It’s good to see Google paying a price.

They are clearly unstoppable at this point, and we will have to wait for them to implode like mega corporations do in cyberpunk fiction – but at least we can take some vindication when someone says something to them.

AP:

France’s anti-competition watchdog decided Monday to fine Google 220 million euros ($268 million) for abusing its “dominant position” in the online advertising business, an unprecedented move, the body said.

Practices used by Google “are particularly serious because they penalize Google’s competitors” in certain markets and publishers of mobile sites and applications, the statement by the Competition Authority said.

“The authority recalls that a company in a dominant position is subject to a particular responsibility, that of not undermining,” the statement said.

Google, based in Mountain View, California, did not dispute the facts and opted to settle, proposing changes, the statement said.

The head of the authority, Isabelle de Silva, said the decision was unprecedented.

“(It’s) the first decision in the world to look into complex algorithmic auctions processes through which online display advertising works,” she said.

It may well be unprecedented, but it’s an irrelevant fine.

This is pocket change for Google.

In the words of Steven Seagal: “Without being able to arrest people, when we just fine them, they are probably making more money off the production of the things that are defiling the environment.”

Once again, we see that the most accurate of any of the classic sci-fi writers – more accurate than either George Orwell or Aldous Huxley – was Philip K. Dick.

Dick was the only one who really understood how much corporations and the advertising industry would play a role in shaping the direction of the enslavement technology, and how the goals of the corporate marketers would overlap with the goals of the tyrannical governmental entity. Dick was also the only one who grasped the level of absurdity we would be dealing with during the end times, and the role that sheer, base stupidity would play in the unraveling of the traditional social, political and economic order.

BBC:

The advertising industry is now turning to technology that can seamlessly insert computer-generated images.

So items can be digitally added to almost any movie or TV show. For example, advertisers could put new labels on the champagne bottles in Rick’s Cafe in Casablanca, add different background neon advertising signs to Ocean’s 11, or get Charlie Chaplin to promote a fizzy drink.

And then a few weeks, months or years later the added products can be easily switched to different brands.

One of the firms that has developed the ability to do this is UK advertising business Mirriad. Its technology is now being used by a Chinese video streaming website, and the makers of hit US TV show Modern Family have also tried it out.

Mirriad’s chief executive Stephan Beringer expects such digital product placement to become widespread. His firm came up with the process after previously making movie special effects.

“We started out working in movies,” he says. “Our chief scientist Philip McLauchlan, with his team, came up with the technology that won an Academy Award for the film Black Swan.

“The technology can ‘read’ an image, it understands the depth, the motion, the fabric, anything. So you can introduce new images that basically the human eye does not realise has been done after the fact, after the production.”

…

Roy Taylor, the chief executive of Californian-based business Ryff, says his firm is taking digital product insertion one stage further.

It has developed the technology whereby the product placement is targeted at individuals, and changes depending on who is watching.

So if you like wine then the hero of a film could be drinking a particular bottle that you might be tempted to try. Or if you are teetotal the star might be sipping on a bottle of branded water.

Ryff can do this if you are watching a film on a laptop, smartphone or smart TV, by tracking what you previously bought or looked at online. It works in the same way that online adverts pop up on websites based on your past purchasing or viewing history.

This is being developed as an advertisement technology, but the potential for social manipulation is limitless.

We have often talked about the fact that individuals will be targeted by algorithms, and that their entire concept of reality could be uniquely tailored. That is what they are talking about here – tailoring individual realities. There is no reason that a news reader can’t read different news items to different people, showing different events which will psychologically affect them differently. In a society of total alienation, which is what the virus regime is, people will not be able to check notes with others in a meaningful way.

This could and will also induce psychosis, where people’s memories stop lining up with what they’re seeing, and they believe they are going insane. There is nothing that makes a person more likely to go insane than believing they are going insane. Of course, their mood can be monitored, and what they receive on TV and through internet media can be targeted to stimulate an emotional response.

Facebook has been caught doing this, actually.

They proved that they were able to manipulate people’s emotions using just their news feed. They were also able to gauge their emotions based on their internet activity.

Advertisement has always been a nightmare system of unwinding the human psychology into a series of loose strings and then tying them up into knots.

It was bad enough when the girl of your dreams was trying to get you to buy the latest Sonic remake.

You could end up in a situation where your dead grandmother pops up on your phone screen and says: “honey, I just wanted to remind you it’s time to go to get your vaccine booster shot. You’re always forgetting things, so I just thought I’d remind you. And while you’re on the way, you might as well treat yourself to a nice cool glass of Coca-Cola.”

There are no conceivable limits to this.

The horror… The horror…

Everything is gay and stupid now, and we’re just gonna have to get used to it.

Or we could, you know, just gas the kikes.

CNN:

An advertisement juxtaposing male astronauts with a woman sitting by a stroller, and another depicting two hapless dads, are the first casualties of a British ban on gender stereotypes in advertising.

The ads, for Volkswagen and Philadelphia cream cheese, were investigated by the UK Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) after viewers complained they perpetuated gender stereotypes.

New rules that came into force in June prohibit depictions of gender that “are likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offense.”

Imagine living in an open-air Moslem rape camp, and this being your main preoccupation.

BTW, you guys ever tried typing “Rotherham” in the JewTube search bar?

Literally every result is about their shitty football team whose videos mostly get a few thousand views.

Meanwhile, there’s no mention of the Moslem rape jihad happening there, even though videos about that have hundreds of thousands or millions of views.

I’m sure that’s just an (((accident))).

The Volkswagen commercial shows a number of primarily male people taking part in adventurous activities — two male astronauts in space, and a male athlete with a prosthetic leg doing the long jump — before cutting to a mother sitting on a park bench next to a stroller. It prompted three complaints from viewers, and the ASA found it showed a woman “engaged in a stereotypical care-giving role.”

“We acknowledged that becoming a parent was a life-changing experience that required significant adaptation, but taking care of children was a role that was stereotypically associated with women,” the body added in its ruling.

All it took is 3 “people” – probably old childless women, not real human beings – to get a commercial that probably cost hundreds of thousands of dollars banned?

Yes, I like it.

Big corporations are part of what got us into this mess, and I hope they suffer.

It goes without saying that if you’re a Brit and you’re not abusing this law as much as humanly possible, and making as many complaints as you can… Well, you’d probably still be a cuck anyway, but you’d be lower on the scale.

And BTW – women taking care of children comes from eons of evolution, not “stereotypes.”

A second commercial for Philadelphia cream cheese showed two dads looking after their children at a restaurant with a conveyer belt.

The men become so distracted by the food that they lose sight of their babies, who end up circling the restaurant on the belt. “Let’s not tell mom,” says one, after rescuing his child. Over 125 viewers complained.

“We acknowledged the action was intended to be light-hearted and comical and there was no sense that the children were in danger,” the ASA said in its decision.

“We considered, however, that the men were portrayed as somewhat hapless and inattentive, which resulted in them being unable to care for the children effectively,” they added. “We did not consider that the use of humour in the ad mitigated the effect of the harmful stereotype.”

Neither ad can appear in its current form following the ruling.

This is so idiotic I can’t even get angry over it.

The new rules follow a review by the ASA, published in 2017, which found that harmful stereotypes reinforced by advertising “can restrict the choices, aspirations and opportunities of children, young people and adults.”

A public furor over a 2015 poster on the walls of London’s subway system, showing a woman in a bikini with the words “Are you beach body ready?,” prompted the regulator to look into all gender portrayals in advertising.

Ah yes, that catastrophic incident that triggered 99% of all the ugly women in the world.

These bitches whine about misogyny and “hatred of women,” but 99% of people who hate women are other – usually childless and/or ugly – women.

The ad — for a weight-loss product — was not initially banned by the ASA, as it did not explicitly break any rules, but the regulator eventually took action due to its health claims.

“Our evidence shows how harmful gender stereotypes in ads can contribute to inequality in society, with costs for all of us,” Guy Parker, chief executive of the ASA, said in a statement in June.

The ASA said commercials will still be allowed to show “glamorous, attractive, successful, aspirational or healthy people or lifestyles.”

Ads that show men or women carrying out tasks with which their genders are sometimes associated, such as women shopping, will also be permitted.

I’m shocked that this cuck lied…

Making ads GREAT AGAIN is just another thing to do after we eradicate the Semitic infection.

And we will.

This is all just getting ultra-goofy.

It’s not even scary anymore. The whole concept of social-engineering used to be scary.

The Guardian:

Adverts showing a woman struggling to park a car or a man refusing to do housework while his wife cooks dinner will be banned from next year as part of an industry-wide crackdown on sexist stereotypes.

Under the new rules, British companies will no longer be able to create promotions that depict men and women engaged in gender-stereotypical activities, amid fears that such depictions are contributing to pay inequality and causing psychological harm.

Adverts will no longer be able to show a person failing to achieve a task specifically because of their gender, such as a man unable to change a nappy or a woman unable to do DIY.

The rules will also ban adverts that suggest that transforming your body will make you romantically successful, while also clarifying rules on the sexualisation of young women.

…

Members of the public will be able to report adverts to the regulator if they feel they breach the code.

The ASA’s Ella Smillie, who helped to devise the new rules, said: “We don’t see ourselves as social engineers, we’re reflecting the changing standards in society. Changing ad regulation isn’t going to end gender inequality but we know advertising can reinforce harmful gender stereotypes, which can limit people’s choices or potential in life.”

This ad was banned in 2015:

Because the woman is sexy.

So there you have a real kind of body-shaming going on – only the woman is shamed for being healthy and attractive, rather than for being an unhealthy slob. Jews generally want to promote ugliness and depravity, so it is logical that while promoting fatness as good they would then flip around and say that being fit and healthy is bad.

It is a wee bit funny that we have a new form of puritanism arising out of this after the Jews made this whole huge push for sexualization of everything. As it turns out, the sexualization of everything was just a method of attack on existing religious, cultural and moral standards regarding sex, and was not an end goal in itself.

That’s something I don’t really think very many people could have seen coming back in the 1990s.

I was growing up in the 90s, and I very much remember older people being outraged by the sexualization of everything. In particular, women were upset about it.

Men could be upset about hyper-sexualization of media too, but they would have to be somewhat intellectual to get to that level. Women on the other hand respond instinctively, because they naturally don’t want men looking at other women.

No men are going to push for ads with physically fit men to be banned.

If a fat man sees such an ad, rather than complaining that the healthy man is trying to “shame” him, he thinks “yeah, maybe I need to get to the gym.” Or he is just comfortable with the idea that other people look better than him.

It’s also women that are concerned about the innocence of children, and tend to push for things to be banned based on violations of children’s innocence, and when you have sexy-sexy stuff everywhere in society, children are inevitably exposed to it. As a non-sexual example of this, in the 80s-90s, there were also women pushing to protect children from Dungeons and Dragons, claiming that it was satanic.

They were also big on stopping video game violence.

Nothing about our society is anything other than Jews exploiting instincts, so it makes sense that they played on the male instinct to look at sexy women and now they’re playing on the female instinct to stop men from doing that.

Women also have an instinct to challenge men. In their own warped psyches, this is a test for the value of the man, to see if he is able to control her. So in her mind, what she actually wants is for the man to demonstrate that he can control her – that is the purpose of rebellious female behavior. However, in the modern system, where men are indoctrinated to believe they shouldn’t control women, and where they are punished both socially and legally for attempting to do that, women just continue to push and agitate for control over men.

This rebellious instinct of women is the core driver of feminism. It’s funny that the women themselves are actually pushing further and further and further because they want men to rise up and put them back in their place.

It is the instinct that they push the buttons of to get women to demand that they can’t be shown cleaning a house in an ad. Or struggling with automobiles.

Nagging is a stereotype that will no doubt be banned from ads, but the whole concept of banning these ads is a form of nagging. Funny that.

There’s so many things wrong about this, I don’t think I can write about all of them. But there is one thing I do know – that 99% of all the problems our race has derives from White men not doing two basic, common sense obligations we have as men of this planet’s master race – gassing kikes and smacking women.

Breitbart:

Cooking, cleaning mums will be banned in advertisements across the UK from next year, following a study which claimed traditional gender roles are “harmful and outdated”.

They’re so harmful and outdated that every country that gave up on them is slowly dying…

This coincides perfectly with an IQ map, btw

The decision to tighten regulation was announced by the Committees of Advertising Practice (CAP) this week, after a report published in summer identified gender stereotypes in adverts as a driver of inequality between men and women.

“Wherever they appear or are reinforced, gender stereotypes can lead to mental, physical and social harm which can limit the potential of groups and individuals,” the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) alleged in its study.

Yes, they’re harmful because professor Shlomo said “Fuck biology!” in his sociology class, and that’s all the proof you retards needed.

You’d think that anyone who cared about women in even the slightest bit would be more worried about Britain being a giant open-air Moslem rape camp, but apparently not.

Depictions deemed problematic include “family members creating a mess while a woman has sole responsibility for cleaning it up”, and adverts which “[suggest that] a specific activity is inappropriate for boys because it is stereotypically associated with girls, or vice-versa.”

There are things that boys can and can’t do, and things that girls can and can’t do. Among the things girls can’t do is “anything that doesn’t directly involve raising children and cooking” for reasons that should be obvious for anyone who read the above paragraph.

Nanette Newman, an actress who appeared in 1980s Fairy Liquid commercials, told the Daily Mailthe ban is “ridiculously over the top”.

“What a bizarre world we live in where the adverts I starred in might today be considered harmful, yet it’s considered perfectly acceptable for women to be shown on mainstream TV having sex,” she told the Mail.

You’re in the wrong century, woman. Get with the times.

While campaigns to change the view of society presented in advertisements is intended to increase equality, it may be having the effect of skewing representations in a different way.

Breitbart London reported in August a major survey of major advertising companies in Britain which found that businesses are over-representing ethnic minorities and homosexual in their marketing in order to ward off accusations of bigotry.

The majority of 500 advertisers surveyed admitting producing campaigns which featured same-sex couples and non-traditional families even if doing so clashed with their brand identity, while half of respondents reported using fewer white people, who they said no longer represented “modern society”.

Those of you who are British need to read the above^ quote 10 times.

As shocking as it might sound, White people (including non-British White people who live in Britain) are still almost 90% of the total population, even thought that’s changing rapidly. These people, who form the vast majority of the populace, are told they “don’t represent modern society” without any of them batting an eye about it.

And all they had to do to get here was let yourself be ruled by a fat drunk who owed money to some kikes.

“For Danzig, LMAO!”

Campaigners last week demanded toy retailers reboot their catalogues to depict a world in which boys are as likely to play with dolls as girls, after a study on Christmas toy catalogues found girls were nearly seven times more likely to be shown engaging in activities linked to caring or nurturing than young boys.

Hoping to socially engineer a future in which men and women are indistinguishable, the Let Toys Be Toys campaign claims that presenting play in a way that suggests some activities are linked more to boys or girls inflicts “long-lasting” harm on children.

May I remind you that the imbeciles who are worrying about this crap are living in a literal Moslem rape camp, where little girls are gang-raped by dozens of subhumans in one night, get murdered and have their bodies cooked into kebabs tortured by having their tongues nailed to tables… I could go on like this for a while.

While Let Toys Be Toys insists that gender stereotypes are “tired and out of date”, research suggests that the sexes have a biological predisposition to certain toys, with children as young as nine months-old preferring toys specific to their gender.

The trend has also been seen in other primates, with scientists having observed that male rhesus monkeys preferred to play with wheeled toys, such as toy trucks over plush dolls, which were preferred by the females.

Yeah but patriarchy starts affecting you from the womb, right? Even monkeys can’t get away from the evil of “gender stereotyping” can they?

I hate these vermin… The feminists, the faggots, the cucks.

But above all else, I hate the source of this filth and degeneracy that pervades almost every last inch of the White world.

And that source is the kike.

Next time, the holocaust is gonna be real.