Well, folks, much like hillary clinton's emails in 2016, one of the most divisive things that you could talk about from the 2020 election has to do with hunter biden's laptop and the hunter biden. Laptop story is now surfacing again thanks to the connection of hunter biden's, laptop story and potential censorship by the team that francis hogan worked on at facebook. Francis hogan, of course, is the whistleblower in the facebook testimony that we heard from congress today about the failures of facebook, especially with its facebook, algorithm and folks in this video we're going to talk about facebook's response. So, let's catch you up to speed all right.

So really really quick, brief overview here on hunter biden's laptop, and i apologize to the left. If i miss something - and i apologize to the right, if i miss something talking about things, this decisive is honestly stupid because i probably am not going to make people who care about both sides really happy, because i'm going to give a brief overview, i'm not going To go super deep on this, but i want the gist of why this is coming up again to be known. So that way we can talk about what the real issue at hand is. So, let's give this a shot back.

In 2020, the new york post wrote an article on email, supposedly obtained from hunter biden's laptop who's. Joe biden's son hunter biden had allegedly left his laptop at a repair shop in delaware in april of 2019, and the store owner is apparently and technically legally blind and said. He tried to reach hunter biden to return his laptop numerous times before. Finally, taking the laptop and deciding to look at the laptop itself, apparently when he looked through the laptop despite being legally blind, there was a big reveal that came out that essentially had to do with an email from april of 2019.

That said, dear hunter, thank you for inviting me to dc and giving me the opportunity to meet your father and spend some time together. It's really an honor and pleasure reads: the email, and apparently this is written by an advisor to the board of burisma hunter, had also been a board member of this company since 2014, and the big issue here is wait. A minute is hunter biden, leveraging the fact that he's joe biden's son to get political favors and set up meetings now on the left. We hear this is not real on the right.

We hear. Oh, no, it's real. In fact, even political has referenced that these emails exist. There are potentially videos that came from allegedly joe or hunter biden's laptop, showing hunter biden having sex with a woman and then talking about things and it's clearly hunter biden.

This story goes deep. The left argues back and says: well wait a minute, of course hunter and hunter's attorney say they have no idea and just say you can't credit rudy giuliani, because sure rudy giuliani may have been involved in releasing and breaking this story and maybe rudy giuliani's credibility has Been you know called into question recently, but the right says that doesn't take away from the fact that the story happened. And why does this particular story matter? Because individuals believe that if this story had proper media coverage, the results of the 2020 election, which were heavily disputed, could have potentially been different. This is why the left calls this fake news and a conspiracy theory, and this is why left-leaning big tech also played a role in censoring.

This hunter biden story because it was deemed to be misinformation and there were campaigns to limit misinformation in the 2020 election, except most of the misinformation that was limited was information that would have favored the right or donald trump's campaign, and this is where people on the Left say: well, that's just because the people on the right are the ones sharing all the misinformation and the people on the right are like. No, that's because y'all are big. Tech and big tech is donating big dollars to joe biden, and now i'm going to take a step back from this, because you could see how insanely crazy this stuff gets, and all i'm going to say here is as crazy as i look right now. I ran for governor in 2021 in the recall election in california.

Now i play second after larry elder to replace gavin newsom, and i'm very proud of that. I got a lot of votes very, very proud of that, but i lost and in my campaign i realized that when i made my campaign announcement, facebook donated over 30 million dollars on behalf of gavin newsom to gavin newsom's campaign, and my announcement post just happened to Get deleted from instagram and when fox news reached out they're like oh, that was a mistake. Sorry, and they put my post back up. Twitter, refuses to verify me despite meeting all of the eligibility criteria to be verified and i'm also running against an existing democratic establishment.

Governor who, in the future, wants to become president who has big relations with corporate tech. So i'm not trying to say i'm on the left or right, i'm just trying to say what i'm literally saying. There's a lot going on with this hunter biden, email stuff, and when i ran my campaign there were definitely some things that were sus. Okay, definitely suspect.

Now the right side calls the hunter biden, email scandal, a big smoking gun of unfairness in elections, which fairness is actually exactly what francis hogan talked about. As a member of wait for the facebook civic integrity team, the facebook integrity team, civic, entire egg integrity team was something that uh francis was a part of she's the whistleblower who talked and testified in congress today about what facebook was doing wrong. How facebook's algorithms are unhealthy for children for younger girls and, potentially so political divisiveness by encouraging extreme or outrageous content to be showed to people who were who are most likely to share it? So, in other words, somebody who's on the left is most likely to share outrageous content that benefits the left. Somebody on the right is most likely to share outrageous content that benefits the right, and so really the videos and articles that get shared aren't videos that try to be neutral, they're, the ones that get you really pissed off and want to want to share that information With your side and that algorithms pick up on, they see that engagement and share that with users more and more and more.

I understand this because i am a youtube content creator and as a youtube content creator. I know that if you are likely to share a video, my video is likely to do exponentially better than if you do not share the video, but it has to be legitimate share because it goes beyond just the first share. I could ask you to share the video, but it does does no good if the next person doesn't watch it or doesn't share it as well. It's really when you get the chain of shares, that's when videos go viral and that's how they circulate their communities over and over again now, what does this hunter biden laptop have to do with francis well, francis being part of the facebook civic integrity team apparently links Her to being part of the team that censored the biden laptop story from facebook, and so now folks, are calling the credibility of francis hogan into question.

Since she was part of that team, where she's encouraging fairness yet apparently might have been on the team that censored. The hunter biden laptop story during the 2020 election now facebook has responded to the hearing today. Facebook says that francis hogan was a less than two-year employee, had no direct reports or knowledge of how algorithms work at facebook never attended decision. Point meetings with corporate level executives testified six times to not working on the subject matter.

She was being uh essentially subpoenaed upon not subpoenaed upon was testifying upon. Facebook does not agree with the conclusion she makes and facebook says yeah. We should have some standard rules for the internet, but what's really important here is that now, all of a sudden, this entire facebook leak and facebook crisis has evolved, and this is the big bottom line. So if you're confused here, here's the big bottom line, i broke down what francis said this morning and i gave my summary thoughts.

I caught you up on the hunter biden. Laptop story what's happening. Now, though, is media specifically social media, whether it's algorithmic or not, whether it's twitter, youtube or facebook or whatever, is turning the story into a story about hunter biden's laptop and the story of censorship? Again, people who have more right, leaning inclinations, are likely to call the francis hogan debate over facebook censorship and that anybody who wants to change the algorithm at facebook wants to censor content and the way it should be shared and media on the other side is saying: No, this is not about censorship. This is about protecting people which, of course, just re-aggravates.

The arguments on the other side that people on the right say well, people on the right or people in general should have the right to protect themselves and we don't need to be mommy and daddy for them they should determine themselves. So basically, if you talk about facebook at this point, if your pro changes to the algorithm, apparently you're a liberal, and if your anti changes to the algorithm you're pro your anti-censorship and you're on the right, that's kind of how things are being cast right now and I think it's really a mistake because we're doing what we usually do in politics again we're not talking about the actual issue at hand. It's like the issue is here in the middle, which i'm going to tell you what i think the issue is and then it's kind of like here's, a red herring. Oh, the right says this, and the left says this: let's take politics out of it for a moment and come to what i believe is a fair conclusion.

This facebook crisis debate is a debate over the fact that, when algorithms make decisions in terms of what content algorithms show us, algorithms are more likely to show us content that sparks outrage and emotion. We can agree on that and something that is shareable. Why? Because a it leads to more views and shares which therefore beget more views b. It leads to more creators making content around that information, because when creators see that certain content gets more views, more creators talk about that situation c.

We potentially amplify negative feelings because feelings of negativity travel in a more viral fashion than feelings of positivity. This is, of course, quite the opposite of what we feel, though, when we go on instagram and we're surrounded by only the most beautiful pictures. So you kind of have to bisect this a little bit when you go on instagram you're shown the most beautiful or sexy pictures in general, but when it comes to politics, you're generally shown only the most negative information and algorithms do perpetuate this. We know this and d, these algorithms lead to more profitability for facebook, currently somewhere around 35 dollars per every three months per user.

So now the question is: how much should we allow algorithms to cater the content that we want to see? Should we go back to seeing content chronologically like when you go to the youtube subscriptions feed which a lot of people don't use? Maybe 10 of people use? If you go to the youtube subscription feed, you will see videos chronologically, try it go. Try click subscriptions right now and then see like ah compare the content. That's in your subscription feed to your homepage page. What's more engaging, do you get burnt out scrolling through the subscriptions feed versus the front page where you're like? Oh, i got ta watch it.

I can watch that right or should we have a more clear option to do that on twitter as well as facebook like we have on youtube now we have that on twitter and it's called the notifications tab. That's one way where, if you have notifications on for everyone, you could just sort by basically content chronologically. I actually use that. I don't like my catered content.

I, like all the content, because i want to see it all and i want to see it chronologically. So the question really becomes: should facebook give you that option and then how do we handle the fact that we have young girls who uh basically uh are asked that uh you're uh? Well, here here's the statistic: 32 percent of survey, teen british girls say facebook helped worsen their body, image, facebook and instagram and 13 of british users with with suicidal thoughts already linked their thoughts back to facebook or instagram right. Do our parents responsible for helping intervene here? Is our health care system responsible, providing mental health for this or the british healthcare system? Is facebook responsible for this? That's the real debate that we should be having not censorship, hunter biden or otherwise, but that's the way things work in this world. So i hope you appreciate this video if you did consider, sharing and subscribing and folks we'll see in the next one.

Thank you so much.