Google Purging Conservative Media, But Trump Looking to Investigate

YouTube removes videos for alleged bullying

Jerome Corsi

WASHINGTON, D.C. � Google and YouTube have advanced their attack on Infowars.com by removing one of this author�s videos decoding the intelligence agent known as QAnon for allegedly �bullying� and blocking this author�s ability to conduct a live chat for 90 days, or until the appeal on the removed video is resolved.

Below is a screen capture of the video removed by YouTube:

On Feb. 24, Alex Jones ran a special emergency broadcast covering the unprecedented attack on free speech being launched by Google/YouTube.

CNN and other news outlets have continued to exert lobbying pressure on Google/YouTube to terminate Infowars.com�s entire channel by falsely insinuating Infowars� content has violated Google/YouTube community standards.

We have previously reported that an internet hashtag has begun gaining steam advancing the concept of Congress creating an Internet Bill of Rights, #InternetBillofRights.

The push to apply First Amendment free speech rights to the Internet has arisen in the wake of the decision by the FCC to repeal the Soros-supported �net neutrality� rules created during the Obama administration.

The Soros-funded �net neutrality� rules were designed to be a deceptively worded subterfuge under which Internet content giants including Google/YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter were free to censor out conservative and libertarian views with impunity.

John Simons, President Trump�s choice to head the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), along with Republican nominees Christine Wilson and Noah Philips, as well as Democrat Rohit Chopra testified to the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 14, that they are open to investigating the Internet edge providers including Google/YouTube and Facebook to see if they are in violation of consumer protection laws.

All four responded positively when questioned by the Senate committee about their willingness to pursue with the Justice Department anti-trust action in pursuit of an open network.

Simon indicated his willingness to task the FTC to examine complaints the Internet giant edge providers, including Google/YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter censor conservatives and libertarians when he answered questions from Sen. Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a staunch supporter of the Soros-backed �net neutrality rules.�

�The FTC has rule-making authority over the Internet,� Simon explained, �and we will be a vigorous enforcer.�

SILENCE! Twitter, YouTube scrubbing all content and banning all users who question the official (false) narrative on the Florida school shooting


SILENCE! Twitter, YouTube scrubbing all content and banning all users who question the official (false) narrative on the Florida school shooting

Sunday, February 25, 2018 by: Mike Adams


(Natural News) A few years from now, looking back on why Twitter collapsed and YouTube was abandoned by every intelligent person, we�ll remember what these totalitarian tech giants did in February, 2018. Starting a few days ago, both Twitter and YouTube began scrubbing all videos and tweets that don�t follow the �official narrative� on the Florida school shooting.

Anyone who questions the wisdom of the school students-turned-propagandists � who were all probably eating Tide pods a week ago � is immediately banned and silenced. Only one side of this �debate� is allowed to exist: The side that worships the lunatic Left�s demands that all law-abiding Americans surrender their self-defense firearms because a group of traumatized school kids were shot at by their own lunatic classmate.

The insanity, stupidity and derangement of all this is beyond description. YouTube, Google, Twitter and even Facebook have now decided to pick a political side and silence all opposing viewpoints. Online platforms that once hosted conversations and debates are now nothing more than lunatic liberal echo chambers of cognitive illiteracy combined with demanded obedience. That�s why I have now dubbed the delusional Left an �obedience cult.�

Now, more than ever, the internet needs free speech alternatives to Google, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter. All these left-wing extremist tech companies have now decided to crush the speech of their political opponents and transform the entire internet into a �libtard bubble� of blabbering idiots who literally believe that school children should not be protected by armed citizens. (Yes, they actually want to make sure all schools remain �gun-free zones� so that mass murderers can continue to target them�)

Via The Gateway Pundit:

David Hogg Unleashes Boycott Rampage After Twitter Threatens to Ban Anyone �Targeting� Parkland Students or �Topics They Are Raising�

The Gateway Pundit was the first publication to question the media�s motives for propelling a select few students into the spotlight following the shooting. They all have one thing in common; they want to fight the gun lobby and the NRA.

We knew an anti-second amendment movement was effervescing; we were right.

David Hogg has launched a boycott-the-NRA rampage from his Twitter account and the social media giant is protecting his activism by banning anyone who harasses questions him.

On Wednesday, Twitter Safety released a statement regarding the Parkland students. Anyone �harassing� (disagreeing with) the students will be banned.

Twitter also said something very interesting. They are using �anti-abuse tools to weed out malicious automation around these individuals and the topics they are raising.�

In other words, if you dare question or refute anything these teenagers say, you risk being banned from the platform. These teenagers are royalty. How dare you question their wisdom.

Twitter Safety tweeted: We are actively working on reports of targeted abuse and harassment of a number of survivors of the tragic mass shooting in #Parkland. Such behavior goes against everything we stand for at Twitter, and we are taking action on any content that violates our terms of service.

Shortly after Twitter released this statement, Parkland student-turned-anti-gun-activist, David Hogg unleashed a boycott rampage from his Twitter account.

Hogg is targeting the NRA and any corporation that has a partnership with the NRA.

So if you dare refute Hogg, you will be taken off of Twitter. See how this is all coming together?

David Hogg unleashed boycott-the-NRA rampage on Twitter targeting every corporation he could think of that partners with the NRA and one by one, the corporations acquiesced to Hogg and severed ties.

If you think this is just a coincidence, we have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.

This was a coordinated attack on firearms and the NRA.

CNN calls on YouTube to silence InfoWars in order to obliterate all videos questioning the official false narrative of the Parkland shooting

Via InfoWars.com:

CNN and other news outlets are lobbying to have YouTube terminate our entire channel by false insinuating we are saying the Florida school shooting was a hoax and that we are �bullying� the students.

We have never said that the shooting was a hoax, just that some of the students being highlighted by the media as staunch advocates for gun control may have been coached on what to say.

The fact that CNN attempted to script a town hall event, and then called one of the survivor�s and heroes of the shooting a liar when he exposed them for it, shows that it is in fact CNN which is bullying students.

CNN also bullied and harassed an old lady outside her home in Florida this week, a move that was widely condemned by media personalities across the political spectrum.

This is an unprecedented level of censorship. A news network is campaigning for another news network to be censored and terminated simply to strangle their competition.

In Russia, the government shuts down dissident media outlets, in the United States, CNN apparently thinks that is its role.

YouTube is censoring videos more than ever and Infowars has become one of their main targets.

The internet giant pulled down the following videos on the Parkland, Florida school shooting, and according to CNN YouTube will ban The Alex Jones Channel outright if two more videos receive strikes.


It is now apparent the free citizen�s press is now under attack. YouTube has been accused of censorship after introducing a controversial new policy designed to reduce the audience for videos deemed to be "inappropriate or offensive to some audiences." YouTube�s decision to remove various videos from what they call "conspiracy theorists" signals a willingness to more directly curate content and also shape the culture. On tonight's show, Clyde Lewis talks with social media analyst, Michael Cross about TUBE TIED.

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/ground-zero-live-with-clyde-lewis/e/53507506?autoplay=true

Tucker Slams Google For Partnering With �Wholly Discredited Hate Group� SPLC to Censor YouTube

Carlson said the SPLC is a �hate group� masquerading as a group that exposes hate groups

Chris Menahan | Information Liberation - March 1, 2018

Tucker Carlson slammed Google on Wednesday for partnering with the �wholly discredited hate group� the Southern Poverty Law Center to censor content on YouTube.

From Fox News:

Tucker Carlson reported that YouTube, through its parent organization Google, is enlisting �trusted flaggers� to delete questionable video content from its platform.

However, he said one group hired by YouTube is the Southern Poverty Law Center, which he said is �not an expert on the South, law, or poverty.�

Carlson said the SPLC is a �hate group� masquerading as a group that exposes hate groups.

The Daily Caller broke the news on Tuesday:

The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting YouTube in policing content on their platform, The Daily Caller has learned.

The left-wing nonprofit � which has more recently come under fire for labeling legitimate conservative organizations as �hate groups� � is one of the more than 100 nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers� program, a source with knowledge of the arrangement told TheDC.

The SPLC and other program members help police YouTube for extremist content, ranging from so-called hate speech to terrorist recruiting videos.

All of the groups in the program have confidentiality agreements, a spokesperson for Google, YouTube�s parent company, previously told TheDC. A handful of YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers,� including the Anti-Defamation League and No Hate Speech � a European organization focused on combatting intolerance � have gone public with their participation in the program. The vast majority of the groups in the program have remained hidden behind their confidentiality agreements.

The SPLC�s close involvement in policing content on YouTube is likely to cause consternation among conservatives who worry that they may not be treated fairly. The left-wing group has consistently labeled pedestrian conservative organizations as �hate groups� and has been directly tied to violence against conservatives in the past. Floyd Lee Corkins, who opened fire at the Family Research Center in 2012, said he chose the FRC for his act of violence because the SPLC listed them as a �hate group.�

On Wednesday, Bloomberg reported YouTube �mistakenly� purged a host of right-wing channels.

It was just a little 'mistake' guys. No censorship of conservatives on YouTube at all. (Say that and you might get a strike). Everything is fine. 😆 https://t.co/2Kt2rdFv6a pic.twitter.com/BF0xverRNY

� Mark Dice (@MarkDice) February 28, 2018

Also on Wednesday, hugely popular live streamer Andy Warski, know for hosting �blood sports� debates where alt-right and alt-left figures (and everyone in between) go at it debating hot topics, got a strike on his channel which banned him from live streaming for 90 days.


Well� this happened. pic.twitter.com/mY52JfiWdM

� Andy Warski (@Andywarski) March 1, 2018

As I reported earlier this week, Alex Jones� channel was also hit with a second strike, but YouTube backed off and dropped the second strike after widespread outrage.

The SPLC and the ADL are smear merchants who label anyone to the right of Karl Marx �extremists� in order to shut their free speech down.

Let�s be clear: the ADL and SPLC are direct threats to your freedom of expression and the free flow of information on the internet. pic.twitter.com/n0l8sLAb2K

� Gab: Free Speech Social Network (@getongab) March 1, 2018

They compile giant lists of traditional Christians and conservatives they label as �extremists� for holding traditional values and then crazy leftists like Floyd Lee Corkins use their list to target people for violence.

Undercover video was released last month showing an SPLC speaker claiming �shifting demographics� are the �primary driver� behind what they called an �increase in hate group activity.�

The speaker said �white supremacists� �mistakenly believe they can push back against that.�

�You can�t,� the SPLC representative said, �because these are some things that have been planned for a while.�

Last year, Apple CEO Tim Cook donated $1 million of Apple shareholder funds to the SPLC and another $1 million to the ADL. Cook also asked iTunes users to pony up cash for the organization, even though the SPLC is sitting on a war chest of over $320 million with millions being held offshore.

George and Amal Clooney donated $1 million to the SPLC last year.

Megabank JP Morgan also donated $1 million the SPLC and the ADL last year.

Fox�s James Murdoch donated $1 million to the ADL also last year.

YouTube Secretly Using SPLC To Police Videos

Peter Hasson


The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting YouTube in policing content on their platform, The Daily Caller has learned.

The left-wing nonprofit � which has more recently come under fire for labeling legitimate conservative organizations as �hate groups� � is one of the more than 100 nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers� program, a source with knowledge of the arrangement told TheDC.

The SPLC and other program members help police YouTube for extremist content, ranging from so-called hate speech to terrorist recruiting videos.

All of the groups in the program have confidentiality agreements, a spokesperson for Google, YouTube�s parent company, previously told TheDC. A handful of YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers,� including the Anti-Defamation League and No Hate Speech � a European organization focused on combatting intolerance � have gone public with their participation in the program. The vast majority of the groups in the program have remained hidden behind their confidentiality agreements.

The SPLC�s close involvement in policing content on YouTube is likely to cause consternation among conservatives who worry that they may not be treated fairly. The left-wing group has consistently labeled pedestrian conservative organizations as �hate groups� and has been directly tied to violence against conservatives in the past. Floyd Lee Corkins, who opened fire at the Family Research Center in 2012, said he chose the FRC for his act of violence because the SPLC listed them as a �hate group.�

It�s unclear when the SPLC joined YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers� program. The program goes back to 2012 but exploded in size in recent years amid a Google push to increase regulation of the content on its platforms, which followed pressure from advertisers. Fifty of the 113 program members joined in 2017 as YouTube stepped up its content policing, YouTube public policy director Juniper Downs told a Senate committee in January.

Downs said the third-party groups work closely with YouTube�s employees to crack down on extremist content in two ways, both of which a Google spokesperson previously confirmed to TheDC.

First, the flaggers are equipped with digital tools allowing them to mass flag content for review by YouTube personnel. Second, the partner groups act as guides to YouTube�s content monitors and engineers designing the algorithms policing the video platform but may lack the expertise needed to tackle a given subject.

�We work with over 100 organizations as part of our Trusted Flagger program and we value the expertise these organizations bring to flagging content for review. All trusted flaggers attend a YouTube training to learn about our policies and enforcement processes. Videos flagged by trusted flaggers are reviewed by YouTube content moderators according to YouTube�s Community Guidelines. Content flagged by trusted flaggers is not automatically removed or subject to any differential policies than content flagged from other users,� said a YouTube spokesperson, who would not specifically comment on the SPLC�s participation in the program.

The SPLC did not return multiple voicemails and emails seeking comment.

The overwhelming majority of the content policing on Google and YouTube is carried out by algorithms. The algorithms make for an easy rebuttal against charges of political bias: it�s not us, it�s the algorithm. But actual people with actual biases write, test and monitor the algorithms.

As noted above, Google�s anonymous outside partners (such as the SPLC) work closely with the internal experts designing the algorithms. This close collaboration has upsides, Google�s representatives have said, such as in combatting terrorist propaganda on the platform.

But it also provides little transparency, forcing users to take Google�s word that they�re being treated fairly.

The SPLC has faced criticism for its cavalier definitions of �hate group� and �extremist.� The organization stoked controversy in 2015 by labeling Dr. Ben Carson, now the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an anti-gay �extremist.� After a backlash, the SPLC reversed its ruling and apologized to Carson.

The organization faced a similarly intense backlash in 2016 for labeling Maajid Nawaz, a respected counter-extremism activist, an �anti-Muslim extremist.� (RELATED: SPLC Says Army Bases Are Confederate Monuments That Need To Come Down)

The Washington Examiner�s Emily Jashinsky noted last year that �the SPLC�s claim to objectivity is nothing less than fraudulent, a reality that informed observers of its practices from both the Left and Right accept.�

�The routine of debunking their supposedly objective classifications occurs like clockwork each time a major outlet makes the mistake of turning to them when reporting on the many conservative thinkers and nonprofits the group absurdly designates as hateful.�

The SPLC has faced tough criticisms not just from conservatives but from the mainstream press as well.

�At a time when the line between �hate group� and mainstream politics is getting thinner and the need for productive civil discourse is growing more serious, fanning liberal fears, while a great opportunity for the SPLC, might be a problem for the nation,� Politico Magazine�s Ben Schreckinger wrote last year.

Bloomberg columnist Megan McArdle similarly noted last year that the SPLC commonly lumps in principled conservatives alongside actual racists and extremists and warned of the possibility that tech companies could rely on the SPLC�s misleading definitions.

�Given the increasing tendency of powerful tech companies to flex their muscle against hate groups,� she wrote, �we may see more and more institutions unwittingly turned into critics or censors, not just of Nazi propaganda, but also of fairly mainstream ideas.�

Trump 2020 Manager Brad Parscale Warns Big Tech: �We Are Watching�


by Allum Bokhari7 Mar 2018

Brad Parscale, who was recently appointed as campaign manager for Donald Trump�s 2020 reelection bid, has warned Google, Facebook, and Twitter to maintain a �level playing field,� following a month of high-profile revelations of bias at big tech.

Hey @facebook @Twitter @Google we are watching. ὄ This is your opportunity to make sure the playing field is level. #MAGA

� Brad Parscale (@parscale) March 7, 2018

Brad Parscale�s comment came on the same day as the results of primaries for the Texas senatorial race in November were released. Google and Facebook both have the ability to significantly influence elections. Facebook has previously boosted voter registration and turnout by significant margins, while research on search engine manipulation shows that services like Google Search have the potential to change the preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more.

Brad Parscale, current campaign manager for the president�s 2020 re-election bid, previously managed Trump�s digital campaign in 2016. In public interviews, Parscale has argued that social media, not traditional media, was the key to Trump�s victory in 2016, and identified Facebook as particularly critical to the president�s success. His selection suggests that the digital campaigning will be given even greater emphasis in 2020.

His comment follows weeks of high-profile revelations about Silicon Valley openly limiting the reach of conservatives. Last week, we reported that algorithm changes at Facebook have caused the President�s engagement on the platform to fall by 45 percent. The same change has hit engagement on the pages of conservative news websites, while leaving the mainstream media�s pages virtually unchanged.

During the same week, YouTube launched a massive crackdown against conservatives and alternative media channels, taking down videos and banning channels. The channel for Alex Jones� InfoWars, which interviewed the President during his 2016 election campaign, is now one strike away from a permanent ban on the platform.

Twitter also continues to be caught up in bias scandals: we recently reported that the platform is hiding tweets from President Trump and Donald Trump Jr. The platform also conducted a recent mass-lockout of Trump supporters, and has refused to apply their terms of service evenly, allowing a campaign of harassment against Pamela Geller�s daughters while banning right-wingers for stating facts.

Allum Bokhari is the Senior Tech Correspondent at Breitbart News. You can follow him on Twitter, Gab.ai and add him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to allumbokhari@protonmail.com.

Editor�s note: Parscale�s notice comes as tech companies have come under fire for wide-scale censorship of conservative opinions.

Twitter, for example, was recently accused of decreasing the number of followers subscribed to conservative authors. The social network has in the past also purged users who are reported to have overstepped speech boundaries, under the guise of enforcing bullying and harassment guidelines.

At a House Intelligence Committee hearing last November, a Twitter exec admitted the company downgraded an Infowars article which had beat the algorithm and made it to the top of its trending section.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Facebook also shut down users who expressed support for Donald Trump, the military, the Second Amendment, strong borders and Christianity. Recently Facebook has taken their battle against conservative voices mainstream by targeting and flagging what �independent fact-checkers� deem �fake news.�

Google, likely the worst censorship offender, has in the past launched efforts to bury search results and block access to certain websites. Google News long ago censored Infowars from appearing in its feed, despite our website espousing libertarian, anti-war and pro-American political views.

Google subsidiary Youtube has also been heavily criticized for purging �right-wing� channels which they claim violate terms of service agreements. Even accounts with billions of views and millions of subscribers, which have been active for over a decade, such as The Alex Jones Channel, are not safe from overzealous censors.

Youtube workers admitted to censoring Infowars� main Youtube channel last October during an undercover sting by Project Veritas, in which Brand and Diversity Curation Lead Earnest Pettie asserted Youtube regularly buries Alex Jones videos.

In recent weeks Youtube has undertaken an effort to ban Infowars� main channel at the behest of cable network CNN, which flagged several videos for the company to review.

While President Trump has weighed in on breaking up monopolies like the one currently being built by tech giant Amazon, Parscale�s tweet is one of the administration�s first indications that social media networks are also being monitored.

Onward and upward,
airforce

YouTube Bans Firearms Demo Videos, Entering the Gun Control Debate

By Polly Mosendz and Mark Bergen March 21, 2018,

Google�s new policy prohibits promotion of guns, bump stocks

At least one video gun blogger ditched YouTube for PornHub

Guns in America

YouTube, a popular media site for firearms enthusiasts, this week quietly introduced tighter restrictions on videos involving weapons, becoming the latest battleground in the U.S. gun-control debate.

YouTube will ban videos that promote or link to websites selling firearms and accessories, including bump stocks, which allow a semi-automatic rifle to fire faster. Additionally, YouTube said it will prohibit videos with instructions on how to assemble firearms. The video site, owned by Alphabet Inc.�s Google, has faced intense criticism for hosting videos about guns, bombs and other deadly weapons.

For many gun-rights supporters, YouTube has been a haven. A current search on the site for �how to build a gun� yields 25 million results, though that includes items such as toys. At least one producer of gun videos saw its page suspended on Tuesday. Another channel opted to move its videos to an adult-content site, saying that will offer more freedom than YouTube.

Read more: Reddit Wades Into the Gun Control Debate

�We routinely make updates and adjustments to our enforcement guidelines across all of our policies,� a YouTube spokeswoman said in a statement. �While we�ve long prohibited the sale of firearms, we recently notified creators of updates we will be making around content promoting the sale or manufacture of firearms and their accessories.�

YouTube has placed greater restrictions on content several times in the past year, responding to a series of issues with inappropriate and offensive videos. Most of those changes involved pulling ads from categories of videos. Google is more reluctant to remove entire videos from YouTube, but has been willing to do so with terrorism-related content.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun industry lobbying group, called YouTube�s new policy �worrisome.�

�We suspect it will be interpreted to block much more content than the stated goal of firearms and certain accessory sales,� the foundation said in a statement. �We see the real potential for the blocking of educational content that serves instructional, skill-building and even safety purposes. Much like Facebook, YouTube now acts as a virtual public square. The exercise of what amounts to censorship, then, can legitimately be viewed as the stifling of commercial free speech.�

The firearms decision comes days before Saturday�s March For Our Lives, a rally organized by survivors of the Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 dead.

See also: QuickTake on the gun-control debate

The new YouTube policies will be enforced starting in April, but at least two video bloggers have already been affected. Spike�s Tactical, a firearms company, said in a post on Facebook that it was suspended from YouTube due to �repeated or severe violations� of the video platform�s guidelines.

�Well, since we�ve melted some snowflakes on YouTube and got banned, might as well set IG and FB on fire!,� Spike�s wrote on Facebook, where it has over 111,000 followers, referring to the social network and its Instagram app. A YouTube spokeswoman said the channel has been reinstated after it was mistakenly removed.

InRange TV, another channel devoted to firearms, wrote on its Facebook page that it would begin uploading videos to PornHub, an adult content website.

�YouTube�s newly released released vague and one-sided firearms policy makes it abundantly clear that YouTube cannot be counted upon to be a safe harbor for a wide variety of views and subject matter,� InRange TV wrote. �PornHub has a history of being a proactive voice in the online community, as well as operating a resilient and robust video streaming platform.� PornHub didn�t immediately return a request for comment on the matter.

Last month, gun control activists escalated the pressure on tech giants for giving a platform to the National Rifle Association. A flurry of businesses cut ties with the pro-gun group after the deadly Parkland school shooting. Companies with streaming services, such as Amazon.com Inc., Apple Inc. and YouTube, declined to remove the NRA channel.

Gun Groups Slam YouTube Decision to Ban Some Videos

Kyle Perisic / March 26, 2018

YouTube says it will ban videos with content related to the sale or assembly of firearms or firearms accessories, a move that has gun rights organizations up in arms.

YouTube, which not only is the largest all-video website but the website with the third-most traffic in the world, said it would begin enforcing the new policy in April.

�While we�ve long prohibited the sale of firearms, we recently notified [content] creators of updates we will be making around content promoting the sale or manufacture of firearms and their accessories,� a YouTube spokesman said in a statement, The Hill reported.

The website said it will ban videos showing the assembly of, advertising direct sale of, or linking to the online sale of high-capacity magazines and certain types of accessories used to simulate automatic fire or to convert a firearm to automatic fire.

YouTube lists bump stocks, Gatling triggers, drop-in auto sears, and conversion kits as some�but not all�of the types of accessories it will ban in videos. It defines �high-capacity magazines� as �magazines or belts carrying more than 30 rounds.�

In October, YouTube banned videos that demonstrate how to use bump stocks after the massacre in Las Vegas, where a gunman using a bump stock fatally shot 58 at an outdoor country music concert from a nearby hotel.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun-industry lobbying group, said the new policy is �worrisome,� Bloomberg reported.

�We suspect it will be interpreted to block much more content than the stated goal of firearms and certain accessory sales,� the National Shooting Sports Foundation said. �We see the real potential for the blocking of educational content that serves instructional, skill-building, and even safety purposes.�

�Much like Facebook, YouTube now acts as a virtual public square. The exercise of what amounts to censorship, then, can legitimately be viewed as the stifling of commercial free speech,� the foundation said.

The policies are written so broadly that they give YouTube the ability to censor any content it doesn�t like, said Karl Kasarda, co-owner of InRange TV, a site with firearms-related videos on YouTube, The Wall Street Journal reported.

�Their policies are not very clear cut, and they are arbitrary,� Kasarda said. �You never know when you are going to get hit by them.�

Kasarda said it isn�t clear whether the new policy will prohibit videos showing how to properly load a magazine into a gun.

Since a 19-year-old with a rifle killed 17 in February at a school in Parkland, Florida, gun control activists have pressured tech companies to shut down channels like that of the National Rifle Association, a nonprofit gun rights organization.

Specifically, activists pressured Amazon to remove from its streaming service the NRA-TV channel, a free streaming service featuring firearms-related content.

As of the time this report was published, the NRA�s official channel was still on both YouTube and Amazon.

�YouTube is now in the business of political posturing and censorship,� the NRA Institute for Legislative Action said in a written statement in response to the site�s new policy, adding:

Millions of Americans watch YouTube videos every day to learn more about the safe and responsible use of firearms, and those videos show law-abiding gun owners participating in lawful behavior. By banning this content, YouTube is engaging in politically motivated censorship and alienating the millions of people who turn to the website for education and training.

Currently, anyone can go to YouTube and watch a video to learn how to make a bomb, yet the company wants to ban videos depicting lawful gun use? It�s absurd.

This new policy runs counter to the American traditions of open dialogue and tolerance for diverse opinions and firmly plants YouTube, and its parent company Google, against the freedoms so many Americans hold dear.

How The Left Turned Tech Giants Into Their Speech Police

Both Facebook and Google faced credible accusations of liberal bias even before their recent algorithm changes

Peter Hasson | Daily Caller - March 28, 2018

The Left has successfully deputized some of the world�s largest corporations into policing the speech of their political opponents.

Liberals have made its corporations� responsibility to enforce content limits on public speech by leveraging their power into advertisers and as platforms.

Activists pressure advertisers � who often cave

As advertisers, companies are now expected to guarantee they won�t finance speech liberals deem outside of acceptable discourse. In practice, this means blacklisting right-of-center voices ruled to have crossed the line.

Liberal activist groups sought to cut off financial revenue streams to conservative and right-of-center voices � like Fox News host Sean Hannity and Breitbart News � by pressuring advertisers into boycotting them over perceived offensive statements.

Left-wing group Media Matters has been waging boycott wars against Fox News for years. Media Matters led a successful boycott campaign to defund Fox News host Bill O�Reilly in April 2017, following a series of sexual harassment accusations against the longtime host. Fox News fired O�Reilly after his advertisers fled the show in droves.

Similar advertiser boycotts in the past targeted conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh and then-Fox News host Glenn Beck, among others.

Trump�s shocking victory in 2016 energized the left and led to a new round of boycotts.

One group, Sleeping Giants, formed as a direct response to Trump�s election. Sleeping Giants targeted Breitbart News� advertisers in 2017 with overwhelming success: 90 percent of advertisers fled Breitbart in just two months and Breitbart continued bleeding advertisers since then.

Activists and advertisers both pressure tech companies � which already lean left

Under fire from the left, digital advertisers in turn pressured tech companies to get ahead of the problem by weeding out potentially controversial topics and voices from the advertising pool.

Major brands pulled millions of dollars in advertisements from Google and YouTube in March 2017 after media investigations found ads running alongside extremist content. Google promptly revamped its advertising system to give advertisers more control, but the pressure hasn�t stopped.

Just this March, Unilever, one of the world�s largest advertisers, threatened to pull ads from Facebook and Google unless the two entities better regulate content on their platforms.

Unilever won�t invest in �platforms or environments that do not protect our children or which create division in society, and promote anger or hate,� chief marketing officer Keith Weed warned.

Both Facebook and Google faced credible accusations of liberal bias even before their recent algorithm changes.

YouTube�s recent demonetization push was meant to accommodate advertisers seeking to avoid controversial content, a Google spokesperson told TheDC.

Liberal activists and politicians have also directly pressured tech giants to increase content regulations in order to combat misinformation and Russian propaganda and �fake news� � a phrase some liberals have tried to apply to conservative media outlets.

Under pressure, Facebook and Google regulate content

The tech giants have implemented a series of internal changes in response to the outside pressure.

YouTube nearly doubled the size of its �Trusted Flagger� program last year, adding 50 government agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to the program, YouTube public policy director Juniper Downs told a Senate committee in January.

YouTube empowers the third-party organizations � �Trusted Flaggers� � to help police content on the platform by mass flagging content and working closely with engineers who design YouTube�s algorithms.

One of those third-party groups is left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), The Daily Caller revealed in February. The SPLC is known for smearing pedestrian conservative organizations as �hate groups.�

The vast majority of YouTube�s �Trusted Flaggers� remain unknown to the public, hidden behind confidentiality agreements.

Downs outlined to the Senate committee some of the other steps YouTube took to suppress inflammatory content.

�Some borderline videos, such as those containing inflammatory religious or supremacist content without a direct call to violence or a primary purpose of inciting hatred, may not cross these lines for removal. But we understand that these videos may be offensive to many and have developed a new treatment for them,� Downs said.

�Identified borderline content will remain on YouTube behind an interstitial, won�t be recommended, won�t be monetized, and won�t have key features including comments, suggested videos, and likes. Initial uses have been positive and have shown a substantial reduction in watch time of those videos,� she added.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg introduced two new algorithm changes with far-reaching consequences in January 2018.

First, Facebook slashed news articles� share of the newsfeed from five percent to four percent. Second, Facebook began boosting certain �trusted� news outlets and suppressing other, ostensibly less trustworthy sources. Together, the changes boosted a �trusted� minority of news outlets while suppressing their competitors.

Facebook now has a �point of view� toward the news as a result of the algorithm changes, Facebook executive Campbell Brown said at a tech conference in February. Brown is a former NBC News and CNN anchor who Facebook tapped to lead their news partnerships division in January 2017.

Facebook has no plans to identify which publishers it�s boosting and which ones it�s suppressing, a company spokesperson told TheDCNF.

Changes have the effect of censoring and suppressing conservatives

Conservatives and Christians across YouTube have repeatedly seen their videosand channels demonetized or censored, especially within the last year.

Conservative media company PragerU sued Google in October 2017 for repeatedly demonetizing their educational videos and placing them in �restricted� mode, but a federal judge dismissed the case on March 26, noting Google�s status as a private company.

Google�s fact-check operation smeared conservative websites by falsely attributing inaccurate statements to them, a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation revealed. The fact-check targeted conservative websites almost exclusively. Google canceled the program just three months after launching it, following a backlash in response to TheDCNF�s investigation.

Facebook�s recent algorithm changes have buried conservatives on the platform, tech website The Outline concluded in a lengthy report in early March. Conservative and right-wing publishers �were hit the hardest� by the algorithm change, the report found. �While the engagement numbers of most predominantly liberal publishers remained unaffected.�

Conservative website Western Journalism reached the same conclusion in a similar March 13 data report. Conservative websites saw a significant drop in traffic from Facebook following the algorithm change, while comparable liberal sources saw a slight increase, the report found.

�There are examples of declines across the political spectrum,� a Facebook spokesperson told TheDCNF but declined to publicly name any of the trusted or distrusted publishers, arguing that releasing the data would provide an incomplete picture of Facebook�s newsfeed.

YouTube Restores Banned Health Guru Channel � But Strips Nearly 100K Followers!

Google wants last laugh in censorship battle

Adan Salazar | Infowars.com - April 11, 2018


Video hosting platform YouTube restored a popular health channel Wednesday, but deleted a third of the organization�s followers.

Natural News founder Mike Adams, AKA The Health Ranger, announced YouTube had reinstated his channel, but did not provide an explanation as to why it was restored.

Moreover, the Google-owned platform brought the channel back, but deleted one third of its subscribers, nearly 100k � �yet another �F##k You� from YouTube to content creators like me,� says Adams.

�The message from YouTube is clear: We can ban you at any time, for any reason, without explanation, with no recourse, and even when we decide to turn your channel back on, we can just delete a third of all your followers, or do anything else we want to screw with your content and silence your voice,� Adams wrote Wednesday.

Youtube deleted the channel, which had over 350K subscribers and 41 million views, last month during a mass censorship purge against conservatives and others led by the Southern Poverty Law Center. It stands at 252.6K subscribers as of writing.

The channel�s deletion followed efforts to ban Infowars� own channel � cheered on by CNN, which referred several Infowars videos to YouTube for review.

Adams says the embattled platform�s latest censorship efforts are a last straw for many content creators and users.

�Even if YouTube reverses its outrageous banning of conservative and libertarian accounts, the world already knows that YouTube can never be trusted again,� says Adams, adding he�s launching a new video platform on July 4 dubbed Real.video.

�This is sort of obvious at this point, but none of us can trust YouTube, Google, Facebook or Twitter as �neutral� platforms anymore. We must actively seek out alternatives such as GAB.ai, REAL.video and MeWe.�

Watch Alex Jones and Mike Adams discuss YouTube�s Orwellian censorship efforts:

https://youtu.be/RVBIuAnwDY8

Patriot Nurse

YouTube strikes again! Patriot Nurse is yet the latest example of the liberal/progressive agenda on social media platforms. On April 11, she woke up and checked her channel and found that practically all of her videos had been demonitized including those that had nothing to do with firearms or patriotism. Even the video with medical training had been demonitized. Of course, there is no recourse for her as some libtard at YouTube has now decided that her work is worthless. Thankfully, she has her Patreon channel. If you enjoy her videos, please consider supporting her through Patreon.

And folks want us to depend on 'Facebook' to spread the militia word. Any guess's when it goes PC also?

Independent sites like this one, NOT under someone we do not know and have met face to face are about the only hope until they turn the internet OFF. YES they do have that capability as the US has done it to certain nations already!

The clear and present danger of Google-Facebook

Exclusive: Joseph Farah warns of Digital Cartel's increasing suppression of speech

Joseph Farah

Do you realize how the Google-Facebook Cartel is destroying the independent media in a way that amounts to a first strike against freedom of speech altogether?

There hasn�t been one big story by any news source, including WND, that lays this out clearly and unequivocally. The facts have just leaked out in stories here and there, leaving the public to assemble the information on their own.

So, let�s review what we know � or should know � by now. Frankly, it�s an urgent message of national security and public interest.

This �Digital Cartel,� as I have dubbed it, consisting of these two giant, avowedly �progressive� corporations, now controls more than 75 percent of the digital advertising market. Both employ strict political speech codes designed to determine what is acceptable discourse in the public square � much like what we see on university and college campuses. In the case of Google, these restrictions determine which websites succeed and which fail.

As a result of the policies in place at Google and Facebook, many perceived �right-leaning� online enterprises are deprived of traffic and revenues they would get if they had a different political point of view. While the Internet was once a free-and-open forum for the flow of information and discussion, today information and discussion are being strictly controlled by two major companies with the same �progressive� political agenda.

Do private companies have the �right� to do something like this? The answer is �yes� � except when they dominate the media marketplace to the extent that they become a monopoly or �cartel.� And that�s precisely where we are today. It�s unprecedented. We�ve never experienced anything like this in America before.

Radio and television companies have been prevented by federal cross-ownership rules and antitrust regulations from dominating local markets. But Google and Facebook are doing something similar across the nation and around the world. They literally have no competition.

As a result, businesses like WND, Breitbart, Daily Caller and others are like endangered species because they don�t have the political blessing of Google-Facebook. They are unfairly deprived of traffic and revenue from the dominant search engine and the dominant social media company. They, and many others, are facing catastrophic revenue losses, because the algorithms of Google-Facebook are purposely designed to ensure such sites get bupkis when it comes to traffic and revenue.

But it gets worse.

Did you know the Southern Poverty Law Center sets the standards and implementation for Google�s content guidelines? This is an extremist, left-wing group that labels people like Dr. Ben Carson and companies like WND as �haters� and �extremists� undeserving of access to the public square.

Meanwhile, this week, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Congress in open hearings that his company would impose even more strict policing of content � eventually turning it over to carefully programmed �artificial intelligence.�

How much stricter can it get? This week we learned the dynamic duo of Diamond and Silk, two black women who support Donald Trump on their Facebook page, were told they were denied their audience because they were �dangerous.�

Google-owned YouTube routinely scrubs content from conservatives and religious people and companies, such as Prager University, headed by brilliant radio talk-show host and author Dennis Prager. Recently, a judge ruled the company has the right to do that because it is �private.� Not so � the company is public, not private, and, therefore, regulated in its business practice by the federal government.

Where is all this leading?

First they came for Prager University. � Then they came for Diamond and Silk. � Then they came for WND and Breitbart and Daily Caller and a thousand other news sources, information portals, commentators, etc. It reminds me of that famous Martin Niem�ller quote.

Soon, the First Amendment will be reduced to words on an ancient piece of paper, and free speech will be dead.

Do I exaggerate?

I fear what we are experiencing at WND is going to become a contagion if something is not done right now to stop it.

If I didn�t believe that what�s happening represents an existential threat to free speech in America, quite honestly, I wouldn�t suggest it. But it does.

After more than 20 years on the internet, we are severely hurting as a result of all this. It�s been developing over time. It has sneaked up on all of us. But the evidence is all around us. It�s compelling. It cannot be denied. And the Digital Cartel, these unaccountable �masters of the universe� who know every movement we make because of their invasive technology, is announcing to the world it is not going to stop its un-American policies of controlling speech.

What can you do about it?

Governments And Social Media Companies Are Collaborating To Censor Anyone That Would Dare To Question Mainstream Media Narratives

The era of free and unfettered speech on the Internet is rapidly ending

Michael Snyder | End Of The American Dream - June 5, 2018

All over the world, national governments are working very closely with social media companies to take control of �Internet news�.

Up until recently, the Internet really was a wonderful marketplace of ideas, and ordinary people like you and I were empowered to share information with one another like never before in human history. But now the elite have seen the power that this can have, and they are cracking down hard. The term �fake news� has come to mean any source that would dare to question the official narratives that are being fed to us from the mainstream media, and in reality the push to censor �fake news� is really just an all-out effort to eliminate independent thought. Before the Internet, it was much easier for the elite to control the flow of information, and now they are taking unprecedented measures to control the flow of information in the digital age.

Just check out what is happening in France. A proposed law would give authorities the power �to immediately halt the publication of information deemed to be false��

Under the law, French authorities would be able to immediately halt the publication of information deemed to be false ahead of elections.

Social networks would have to introduce measures allowing users to flag up false reports, pass their data on such articles to authorities, and make public their efforts against fake news.
And the law would authorise the state to take foreign broadcasters off the air if they were attempting to destabilise France � a measure seemingly aimed at Russian state-backed outlet RT in particular.

New measures under consideration by the European Union as a whole are even more draconian.

According to a Breitbart report, all social media companies would be forced to use �content recognition technologies� to �monitor and control all uploads��

The European Union (EU) is less than a month away from voting to introduce aggressive new online copyright laws and �widespread censorship� measures, which critics say could strangle new media websites and stifle satire and online meme culture.

Unelected European Commission bureaucrats have drafted legislation which detractors say could force online platforms to monitor and control all uploads to some platforms with �content recognition technologies�. They are also said to have proposed what has been termed a �link tax�, which could compel blogs and other websites to pay just to reference content.

To give you an idea of what that would look like in practice, all we have to do is to consider what is already happening over in China.

Internet censorship in China has already achieved legendary status, and the largest social media network in China has already blocked at least 500 million postings in the battle against �fake news��

WeChat, China�s biggest social media network with around one billion users, has so far blocked about 500 million postings in its fight against fake news, according to a report by a government body.

Apart from blocking the posts directly, Tencent�s WeChat is working with hundreds of third-party organisations in an effort to block postings and quash �rumours� as part of its overall effort to �safeguard cybersecurity�, according to a report released on Friday by the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, an institute run by the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.

WeChat has built a mini-programme into its social messaging application dedicated to refuting �rumours�, including postings on topics such as the disappearance of Malaysia Airline Flight 370 in 2014 and various other topics, such as �cures� for cancer. By the end of 2017, the programme has quashed �rumours� for over 19.7 million users and around 37 million alerts were sent out.

Just think about that for a moment.

The Chinese are not just filtering out a few legitimately fake news stories.

The truth is that they are systematically censoring anything that does not fit the official narratives that they want the public to believe.

This is the greatest threat to freedom of speech that any of us have ever seen, and it has started in the United States too.

Late last year, YouTube made an announcement that it had decided to hire �10,000 new moderators� to �flag content��

�Of course, all of this comes after YouTube announced in December that it would hire some 10,000 new moderators to flag content,� Swann reported. �And those moderators have been flagging at a stunning rate.�

He noted further that in several cases the moderators were pulling entire channels �without any advance warning� whatsoever, and that most of those channels were deemed �either pro-gun or conservative.�

Since that time, conservative videos and conservative accounts have been �disappearing� in massive numbers.

Twitter is cracking down hard too. Multitudes of conservatives have been shadowbanned, and that happened to me too.

So I have started up a new Twitter account, and if you would like to follow it, you can find it right here.

On Facebook the censorship of conservatives has reached epic proportions, and now this week we learned that Facebook has decided to kill off the �trending topics� section and replace it with filtered news from �trustworthy and quality sources�.

In essence, what they want to do is to take more control over what we see and what we think.

So what should we do?

Do we keep banging our heads against the wall and continue to use these platforms that are systematically censoring us, or do we try to create new ones? Kurt Schlichter seems to believe that the latter would be the better choice�

Liberals want to win the victory they can�t achieve at the ballot box by using their cultural power to systematically marginalize and exclude Normal Americans from every aspect of society � and we can�t let them. From the business world to Hollywood, we are seeing them react to their utter repudiation in recent elections by trying to intimidate us into silent conformity as the price of us being allowed to participate in the non-governmental institutions of society. We must therefore have a two-part response to this act of cultural warfare � not only must we get right back in their smug little faces, but we must also build our own cultural institutions, ones that they can�t control.

The militant Normals built this country; they can build their own institutions too.

But ultimately if governments are the ones mandating the censorship, there will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. Just yesterday I wrote about how the Department of Homeland Security is now compiling a comprehensive list of journalists, editors, correspondents, bloggers and �social media influencers�, and I believe that is a very ominous sign.

The truth is that the battle to restore the U.S. Constitution is literally a battle to protect our most basic human rights.

If we do not have the freedom to think what we want and say what we want, it will only be a matter of time before all of our rights are gone.

And if the United States falls, there won�t be any guardians of liberty and freedom remaining on the entire planet.

We must wake the masses up while there is still time, because we really are extremely close to losing everything.

YouTube Will Now Decide FOR YOU What Is And What Isn’t AUTHORITATIVE NEWS!

July 13, 2018

By Press For Truth

The days of “YouTube” are over and the time of “ThemTube” is upon us. On Monday July 9th on the official YouTube Blog the company announced their plan to promote and fund “authoritative” news. The mainstream media outlets are not getting the views they used to on cable television but what they do have access to is analytics and ratings and they can see that the majority of news consumers are flooding to YouTube because they no longer trust the mainstream outlets and rightly so! In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth goes over the latest YouTube announcement that they plan to fund news agencies while promoting outlets they determine to be “authoritative”.

https://youtu.be/v2aAHUM_Dmc

This is truly scary. YouTube has said they plan to use vetted sources such as the Southern Poverty Law Center(SPLC) and Wikipedia to determine what is real news. Both of those apparatus being antithetical to freedom loving Americans. Apparently when the founders of Alphabet watched Fahrenheit 451 they were on the side of the statist book burners.

Mex,
After Trump leaves office, you can expect the left to go after conservative, republicans, Christians and constitutionalists with a vengeance. Our voices will be silenced and our access to alternative news sources will be cut off. We will be blamed for everything from bad weather to poor gas mileage. There will only be one narrative...the party line according to CNN and NPR. I look for things to get very bad quickly.

How Big Tech Censors Conservatives on Social Media

A new roadmap reveals all the censorship techniques – and how they all work together to stop free speech

Kit Daniels | Infowars.com - July 16, 2018

Censorship of conservative and libertarian speech from the Internet is real – and how it works exactly is outlined in a new, roadmap report intended for DC policymakers.

The easily readable report, entitled The Censorship Master Plan Decoded, is intended for the average American to understand how online censorship works and how the various methods of suppression work together to clamp down on free speech throughout the Internet.

It begins with a “triple threat” of institutions:

1) Corporate, legacy media

2) Left-leaning, “objective” fact-checkers and

3) Social media sites

Which attack free speech on three different fronts:

1) By fueling a “lynch mob” mentality in the public to kill “triggering” political speech,

2) By “fact checking” conservative viewpoints, judging them “fake news” while, in contrast, claiming liberal – or simply establishment – viewpoints are “factually true,” which ultimately leads to

3) “Shadow” banning – or outright removing – conservatives (including libertarians) from social media.

“These three fronts conspire to attack, defame and deplatform originators of certain types of speech (such as conservative speech, pro-Trump speech, natural health speech, pro-cannabis legalization speech, etc.,” the report’s author, Mike Adams, stated. “Thus, we are now faced with a kind of perfect storm in America – a ‘free speech apocalypse’ – where all the institutions that once called for protections of the freedom of expression are now actively conspiring to exterminate it.”

“This coordinated attack on free speech is now taking place in plain view.”

And, if left unchallenged, it will lead to a future Internet in which only one “official” opinion is allowed for each topic of discussion; a corporate monopoly will replace the Internet’s free marketplace of ideas.

No debate nor dissenting views will be tolerated.

Their overall goal is to have a “controlled” Internet in which a handful of media sites control the majority of the web traffic – and the speech allowed.

In other words, this version of the Internet is not unlike TV in the 1960s in which a handful of news outlets controlled the programming offered to the public who had no real influence in the discourse.

There are legislative solutions, however, which are presented in Part Six of the report.

“Read this document in full,” Adams added. “Forward it to your representatives in Washington D.C.”

“Urge lawmakers and our president to act on this now, or we will lose not just our freedom to speak, but our right to meaningfully participate in the dominant public space platforms through which social and professional interactions now take place.”