing yet we consume ever increasing quantities of manufactured goods...When I see film of Chinese factories with thousands of workers I think to myself that those jobs used to be in our countries...& this all happened under the control of the incompetent EU.
@@davidbrewer7937 That was Margaret Thatcher who decided to sell off British Steel. At least get your facts straight.
@@davidbrewer7937 Did Americans complain when Ford opened up their factories here? When General Electric did, and all the other American firms that first came here then went to China because they were cheaper and less regulated. I'd live to see you manage on £130 a month for 60 hour weeks.
@@BigHenFor Nobody should be working for the wages they pay in China but these earnings are relative to the place where they are paid. Everything costs a lot less in China than it does in the UK so earning what we see as low pay is a good pay packet there. As for Americans complaining when their factories moved to the UK they probably should have, but the reason the factories like Ford built their engine plant in Bridgend was to support the local manufacturing which was located there to gain access to the market in the country of purchase for sales of their vehicles.
It's NOT the EU's money it's OURS
That is correct. Britain hands over something like 16bn euros to the EA each year & they then hand back something like 11bn but with rules on where Britain can spend the money so for instance, the government can spend on the HS2 project which uses millions of tonnes of steel rail tracks but was unable to help prevent Scunthorpe British Steel going bankrupt costing 2500 direct manufacturing jobs because the EU said they were not allowed to...LUNACY....
It's only yours till you send it to the EU. Once sent, it becomes the EU's PR money to influence perception.
@@davidbrewer7937 And again someone who fell for the anti-EU propaganda. Its not the EU its the WTO that prevented the UK from saving British steel. Then they decide how much anyone is allowed to subsidies certain industries. The EU just enforces the rules set by the WTO.
Liked the applause at the end, hope the lesson was taken to heart.
thank you for this!
Just ask yourself, would she have saying all this if remain had won?
Remain didn't use these methods.
If the remain campaign would have used the same tactics, yes.
facebook is only good for memes and me feeling slightly better about myself when people send me happy birthday messages
Happy belated birthday! I'm sorry I missed it.
You mean normie memes...
Incredibly brave Carole Cadwalladr. Thank you so much for what you've done. Is there any way to turn back Brexit?
She is one more liberal mouthpiece.
Hoy en Argentina ganó un candidato de ultraderecha😢 y apoyado por estos magnates de la comunicación
I don't use Facebook for over 3 years now. Any other intersection is minimum, not unless it is extremely important. Data is our right, a human right. Keep fighting for it guys. Save it from companies and governments. Don't mKe yourself vulnerable to manipulation.
makes me think that facebook and youtube might doing the samething to hongkong
It's everywhere.
It has been so from the beginning
exactly
Jin Wei ok boomer
well said Jin Wei. brave comment
Not actually funded by the EU, but by UK tax payers. You fail to point out the UK is a net contributor to the EU.
This is true for the UK, but the examples were from Wales, which is a net beneficiary of the EU (£79 per capita annual benefit vs. £151 per capita annual contribution for the UK in 2014 - see the 2016 Cardiff University report "Estimating Wales' Net Contribution to the European Union")
@@mrfacetious somewhat of a sleight of hand there.
They are still funded by the UK tax payers.
@@joelhall5124 no sleight of hand intended - all the figures are there. While the UK on average indeed makes a net contribution (-£151pppy), as one of the wealthier member states, those funds are partly redistributed via stimulus packages etc. among poorer regions of the bloc. Wales is one of these regions: when the individual countries of the UK are held against other EU member states, Wales' GDP per capita is in the bottom 10 countries, below, e.g., Slovakia (see, for example, Discourse .scot's page on 2015 GDP per capita for the EU27 and regions of the UK). As such, tax payers in Wales, on the whole, get more back from the EU than they put in (+£79pppy). The people interviewed for the original piece mentioned in the talk were Welsh taxpayers, so this is relevant when discussing their motivations, as the talk does. If you think I've missed or overlooked something, let me know! We could all do with more discussion and exchange.
@@mrfacetious I certainly do think you've overlooked something, and still maintain that it's sleight of hand.
The UK hasn't broken up yet, and regions are not members of the EU in their own right.
What is actually happening here is the EU is making decisions about where UK tax money should be spent in the UK, while also taking a cut for itself.
Scotland claim that their net contributions to central government are positive, and the same could be said here for England and Scotland via the EU. Wales is gaining an advantage on the backs of the other UK regions.
@@joelhall5124 I’m not advocating for a pro- or anti-EU stance, merely maintaining that the speaker’s reasoning is correct regarding the voting considerations within the post-industrial communities of Southeast Wales, which is the main discussion point of the talk. You are correct - Wales is a part of the UK, and the UK is on the whole a net contributor. But the people of Ebbw Vale mentioned in the video see more money return to their community than leave it. Given that they are more likely to consider their local economy than that of the nation as a whole, there isn’t a reasonable argument for them to vote to leave on purely economic grounds. The talk argues that they voted due to misleading targeted advertising. You argue instead that they could have voted on ideological grounds - even if there is a benefit, the EU decides where UK tax money is spent. This is also correct, although is perhaps better worded as “the EU decides where the EU budget, partly funded by UK taxes, is spent”. An interesting breakdown of this spending is presented in Daniel Dunford’s 01/06/2016 article in The Telegraph. The projects such as the sports centre shown in the video are paid for by funding from the EU regional development fund - rather than the EU proposing these projects, the funding is available to and applied for by local government. Details of the process are discussed in a RUclips video series from the SE Wales Specialist European Team channel. It should be noted that Wales also receives more in public spending from the UK government than it spends in taxes - its fiscal deficit is 5 times larger than the UK as a whole (see the FullFact discussion on Wales’ fiscal deficit). Voters elsewhere in the UK who are unhappy with Wales receiving more funding would be better off targeting their disapproval at Westminster at the ballot box. Ultimately, the decision of how to distribute money, for example regarding local project applications, is made, and can be vetoed by elected British representatives, both in the EU and UK parliaments (the RUclips channel Kurzgesagt has an excellent recent video describing the pros and cons of democratic representation in the EU).
Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005.[5] Progress was slow: out of the 35 chapters necessary to complete the accession process, only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.[6] The early 2016 refugee deal between Turkey and the European Union was intended to accelerate negotiations after previous stagnation and allow visa-free travel through Europe for Turks.[7] Oops - thought Carole was a journalist lol + Wales not Ebbw Vale received £585 from the EU and the UK Gov gave Wales £20Billion in 2021 rising to £24Billion in 2023.
Remember the BBC invest millions in to the remain campaign.
Evidence of this claim?
@@lordreynardine1481 Even in the face of evidence you would not believe it, so, no evidence for you, get your own.
Jerome Potts Given actual evidence, I would gladly believe it. But it’s incumbent on those making claims to provide the evidence. Otherwise we can claim anything, no? The queen is a lizard. The moon is made of cheese. RUclips comments are a fine place to participate in reasoned debate.
The federal government should demontize FACEBOOK!
Bruce Edwards if you believe the FG is “For The People,” it would be my pleasure sending them your way... ALL of them... EVERY Branch! We no longer need their services anymore as far as I’m concerned. I’ve done vast amounts of research on the FG. They are, without question, the World hub of child trafficking, responsible for more homicides then ANY other Organization or person, responsible for more addicted human beings than anything else, they spy on every person in the Nation which they Govern, they actually work alongside Zuckerberg and Facebook. This is the reason why they would NEVER shut Facebook down and Zuckerberg was not forced to comply with their Parliament, etc...
They are responsible for the 100’s of Physicians who treated their patients Holistically who were found dead mysteriously.
If you haven’t been paying attention to all the indictments occurring {cough} Comey, Strzok and Paige (amongst many others) in the FG {cough} they are HIGHLY responsible for meddling the elections, period!
Yes!! You can have the FG but please take the ENTIRE FG Organization and please, while your at it, take our entire Judiciary & Congressional and every Lawyer here in America too. They aren’t here for The People either. Any person who is licensed/Certified or has completed the BAR is NOT for the American People. BAR is an acronym for British Accredited Registry! As much as I’ve already revealed, it’s probably not even necessary to reveal that nearly EVERY Congressional leader is also educated in Psychology too because I guess here in America we need Psychologists too.
I’ve performed my research too 😉
*demonize
@@j_freed and... I meant demonetised
@@edwards1218 'demonetized'? Try again.
PS. Try 'demonised'.
@@shanedurcan2805 Show your name if you dare to call TED TALK fake news. Everything shall be based on facts backed by evidences, not based on what you, a no name faked guy, called.
Wow! What a powerful speech. Seeing her trying not to tear up was making me tear up. She is right. I love being able to communicate with people all over the world just as much as anyone, but allowing these companies and individuals to manipulate us and the governments of the world in this manner needs to be stopped.
Do you also like un-elected wankers in Europe overturning your political system by idallowing laws passed by your parliament?
How is Zuckerberg influencing people any different to your government introducing one law after another that not a single person asked for or wanted? Wake up!
«Turkey signed a Customs Union agreement with the EU in 1995 and was officially recognised as a candidate for full membership on 12 December 1999, at the Helsinki summit of the European Council.»
«Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005.[5] Progress was slow, and out of the 35 Chapters necessary to complete the accession process only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.[6] The early 2016 refugee deal between Turkey and the European Union was intended to accelerate negotiations after previous stagnation and allow visa-free travel through Europe for Turks.[7]»
Sorry, have they joined? I must have missed it.
For the avoidance of doubt, there's 30-odd tests they need to pass to be able to be admitted. To date, they've passed 3. They're not joining any time soon.
If they pass the 30-odd tests, they would have become a fully functioning democracy. And that would be a brilliant thing, so what would be the problem? Would it be that you don't like brown people coming to the UK to live, work and love?
Sparking fear of Turkey joining the EU any time soon is not only a lie, it's racist.
You've missed the point. She said there haven't even been talks. There have been talks. It doesn't matter how improbable final success is. She said no talks and there have been talks.
@@shka-n1t Turks aren't brown.
In the beginning of the talk; the EU didn't fund those buildings, it was UK tax payer money payed to the EU and then returned as development funds.
If the EU did fund those buildings it was because they fully expected to own the UK and so would be spending the money on it's self.
Like someone renovating a property they don't yet own.
I must admit, I wondered at the Money put in by us as she said that too. I'm not sure on the figures though as to whether we put more in or get more out. So much miss information its difficult to know.
@@clairewheeler2937 Do you get more out of your ISP than you put in? You pay a monthly subscription for a service that in turn allows you to access other services. You can within limits negotiate a discount, but all in all you still pay up. The EU, like its predecessor is a service for Trade and Business, and more so than business, it puts money into the societal aspect of the relationship instead of keeping it for profit. The UK's financial contribution is minor in comparison to what we get out of it by not having to spend money on customs posts, or paperwork. By having common standards it actually saves us money. For example, if you eat meat, you might know that it has to be inspected after stsughtering to check for disease. Your Danish bacon sandwich, has bacon that was inspected in Denmark before export by a Danish vet according to standards the whole of the EU agreed, so there is no need for a UK vet to inspect it on entry to the UK. That saves the Taxpayer at a minimum £30,000-£45000 per vet, per year we we have to employ at each entry point. I was listening to Farage's show on LBC, and a young vet named Sue phoned in. She asked him what the UK was going to do as there weren't enough trained vets in the country to inspect meat imports if we left the EU with no deal. As usual, Farage blustered a bit, and eventually had to take pause before blowing her off. That is the crux of the problem. There are now many new civil servants that will have to be employed to cover tasks like these if we leave with no deal, those will all add up over time. Yes, there may be technological solutions for some, but as we can see by the the issue of the Backstop, there are circumstance where it can't, and so money will have to be found for all these additional costs. The contribution that we pay saves us money because it reduces our costs of trading with our nearest neighbours. That means our prices for our exports to the EU can be cheaper, and we can compete. Arguably, looking only at our annual subscription ignores the cost of getting those services it gives us elsewhere if we leave with no deal. Until someone is brave enough to quantify that in detail, we are flailing about in the dark. All we do know is that there is no undertaking by the present government to replace the EU Social Fund contribution. Why should they? We've sat on our hands while huge swathes of the country was deindustrislised, and left to rot by Central government for the last 40 years . Why should anything change now?
I don't personally eat meat, and would prefer that someone in the UK were inspecting it as overseas standards can often be poor. It stands to reason that leaving will be a logistical nightmare sorting out each new department that was centralized but sometimes we need to tear down the old to bring in the new improved. But as you say, relying on the UK government to then be fair of course is unlikely with thier track record. I just feel we probably have a bit more chance of getting some change in certain areas that we now have no control over, as I said in a previous comment, horrific live animal exports being one of them.
I only just saw it today. It's like everything that Edward Snowden warned everyone about what they government was doing, but a private company is getting away with doing the exact same thing.
It's pretty much the Monty Python Life of Brian sketch 'What have the Romans ever done for us?'
The Aquaduct?
So, the EU is like the Roman Empire? I'll concede that. The EU sucks money out of local economies, then returns a small portion of it in very visible ways.
@@ronaldjohnson7905 so how much money has the EU sucked out of South Wales compared to what it has paid out? I'm not being conceited, I'm genuinely interested to know because I don't know myself.
Andrew Higginbottom I don't have numbers for South Wales. However, I do know that the EU takes in more than it sends out. Something has to go to the beauracracy. If it is anything like the US, the percentage of return is low. By the time you pay the salaries for the legislators, administrators, consultants, etc. there is a fairly low return . I think your analogy to the Roman Empire is spot on. You sir, are brilliant.
@@ronaldjohnson7905 The headline figure is £126 per person. However, in return for that we get reduced costs on shared services such as Science research, international terrorism prevention, medical research, international trade negotiations. Now the UK is going to have to replicate all those shared services. Going to cost us a lot more than it does now.
This is before you add in the other benefits we gained whilst being in the EU: frictionless trade, freedom to work, live or retire anywhere in the EU, cleaner beaches, improved air quality, improved employee protection (2 million of us got paid holidays for the first time) etc etc.
Very weird editing cut at 7:46 - I've watched a lot of videoconferences from TED and it's the first time I see this !!
On such a sensitive topic, it's unfortunate to say the least...
Can the TED team investigate and try to explain what happened there? Thanks in advance!
What a great speech though!! I honestly cannot believe it has barely made more than a million views - makes me sad...
It's because she told a complete lie and got sued for telling said lie and part of the sentence meant that Ted had to cut the part where she tells the lie.
Google Aaron Banks and Carole Cadwalladr libel case.
Thats one version. Some other say, it was a SLAPP suit* “intended to silence Cadwalladr's courageous investigative journalism”
* a "Strategic lawsuit against public participation" is a lawsuit intended to censor, intimate and silence critics by burdening someone with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
Me too....my daughter told me too watch the Great Hack....what a bone chilling documentary.🍁🇨🇦
The most important discussion of the 21st century.
1:25 The E.U. funds nothing.
Wrong
With all the money we hand over to the EU, the UK probably could’ve funded those projects.
Absolutely frightening.