The Creepy Line (2018) User Reviews

Pulling the curtain off FB and Google

[drfunk-18075 · 8/10 · 16 June 2019]

I am not sure why so many seem to think this is so biased. The whole point of the documentary is to demonstrate how Google and Facebook are able to manipulate SOME people's opinion through their algorithms. It also shows how they sell information to various buyers through data collection. I am not sure how this falls into the 'conspiracy theory' but apparently it's too much for some viewers. Many of the supporting evidence has been corroborated by other news outlets. To believe that companies do not have agendas and are trying to be as profitable as possible is naive.

"Google has so much information about you, it's scary." - Barry Schwartz, CEO Rusty Brick

[classicsoncall · 8/10 · 18 April 2019]

Over a decade ago, a cousin of mine asked me why I wasn't on Facebook. I stated at the time that I wasn't comfortable with the inherent invasion of privacy, potential for hacking, and selling of information based on one's input. In fact, all of these things have come to pass, including data mining and algorithms designed to steer one's search objectives to those that align with the company's agenda. Particularly disturbing in the case of Google is the fact that all of one's incoming and outgoing e-mails are stored and analyzed for content, and then used for purposes that one doesn't even realize. That's not to say someone is behind the scenes and reading them all, but that the text is analyzed in such a way as to be used for marketing and potential for monetization. The latter part of the documentary is particularly effective in demonstrating how manipulation of search results can and is being used to sway opinion when it comes to an important matter like voting in an election. A handful of reviews here on this board pooh-pooh the subject matter of the program, so all well and good. Personally, as impossible as it might be, I'd prefer to remain under the radar as much as possible by bypassing the entirety of social media.

In the meantime, for the naysayers:

Addendum**** 9-25-2019 - Today's headline from The Houston Chronicle: " 'Newsworthiness' allows politicians to spread misinformation on social media"

Addendum**** 8-31-2019 - Today's NBC News headline: "Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey's account hacked"

Addendum**** 8-29-2019 - Today's New York Post headline: "Apple apologizes for letting contractors eavesdrop on Siri's sex recordings"

Addendum**** 8-26-2019 - Today's headline from Fast Company : "Uh-oh: Silicon Valley is building a Chinese-style social credit system"

Addendum**** 8-17-2019 - Today's headline from the UK's The Sun: "CYBER PANIC" Google warns BILLIONS of website passwords have been hacked - how to check yours now

Addendum**** 8-5-2019 - Today's headline from PJ Media: "Former Google Engineer Says Google Will Try to Prevent Trump's Reelection"

Addendum**** 7-28-2019 - Today's headline from The Guardian: "Apple contractors 'regularly hear confidential details' on Siri recordings"

Addendum**** 7-24-2019 - Today's headline from Project Veritas: "GOOGLE ENGINEER BLOWS WHISTLE: "Are we going to just let the biggest tech companies decide who wins every election from now on?"

Addendum**** 6-27-2019 - Today's headline from the United Kingdom's 'The Sun': "ALEXA ABUSE Amazon's Alexa started calling man a 'SH**HEAD after he cancelled his Amazon Prime subscription"

Addendum**** 6-24-2019 - Today's headline from Project Veritas: "Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent "Trump situation" in 2020

Addendum**** 6-18-2019 Today's headline from U.K.'s 'The Sun': "BANG FOR YOUR ZUCK? Facebook unveils 'it's most invasive and dangerous form of surveillance yet' with launch of Libra cryptocurrency"

Addendum**** 6-12-2019 Today's Observer headline: "Why AI Deepfakes Should Scare the Living Bejeezus Out of You"

Addendum**** 6-5-2019 Today's Wall Street Journal headline: "Hackers May Soon Be Able to Tell What You're Typing-Just By Hearing You Type"

Addendum**** 6-4-2019 Today's NBC News headline: "Quest Diagnostics Says Up to 12 Million Patients May Have Had Financial, Medical, Personal Information Breached"

Addendum**** 5-6-2019 - Today's Washington Post headline: "Alexa has been eavesdropping on you this whole time"

Addendum**** 4-29-2019 - Today's Fortune Magazine headline: "A Goldmine for Identity Thieves: Unprotected Database Puts 65% of American Households At Risk"

Addendum**** 4-27-2019 - Today's Bloomberg News headline: "Retailers Are Tracking Where You Shop -- and Where You Sleep"

Addendum:**** 4-24-2019 - Today's Bloomberg News headline: "Amazon's Alexa Reviewers Can Access Customers' Home Addresses"

Addendum**** 4-22-2019 - Today's 'Verge' Science and Tech Manual headline - "That mental health app might share your data without telling you"

Addendum**** 4-19-2019 - Today's 'Wired' Business headline - "PLATFORMS WANT CENTRALIZED CENSORSHIP. THAT SHOULD SCARE YOU"

Addendum**** 4-19-2019 - Today's 'Chron' headline - "Federal Facebook investigation could hold Zuckerberg accountable on privacy"

Addendum**** 4-18-2019 - Today's 'Marketwatch' headline "Facebook now says millions of Instagram passwords were exposed internally".

Very Important Film

[jmoore-88204 · 8/10 · 17 April 2019]

As with other Schweitzer works, there is some bias via exaggeration. However, you do yourself a great disservice to ignore the underling threat that is well-substantiated by this film.

Schweitzer doesn't include the leaked Google staff meeting videos, which are pretty creepy in their own right.

A must-see film ... may it lead to a call to action

[jacobs-greenwood · 9/10 · 30 December 2018]

I am stunned that I'm the first to review this title. It popped up as a choice on Netflix and has the same title as an article I'd read (sometime this fall). In any case, the topic is too important not to address, even if you think the filmmakers have an "axe to grind", which they (rightfully?) do.

Every segment has eye-opening information for the uninformed, those who blissfully ask Google (in particular) for answers without considering the possibility that they're being manipulated by the company's human biases, but it's the last few segments which show how easily Google can (and does!) manipulate election choices of the "dumb masses" that is really scary.

One can easily choose not to have a Facebook account. However, it's hard to avoid Google and its apps (even if you have an iPhone) and their 'deal' with Congress to operate as a public utility is a sham. They've been collecting data on each and every one of us since Day 1 of our Internet experience and it seems impossible to now opt out. We are the product!

I only wish the filmmakers had provided meaningful alternatives and/or solutions.

If it does nothing but sensitize you to the issues, it is a good use of your time.

[wannall · 9/10 · 12 April 2020]

It may also inform you quite a bit. Some reviewers want to dismiss some of the info as "right wing conspiracy theory". I disagree.

More importantly, even if you do not believe that the tools have been used exactly as claimed, there is nothing that they claim is happening that CANNOT be done, and, as they point out, we have absolutely no method whatsoever, as users, to have any clue whether any of it is being done or not, and THAT is the problem.

You can dismiss the few points where you decide that they are "too conservative", and take the underlying possibilities as the real point.

And I suspect that they have barely scratched the surface.

A Real Eye Opener. Absolutely not biased, but thought provoking.

[thezone1 · 10/10 · 21 January 2019]

The idea of this documentary is to present you with information on how powerful the executives are that run the internet. You didn't know someone actually runs the internet? Or do they? The last half hour is the best. The first hour is mostly educational. If you want to learn how you are being manipulated by internet searches and results, watch this movie. I am not sure why anyone would say it is biased. Is it because this movie presents you with information that you see that could sway people to your way of thinking? I think not. It presents you with what is actually happening when you use the internet. Don't believe me? Watch it and find out.

EVERYONE must watch this documentary!!

[ryansmojo-875-878729 · 9 January 2019]

I've always known that Google spys on its consumers but this movie really put it into perspective. Basically they are spying on anything and every thing you do online. They automatically scan your google email and read everything you send and receive. They change your google search results to show you what "they" think is important for you to see and burries other search results to better push their agenda. Google is criminal!

People wake up!!! Enjoy :)

Did they completely overlook Google Ads?

[briannahornback · 5/10 · 7 January 2019]

It's a little "they're coming to get you, Barbara" and they're not wrong but it is a "creepy" enough reality to not need the menacing music used.

The filmmaker hammers on how problematic Google's search biases are (just one facet) but I never once heard them mention that companies pay Google Ads to get their ads on top (and yes, they are labeled ads) of the search results page. The film seemed to imply that the results were based on internal biases at Google and/or flawed algorithms only. People are usually clicking on whatever website paid top dollar to be listed first so that the user buys their product or service.

The movie makes good points as far as need for regulations as these companies are in the telecommunications business but circumvent those regulations. It's scary how integral Google has become to our lives and how it's pretty much impossible to completely get away and still navigate our 21st century societies. It will be interesting to see where it goes.

Big Tech Big Tyrants

[joes-43589 · 10/10 · 31 July 2021]

Finally a documentary that exposes and warns about the destructive nature of these tech giants.

Add YouTube and the msm to this list.

What we have in the 21st Century is high tech Nazi Propaganda where ideas and opinions are controlled and prohibited, and other, more pernicious ideas are promoted.

Forget China and Russia as threats to our Democracy; its these Tech Tyrants that are jeopardizing our Constitution and Freedoms.

Big Tech, Big Brother on steroids!

We need to wake up to these monsters and destroy them, or feel the Iron Heel of Oppression on our necks.

Agenda: 'Where's Waldo' style

[justjsscat · 2/10 · 20 January 2020]

In watching this program, I became aware if three things: 1) Not everyone in it was as neutral as they would appear 2) Not all the information was inaccurate 3) Just because a correlation occurred, didn't mean it was a fact

Whether it was because I felt the undercurrent of the film and began questioning it's motivation or if the main speaker's slickster vibes reminded me of a greasy snake oil salesman, I began to ask myself questions-- Are these platforms truly any different than other media platforms? What is the actual complaint or message they wish to express? Is this any different than any other big conglomerate? How can this be morally incomprehensible if we allow other platforms to pick their messaging? Are there alternatives? Would a person HAVE to use these platforms or could they pick another? Is this fear mongering? Why is this a thing?

My conclusions were as follows: No, a person wouldn't have to use these formats. Yes, this is fear mongering. Cherry picking. Selective information release-- in hopes a person grabs on to the half answer or Skewed conclusion because part of the information given is possible. What difference is there between the Fox or CNN tilt and the one they say occurs in Facebook or Google in the sense that those who use the formats get what they 'want' due to how they choose to look at it? If I am a Fox news watcher, am I not swayed by those who are running this format to the views that are presented with the same amount of rose color in the glasses as are the CNN watchers or the Facebook users? Why assume the tilt is neutral? Why assume that there IS'NT a bias in ALL of it..? This flick serves as a reminder that MOST media has it's own agenda and that there are VERY few sources which are truly neutral. Facebook and Google are no different than ANY other -- though both might have a mathematical formula to narrow to the median view rather than a specific agenda when using the information-- making them categorically the same as other outlets. If a person spent 10 mins looking up the main cast of players in this flick, they would learn -- rather quickly-- that those with the biggest opinions tended to be those who had the most to gain from breaching trust between the viewer and these companies. Weird, eh? 😂 Serendipitous. This is a pretty insidious attempt to create friction with these companies. It's hard to take as even vaguely credible because of how radical they pretend it is for mass media to stir opinions-- like everyone out there is so 'fair and balanced' and these are the only sources attempting to disrupt the perfectly neutral and unbiased presentation of information that we currently have-- Bbawhahahahaha!! ( Big wink, big wink)

Watch it if you enjoy being treated like a mushroom. A stupid mushroom.

Informative

[surgyo · 9/10 · 12 January 2020]

Watch it and draw your own conclusions. Too short? Or just efficient?

Must see

[winnetkaelm · 9/10 · 18 February 2019]

The concentration of power in Facebook and Google is dangerous. Both are controlled by Leftists who have abused their power.

Must see!

[pensacolacomputer · 10/10 · 14 August 2022]

Honestly, I was VERY surprised to see Amazon Prime had this. Very. They all all kind of in bed with each other, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc...

This is a must watch doc. MUST WATCH. After finishing it, I feel like one of the mouses in a maze being told where to go and when.

We are all sheep right now.

Think for yourself. Dont blindly follow the mob.

Peace.

10/10 Must see.

Their attempts to surreptitiously control your thoughts on politics, under the cover of a "documentary", should really give you the creeps.

[crackmysafe · 1/10 · 28 November 2021]

The Creepy Line opens with a quote by Arthur C. Clarke,

"Before you become too entranced with gorgeous gadgets and mesmerizing video displays, let me remind you that information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom, and wisdom is not foresight. Each grows out of the other, and we need them all."

The quote serves as a harbinger of the potential for the likes of Google and Facebook to control your decisions, which is the thesis of this film. However, it should also be read as a warning that the makers of this "documentary" are trying to control your decisions, particularly on politics. To that end, The Creepy Line is laced with messages and examples suggesting that all the perpetrators are liberals, and all the victims conservatives.

Their attempts to surreptitiously control your thoughts on politics, under the cover of a "documentary", should really give you the creeps.

Fitting that the past few years have put this in a new light.

[VALARAUKAR-18 · 10/10 · 11 December 2021]

It's not biased with some sort of far left bizarro manifesto, or something, but it is in fact biased towards us, towards you, you dumbasses that wrote the shallow, copycat reviews and either didn't watch it or didn't and possibly couldn't understand it. Of course Google and Facebook are evil, and of course that wasn't the initial intention of the respective creators o' content and ye ol' algorithms. But serious lack of foresight doomed humanity again, same as it ever was and will be. It's in mankind's nature to start brilliantly with all of the hope and promise in the universe at their fingertips and to nonetheless inevitably fail of their purpose all over again, and again. Too busy playing with their new toys for introspection and a couple years into feeding the actual beast and it can't be undone now. The ghost in the machine don't play that. What's hilarious is who was bitching initially here. The mighty inclusive d'army, the same one that it turns out isn't so tolerant or inclusive of ANYONE WHO HAS A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE than the one that they have lashed themselves to unto the ends of the earth and everything else for that matter. Isn't it terribly ironic and yet absolutely deserved that the very things and ideas that were railed against and oftentimes justifiably vilified but not always, became the base dna for the downtrodden, unheard, unwashed and unloved masses? If we weren't all so terribly screwed I would actually giggle like a freak every time I considered the subject at all. We become what we hate, every goddamn time, because good intentions bleed away and fear and loathing and malice take their place and then the figurative and literal violence commences en masse. Cliches are cliches for a reason. You reap what you sew, folks. On your miserable, hateful heads be it. I really missed having far less friends in volume, but so much richer in quality, who actually absorbed all of the information from every available source and then formulated their very own conclusions and opinions, sifting through the ugly brown smelly paste of intentionally misleading biased hackery down to the marrow that is the truth. Frankly, I don't have a ton of faith in our collective salvation and deliverance from our AI overlords but if we all gleaned just minimal percentages of genuine perceptions before they cash humanities collective check, we have it within to solve this seriously horrific situation just like we do every other dumbass thing we deliberately toss into our own path to hamper us and then hobble us so we fall and perish as we're going to be told do, like the little bitches we've apparently been this entire goddamn time.

Right wing propaganda

[Billybrownbunny · 2/10 · 27 January 2019]

Well made doc, just seemed rather biased. Invoking fear and paranoia to disguise right wing agenda? Maybe...

A Must Watch for Everyone

[sbuck-66983 · 10/10 · 30 January 2022]

Wow! Talk about brainwashing...This show discloses how they do it! The show uses technological terminology but puts this all into everyday language so we can understand how the Big Tech manipulates children's minds and all world politics. If we want free speech and free thought, we really need to watch this movie watch this movie and act now.

who's manipulating who?

[howboutthisone_huh · 5/10 · 10 May 2021]

Here's the description of this film: "The Creepy Line reveals the stunning degree to which society is manipulated". Five mins into the film they're portraying steve jobs and bill gates as inventors of computers, google as inventing the search engine, and facebook of creating social media. Right off I'm getting a parkinson tick and so much angst I'm on the verge of a stroke. Who is manipulating who here? Neither steve jobs or bill gates invented computers or the internet. Google it. Both were/are innovators and unarguably among the titans of business for their era (note, steve's dead and bill gates hasn't headed ms for a gazillion years) But, lets not forget that steve's fame with regard to computers is mostly overrated. I repeat, "with regard to computers". Apple didn't invent the first personal computer and what is that anyway? If you mean a computer that can fit on a desk but still leave enough room to work, apple didn't invent that. When people claim that they invented the personal computer, it's an ignorant untruth. Steve, et all, did invent their own small computer and were successful selling it but they weren't the only players at the time. And throughout the 80s, I can't remember the exact numbers, but apple's market share for the apple IIC, and the mac, was always under 20% and at the end of the 80s, early 90s, the mac and apple were in serious financial trouble. Okay, you bought a phone from apple but so what; it doesn't mean apple invented computers. Bill gates didn't invent computers either, or software as I've heard people claim (an even more incredible untruth). AFAIK, ms was never in the hardware end of the pool. All those gazillion PCs in the 80s, and 90s were mostly made overseas, and if not overseas, almost all the components in the box were made overseas. What ms did under bill was convince PC manufacturers that it was in their best interest to standardize on the operating system they bundled with their hardware. The hardware is not much use without an operating system. First on DOS, then windows and this meant, more importantly than anything else, that all software that ran on these operating systems had to accept the development environment as well, written by ms. So I mean that if you wanted to write an app that ran on the ms operating system you had to use their development libraries, their development environment and their model. And you usually had to pay ms for that privilege either by buying their dev kits, or documentation, or something. It wasn't until java came along that people were able to break these ties and get away from ms but for a long time, and under bill, ms had a monopoly. They had the largest monopoly in the US, which the fed didn't do anything about because they didn't understand the business. And in other software development, like browsers, and office processing, ms just ran out any competition by bundling their software for free. You can't compete with free. Ok, what about google. Well, if you were using the internet in the early days, google wasn't around. The most popular search engines were altavista and yahoo. But, who invented search engines? I don't know but the first one I ever saw was in 1983 before the internet as we know it. And facebook? Ever heard of myspace? And there may even be other social media platforms I'm not aware of. Before the internet, you had bulletin board services that goes back to the 80s and they had similar features of social networking but limited network reach. So there may have been other social media platforms that came and went and nobody remembers anymore.

So why do the producers tell the story like this, and why is this important? Because they don't care about history or accuracy or anything like that. They're in the entertainment business and if you try correcting 25 years of misinformation, nobody will watch their show like very few people will be still reading this review right now. But if they got a few fundamental faqs wrong (or at least spun wrong) then how can you tell if the rest of their story is not fantasy. Who's manipulating who? This is one of the most bizarre productions I've ever seen because while they are trying to tell you about this sinister manipulation, they themselves are manipulating viewers. So as interesting as it might be, or might have been, reserve room on your plate for some skepticism.

Some good info, but biased and misleading

[svc-imdb · 2/10 · 6 January 2019]

Lot's of conspiratorial claims, but no real evidence to back it up. The search research discussed is generic and not specific to Google or Facebook. Some of the scenes show information that's inconsistent with claims of censorship and indicates a lack of technical understanding how the internet and Google work. The ominous background music eventually became very tiring.

Biased

[peanutdogk · 3/10 · 3 January 2019]

I really wish unbiased filmmakers would explore this issue as seeing a documentary on the topic of manipulation by propaganda producers made me turn it off midway. Some good points were made but not enough to keep me distracted from the right-leaning message running underneath an important headline. It's a shame this topic wasn't approached as genuinely as it deserves to be.

Awful Documentary

[anthonygrundy-39448 · 1/10 · 17 March 2019]

Does not really give you anything you didn't already know and I feel some of the people complaining about Google were not telling the full story! Don't bother watching. Very right wing and obsessed with conspiracies but conveniently left out Cambridge Analitica, Brexit and Trump!

Wild Conspiracy Theories

[dylonrm-19357 · 1/10 · 27 January 2019]

This documentary wants to show you that google and Facebook are running the world and controlling your every move. Not once did they have a guest on that wasn't fully against the entire tech world. They completely ignore several important points, such as never mentioning that google and Facebook make money from selling ads, not from controlling elections.

It uses the biased strategy of taking small facts like "google shut down the entire internet for 40 minutes" and not mentionining that it was caused by an unintentional bug, not by a rogue developer who wanted to censor conservative voices. Or mentioning the google "packet sniffing" scandal and not explaining google's response that it was caused by a bug (and that there is basically no value in that information). Or mentioning that certain government agencies use google docs, perhaps because they felt that it's a superior product to everything else on the market?

Strictly For The Alex Jones Crowd

[Zebb67 · 1/10 · 25 April 2019]

The right wing, as it so often does, pulls the 'persecution' card, arguing that Google and Facebook are blocking conservative information/favoring progressives, blah, blah... So if you're wondering why Pizzagate and other such conspiracies, er, important news stories aren't being spread around the Internet enough, you'll love this--it tells you exactly what you want to here..

Definitely bias

[Dconstructivist · 3/10 · 5 January 2019]

It was interesting during the first 20 minutes, then they make a few key conservative assumptions or spins and start waving conspiracy theories. Disappointing.

Fearmongering non-technical folks

[wallmonster · 2/10 · 16 October 2021]

I was actually hoping that I might pick up on a couple of updated tech tips to avoid tracking but found a program focused on scaring viewers into thinking big tech is trying to turn the US into a totalitarian state. That is literally the focus closing argument. Each of the data collection issues they raised is easily avoided. A more organized edit with quick tips after each segment to show viewers how to delete their search history, phone tracking, browse and search anonymously, cultivate or delete their social media feeds etc... would have been much more interesting. Somehow they completely overlooked pixel tracking which is arguably more invasive than many of their other privacy concerns. Again could have been followed a segment that pixel tracking can be circumvented with a little effort.

A lot of bad or misleading information in this. Not sure you can call it a documentary when one of the interviewees repeatedly states that facts are irrelevant.

As what must be the result of poor editing, one of the primary interviewees appears to claim that he was censored for an act that was performed after the alleged censorship. To accomplish this seemingly impossible task google must have been using their precogs. This same person later admits to have actively engaged in small scale voter manipulation of an election in India in a misguided attempt to warn of the dangers of voter manipulation. Later as what I can only hope is another result of poor editing this person claims to have been taken offline completely based on not being able to access google.com. This is clearly not the case unless 100% of your online presence is hosted by google. Anyone that is not capable of circumventing this restriction and restoring full access to google services with a new account in less than 5 minutes should not be put forward as a technical expert. While complaining about bias a politician is allowed to claim something as scientific fact that is absolutely not a scientific fact with no opportunity for rebuttal or correction by an actual scientist. If only this interviewee realized he was meant to laugh at Archie Bunker not with him.

A couple of obvious key points are overlooked. Progressives are by definition trying to make progress, improve things, build the future etc. By the same definition conservatives should want slowed or controlled progress but contemporary stances have actually stated a desire to revert to a previous "again" time. The result of those positions is that there will never be equal representation of those views at tech companies trying to build the future. Difficult to compete as a conservative tech company using punch cards and vacuum tubes. The previous point has and will continue to naturally reinforce itself with a couple of rare exceptions for all of human existence. The second major point this program overlooks in its tech bias argument is that facts matter. If a search engine repeatedly serves its visitors with false, misleading or irrelevant results those visitors will learn not to rely on its service. Internet search is not the only source of information. Search results need to align with information that we receive from other sources. Yelp would go out of business pretty quickly if 100% of their results were 5 stars reviews of McDonalds.

Looking at his previous works, I imagine Schweitzer will keep pumping out his bias "anti-bias" propaganda. I challenge their production team to do so without the use of technologies invented by progressives. Good luck working with no computers or cameras. Not sure how you would distribute your project as clearly walking, crawling even slithering on the ground were all evolutionary efforts at making progress. I'd say have fun painting on the walls of your cave but even those people were likely thinking of a brighter future!