While I was reading Noble’s book, I searched every example that she used for how google searches came up with harmful information about minorities. I found that all of these examples have now been remedied, now the first thing that comes up on Google when you search black girls is Black Girls Code. I assume that people over the last five years have not changed what they are searching, but google either changed their algorithm or under pressure they curated the results for that search and other searches that have controversial results related to minorities. I am inclined to think that they likely curated the results, but either way that is further evidence that these platforms could choose to stand up for these individuals with less power, but they did not. To me, this is reminiscent of our discussions about content moderation. These platforms make decisions about what they will and will not allow on their platform, and often these decisions are made with advertisers’ best interests in mind above anything else. This is often a topic of debate on youtube as many YouTubers who talk about “controversial” issues that they think are important to discuss are demonetized because advertisers don’t want their ads on controversial videos. While reading Noble’s book I was reminded of Twitter’s new misinformation policy. Twitter has now decided that they will put a warning on content that contains misinformation. Their first use of this new policy was on a tweet by Trump that was misrepresenting a video by Joe Biden. I think it is a good step for platforms to have a warning for misinformation, but pressure was put on Twitter (as well as Facebook) by Biden’s campaign. Most people don’t have the resources to pressure these platforms the way that Joe Biden and his campaign were able to, so in one sense once again these platforms are prioritizing powerful elites once again just as Noble argued.