>> good for him. go yankees. thank you for watching. we'll see you tomorrow. life, liberty and within, how are you, sir? america, this is probably martha biggest shows i've ever done. i hope you will watch the entire hour involves our republican system of government. involves our vote in manipulation of the vote and the outcomes of the next presidential election, the

effect it had on the past congressional elections. this is a very important program as far as i'm concerned. you are they, senior research psychologist the american institute for behavioral research and technology former editor in chief of psychology today, founder andnd director of the cambridge center for the behavior study massachusetts. i want to read something you, something he wrote a few years back. he said there are at least three very real scenarios whereby google, perhaps even without knowledge, shameful to even

decide the election. whether or not executives see it this way, the algorithms are manipulating people every minute of every day. they influence our thinking including our voting preferences. our research leaves little doubt about whether google has the ability to control voters in laboratory and online experiments conducted in the u.s. we were able to reduce people by 37 and 63%. after just one start session. the impact rankings repeatedly over a period of weeks and months. google is massive. almost everybody uses google. how are they able to manipulate the vote? what are they doing? >> if google's suit results for any reason are biased to favor one candidate or party for any reason, that will shift a lot of opinions about that candidate shift a lot of vote. it can shift millions of votes.

doesn't matter whether an employee or executive google did this deliberately, the algorithm alone, the computer program could be doing this and it will still affect the outcome of the election. >> are they trying to affect it? >> i don't know for sure. there have been a number of weeks recently from google even some whistleblowers who are saying google, a strong political bias internally, that they mean left which i tend to do as well, that's a deliberate and wanting to affect -- >> i'm interested in what you found. are they biased or not? be very specific. what happened in 2016? >> in 2016, i set up the first

ever monitoring system that allowed me to look over the shoulders of a diverse group of american voters, 95 people in 24 states. i looked atah politically oriend searches that these people are conducting on google, bing and yahoo, i preserved 13000 searches and 98000 webpages and i found very dramatic bias in google search result, just google. favoring hillary clinton, whom i supported strongly but the point is, i reported what i found. that level of bias shifted over time somewhere between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to hillary without anyone knowing it occurred.

>> so how does that get accomplished? the algorithms that are changed and adjusted and so forth? to have that significant of an impact, obviously someone or something want someone to win and someone to lose. to the person who goes on google, how is that manifested? >> if you go to google and type in anything election related, immigration or a law, think about the things related to election, you end up with search suggestions that passed you as your typing, we know those suggestions are very powerful effect on people.

they alone can shift opinions and vote dramatically. search results appear below and if there's a bias in them,t if a search result is highest on the list, if that takes you to a webpage that makes one candidate look better than another, if you're undecided you're trying to make up your mind, but we've learned is that the information posted high in google search results will shift opinions among undecided people dramatically because people trust google and they especially trust high ranking search results. that's why 50% of all clicks go to the t top to items. >> is at what google did? >> i can't say what google did but i can tell you what we found. we found a very dramatic pro hillary clinton bias on google but not the other search engines and they all search positions on

search results. that's quite dramatic. >> so it's front loaded pro hillary, anti- trump. who does it if google doesn't? just happens? somebody has to put information in for information to come up. google tends to say is it's an organic phenomena , organic

meaning all generated by users. entirely the fault of users -- it's nonsense because in the controlled experiment i run, i determined which candidate is favored in concert results or can mix it up for neither candidate. so google actually has total control over what users see. so to blame this bias on users, it doesn't make sense. >> these algorithms and models set up, people set up algorithms, don't they? >> people create the algorithms to begin with, for sure. one of the recent whistleblowers from google said we make our algorithms do what we wanto, thm to butls the fact is, google acknowledges adjusting their algorithms at least 100 times a year. we also now know for sure that google uses blacklists and they also wreak ranking, ranking, fringe ranking, they are constantly making manual adjustments to what we see. so they havey control whether they deny it or not, they have complete control over what we see and if there's bias favoring

one candidate or party, the fact is they have control over that. >> has google shown political bias in the past? >> it's a matter of record at the top executives and employees have a very strong liberal bias. i sympathize with that. i don't like the fact that the bias is getting expressed in a way that is interfering with the free and fair election but typically 95% or more of donations from google go to democrats. the former head of google, eric offered in writing to run the clintons campaign in 2016.

hillary clinton chief technology officer, stephanie right before she came to the race team, she was an executive at google and google and alphabet the parent company, they were the largest donors in 2016. >> let me say for the record, the ceo of google wants to come on and have a discussion with me. >> more than welcome, i would encourage it. let's continue. 2018, democrats pick up a whole bunch of seats. did you monitor that? >> this time we had moreer than 160 field agents. we focused, because midterm elections on three republican districts in orange county, california, thinking perhaps maybe if there's something going

on with search results, maybebee would pick it up in those counties. in all three counties, the democrat won, we measured substantial bias, liberal bias in the google search engine but not being or yahoo. we are finding and one but not the others. that level of bias very easily be the margins that occurred and even more problematic here, if that level of bias had been present in google, nation wide for all the districts that would have shifted to democrats, upwards of 78.2 million votes

spread across many races but the point is, it's enormous. the two big problems here besides the fact that there are a lot of folks, this is occurring subliminally, without people's knowledge. people can see that bias search result. >> subliminally? people can't find a bias. this is very important. this where there are probably people who disagree. i want to get into this. this is very important. don't forget to check this out most week nights. 844 --- or place tv.com and sign up there. don't forget, best time seller.

if you haven't got it, i encourage you to get it. we'll be right back. and

♪ i

from the couldn't be prouders to the wait did we just win-ners. everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy a new samsung note. click, call or visit a store today.

subliminal, no paper trail, how do we know then? >> if someone on my staff brings me search results that they are getting ready to use an experiment, controlled randomized experiment, i can't even tell there's bias. how would you know? would have to click on all the links and then make sense of it all. it's virtually impossible so when we do big studies, it's typical that 95% of the people in the study can't detect any bias even though we are showing them highly biased search results. so that's exactly the number we got in the study we got in india in 2014. more than 2000 undecided voters throughout india participating in our study and we shifted opinions and vote exactly as we had done in other studies and

countries but 95.5% of the people couldn't see the bias. here's where this really get creepy. the very small number of people who can see the bias, they shift even farther in the direction of the bias. so merely being able to see it, does not protect you from it. >> and there's no paper trail. you prove it throughout, you can track it. >> normally, that is right, no paper trail. internally at google, we know from an e-mail from last year, they call these a femoral experiment. that means you type in a>> searh

term, where flashing suggestions, those are very powerful manipulators. there does flashing at you and then they disappear. search results appear maybe you click on something and then that disappears. it's short-lived, it's not stored anywhere. once it's gone, you cannot go back and re- instructed. they know this. they understand the power that has two shift opinions on anything and shift voting preferences. 2016, i built the first ever system to preserve one of these experiments us. t in the months leading up to it, search results on google, bing and yahoo. looking over their shoulders and

capturing it before it disappears. we don't have monitoring systems in place, all of these experiments us are gone. so the programmers, executives understand how this works for well but once these experiments have an impact on people, they disappear and authorities can't trace them. >> 2016, google went full out.>> for hillary and against trump. but trump one. how do you explain that? >> i don't think google or facebook or these companies actually went full out. i think they held back. there are a number of things i study now and beyond search

results, which can also be used to shift opinions and votes. there are many indications that a lot of these techniques were not being used. i think they were overconfident, they were certain that hillary clinton would win. i think they were more aggressive in 2018. i have some evidence to support that. i'm pretty sure in 2020, they will go all out. release every possible technique. >> when you say they will call out to defeat trump, all means right up to election day, pushing these agendas. for example, if they put on their site as they did in the past, go vote, they had go vote, 2016? >> 2018.

>> the women said look at that, a public service, go vote. you don't think it was a public service at all. >> i published an article in which i included all the calculations during this was actually just a vote in ablation. that's something illla know him studying and understanding better. but -- google knows full well that more democrats on the left leaning people, like myself, use google more than republicans do. so they know ifdohe they presena prompt, they know it will have a bigger impact on democrats and republicans and i calculated that one manipulation in 2018 give at least 800,000 more votes than democrats than republicans. but that's an example of another kind of very subtle many

ablation which on then. surface doesn't even look like a manipulation. it looks like a public service. >> this is fascinating to me. if google knows who's using google and you know a lot about each one of us, if not more democrats than republicans and conservatives, that means their ability to try and affect the outcome off election is scientific. i want to push through this aa little more. we'll be right back. k.

live from america's news headquarters. the u.s. stands ready to release oil from a strategic reserves if necessary. this following an attack by rebels on the world's largest oil processing facility in saudi arabia and major oilfield saturday. half of the supplies in the world largest exporter of oil. pompeo blames iran and urging all nations to condemn the attack. the hurricane center says this hurricane will reach hurricane strength by sunday night. it's unexpected to threaten land

but this is still causing dangerous swells along georgia, south carolina this weekend. the government has discontinued tropical storm warning. back to life,w liberty and when. >> i want to read another couple of sentences. laboratory and online experiments conducted in the u.s., we were able to boost the proportion of people who favored any candidate between 37 and 63% after just one search session. the impact of biased rankings repeatedly over a period of weeks or months would be larger. so this is ubiquitous.

the more they do it, the more they are able to tip the scale toward one candidate or another. correct? >> i have no doubt this is occurring at this moment.n without monitoring systems in place to capture these experiences, there is no way to know. i'm sure right now, they're having an impact on registering to vote. they will impact the way that primaries go from they will have a big say on who gets nominated by the democrats. they are using this power, at least that's what the whistleblowers suggest, a power that i've been studying for a long time now, they are using it and it's not just election day. they will use it every single day leading up to election day. >> so you have been doing these studies for some time. these leaks or whistleblowers,

say wait a minute, that's what my studies show. >> what i really say is, i told you so. >> how does the average person who goes on google defend themselves? >> you have to be insane if you're actually usingal google.com. >> i use bing, personally. >> haven't even talked about the surveillance problem, the massive tracking occurring. censorship problem, you shouldn't be using google or gmail because of the surveillance or chrome, another surveillance 12. so what you say to people using these things? look, just the surveillance issue alone should make you think twice. >> you going to google, people want to use google. you can use whatever you want. they go into google, with the information given to us, just tn be alerted to this, but it's not

the problem, it's maybe these people who are d not watching te show or are unaware that they are being psychologically manipulated in the sense that they are being pushed one way or another. limited or biased information and that sort of thing. they used to call this propaganda. is not a proper word or not? >> this is way beyond propaganda for any manipulation that has existed. for example, you start to type o search and, my research shows two things. my research shows just by s manipulating suggestions they flash that you, we can turn a 5050 split among undecided voters into a 90 -- ten split with no one having the slightest idea that we are doing it.

your pink mini bladed from the very first character you type. if you doubt that, type the letter a. if you type the letter a, there's a good chance when the suggestions flash at you from the first, second or third position you will see amazon. you might even i see in two or l three positions. amazon is google's largest advertiser in google extends more traffic to amazon than any other traffic source. these are business partners and google wants you to go back. they are constantly nudging you with these suggestions and when they finally show you that boost the state downno below, if they-

they know what they're doing. they understand the power the search suggestions have. the answer boxes that they are now showing. >> we've gone from search engine to something much bigger. i'll tell you what is on to me. we know more about mobile's activities inside and outside the company, what they do day today. we know more about most major corporations in this country, what they can do. we don't really hide it anymore. we really don't know. about these tech companies.. we don't know how google functions. i watch these members of congress, some of them are serious, people trying to get information. you don't get information. it's not just google, it's other companies, too. it's as if they felt a tone offt secrecy. you can't break into what they are doing and how they're manipulating. so here you are one guy, maybe

with a handful of helpers from the outside monitoring this, limited budget and personnel you're able too because of your background and experience in years and years of working on this subject, you're able to find a significant amount of evidence showing thought manipulation. i want to pursue some of this when we get back blaise tv.com. oh -- look at this. freedom of the press. we sold almost half a million copies of this book. thank you, we'll be right back.

all doctor robert epstein this isn't just happening in the

united states, right, it's ha this isn't just happening in the u.s. given election coming up in israel. with prime minister benjamin.it i take it the same people or groups of people in google who do not like president trump probably do not like benjamin. they support each other. is there reason to believe they are probably doing the samear thing? >> they have the ability and power. it's hard to imagine based on recent leaks that they are not exercising that power. the problem is without monitoring systems that are capturing a femoral experience, we'll never know.

>> the other thing that strikes me as i talk to you, they are having an enormous effect on elections, troop? >> correct. >> they will go all out in 2020. true? >> i believe they will. but i'm no longer obsessed with the deliberate part of it. even if it's just e an algorit m algorithm -- >> passive-aggressive is still aggressive. onthe algorithms are based 2016, anti- trump. >> they are not pro trump. it's hard to imagine their algorithms or employees are broke trump. hard to imagine that. they can do more in 2020 than 2016? >> oh yes, back then, i was only studying one kind, i've identified since then about a dozen, i'm starting seven right now. there's a lot of things i can do. >> these whistleblowers you talk about, have any that google has

moved to the right, they like trump, have you found that?ng >> the people they have been firing for people who have quit have been conservatives. >> have you found any information that demonstrates theirty anti- democrat or liber? >> quite the contrary. if google gets away with this. you're saying they can affect millions of votes. >> have calculated 2020, there's 15 million votes on the line. that's how many boats that could be shifted, possibly by these subtle largely invisible online techniques. >> the federal election commission -- whether you believe in these or not, they exist.

there they are. individuals are primary, $2700 max. total of $5400. you have these huge packs, companies can set up for advocacy purposes, individuals set them up as well and have significant amounts you condone it but there's still limits. google can influence an election in a significant way. they have to report anything. what would you suggest the value of their influence in american dollars might be? >> if they allow companies to buy the influence that they are having, it would be in the billions.

it's priceless really, they can do things on a massive scale that no company or campaign can do they can do things invisibly. it's hard for a campaign can do. they can do things in a way that leaves no paper trail. >> unless somebody isn't caught it takes a picture says okay, now i have it, i have a trail for you. is anyone doing it other than you? >> to my knowledge, and this is sad to say but to my knowledge, there's just me and my helpers and associates, that's it. >> when we come back, i have a question for you, for 2020, how are you planning to monitor

this? i don't mean t just the electio, i mean the lead up to the election to the american people can know what's taking place. we'll be right back.

the game doesn't end after a spectacular touchdown grab

because there's always another team looking to punch one in. with nfl redzone from nfl network on xfinity, you get every touchdown from every game on sunday afternoons, all season long. watch every breakout star, every heart-pounding running attack, and every big time defensive stop. sundays were made for football on xfinity. that's simple, easy, awesome. add the sports entertainment package for nfl redzone. click, call, or visit a store today to learn more.

because there's always another team looking to punch one in. a spectacular touchdown grab with nfl redzone from nfl network on xfinity, you get every touchdown from every game on sunday afternoons, all season long. watch every breakout star, every heart-pounding running attack, and every big time defensive stop. sundays were made for football on xfinity. that's simple, easy, awesome. add the sports entertainment package for nfl redzone. click, call, or visit a store today to learn more. doctor robert epstein, in the

2020 election, it's not that far away, other than you the 2020 election is coming. it's not that far away. other than you, nobody is monitoring this. we even knows how. the lead up to the election given the consequences given the effect on the electoral process, google is out there not only gearing up but doing their thing right now, what do we do? >> i'm hoping to build a very large, much larger than the systems i felt before, and monitor a wide variety of phenomena, e-mail suppression that's going on now, all kinds going on onr youtube, shadow banning on twitter, new leads, promoting other leads, and helping to build a very big system.

keep an eye on what is happening and use artificial intelligence to spot these shenanigans as they t are occurring. if i'm unable to build that system, we will never know why the winners one. >> let me ask you this. the media, there exception to your findings, how has it been? >> until a couple of weeks ago, the reception was pretty good but a couple weeks ago, president trump tweeted about some of my findings from 2016. he got a couple of things slightly wrong. and hillary clinton tweeted back at him saying my work had been debunked and it was all based on

21 undecided voters. >> it didn't sound like she got anything -- >> you are a hillary supporter. >> a huge hillary supporter.su i'm huge supporter of the clintons. then mainstream media, they all took up her message. at this moment in time, i don't understand how this happened. it makes no sense y to me. but that's what's happened. >> i can say why. you are trying to bring the objective analysis to our electoral process and an influence on that process that is under the radar. if we have new operations, have

investigative reporters, new york times and washington post and they pursue it and look into it but they don't. so they attack you. democrat party press. that's what i call it. all that said, if you find more and more information and yet the information is censored by the mass media, it makes it much more difficult. you could go toic the media, around network in newspapers and so forth, social media which i think is where your word is spreading concern websites and so forth. >> i could but it's very hard to write these companies. facebook controls the largest social media platform that there is. if facebook wants to suppress

your message, they can. google controls 90.2% worldwide. that's the largest search engine to control 2.5% of searches. if major media wants to suppress my findings, which are rocksolid, very carefully done, of they want to suppress my findings, or want to criticize me in some way, they are hard to fight. >> have you been on meet the press? >> no. >> have you been invited on this week? >> no. >> any of the major shows? >> no. >> any major networks news program? >> no. >> i just wanted to understand. we'll be right back. so

0. mark: if i understand you correctly, you are saying the lead-up to the 2020 election, google will do even more intensely than it was doing in 2016. is that correct? >> absolutely. that's my belief. mark: are you monitoring them now? >> no. mark: are you going to start monitoring them again soon? >> i hope to. mark: as you do this, you will make public what you are finding as best you can? >> correct. mark: i'm concerned if you are not monitoring them with your unique skills, other people don't have the skills. is it surprising that you have received the reception you have from democrat party friendly outlets? >> surprising is not quite the

word. mark: upsetting. >> upsetting, my head is spinning. mark: t because you are being personally attacked? >> and i have had a spotless reputation as a scientist and scholar for almost 40 years. my work meets the highest standard of scientific integrity always. mark:ci here is your work. the charts, the billion foot notes. you are more transparent than google. page after page. do you think anybody has read this other than me? >> i doubt it. mark:he do you think don lemon read this? do you think andrea mitchell read this? >> that was from the proceedings of the national academy of science, one of the top journals in the world. that paper you are holding in your hand has been downloaded from their website 200,000 times and it was ranked in the top 1%

of all scientific papers in all fields. but, no, i don't think many people have read it. mark: why do you think the media won't read it? >> i think there is a message here they don't want to hear. at the moment the tech companies are supporting people who lean left, supporting democrats, which s i like those, i like democrats. you don't know who they are going to support next year. we should put democracy, our nation, the fee and fair elections ahead of any party or candidate. that's my message. that's why we are speaking out. mark: the title of the report is the search engine manipulation effect on its possible impact on the outcome of elections. you can download this if you

want to check it out. we are going to monitor this, too. w it's very, very important. see you next time on "life, liberty & levin." [♪] jesse: welcome to. "watters' world," i'm jesse watters. fact checking fake news. another week, another false story about cnn and trump and russia. the network at the center of another embarrassing story claiming the cia was forced to tract a high-level spy inside russia in 2017 because president trump mishandled classified intelligence and risked exposing the asset's identity. the reporter behind the story, former obama administration official turned national security correspondent jim scioto.