Google CEO admits that are trying to censor ‘hate speech’

In an interview on HBO, Google CEO Sundar Pichai admits his company, and especially YouTube, is working hard to censor what they deem as ‘hate speech’:



In short, what Pichai is explaining here is exactly what they are doing to Steven Crowder.

None of us want harmful content on our platforms. I think last quarter alone we removed nine million videos from the platform. More recently we have introduced – just like today we do this in search. We rank content based on quality. And so we’re bringing that same notion and approach to YouTube so that we can rank higher quality stuff better and really prevent borderline content. Content which doesn’t exactly violate policies which need to be removed but which can still cause harm, and so we are working hard. It’s a hard computer science problem; it’s also a hard societal problem because we need better frameworks on what is safe speech, what’s not, and how do we as a company make those decisions. Let’s scale and get it right without making mistakes.

Crowder didn’t violate their policies and they admitted as much. Yet he was censored anyway from making money on his videos because Google and YouTube have become big brother.

This isn’t about ‘safe speech’ at all. This is a war on speech they disagree with and want to suppress.

It’s one thing to take down videos of a terrorist organization that is killing people, or videos that support those organizations. It’s wholly another thing to suppress videos because of political correctness in some kind of utopian effort to make the world a ‘safe space’ devoid of offenses. Sadly it appears that’s exactly where this world is headed.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

87 thoughts on “Google CEO admits that are trying to censor ‘hate speech’

  1. Conservatives just need to start living without using these platforms. You don’t need google, you don’t need youtube, you don’t need twitter, facebook or pinterest. Go enjoy life and screw these leftist fascists.

    1. You don’t need google, you don’t need youtube, you don’t need twitter, facebook or pinterest.

      The average individual doesn’t need them, but the caveat is in this day and age if you own a business advertising on social media is a must. These platforms have become interwoven into the way we conduct business that it’s very difficult to divorce them completely, and they know this.

      1. I understand the business side. Dishing out more money to these leftists for advertising isn’t going to help conservative causes either. People will have to pick either fight against these leftists now or lose everything if they get full control.

    2. Not true. I need it. I can’t exercise freedom of speech without it. Also I’m entitled.

      And other leftist arguments.

    3. I’ll stay on twitter until everyone has moved over to Parler. Right now there is too much good information there. Once Trump moves to Parler it will be game over for twitter.

  2. but which can still cause harm

    If they’re not going to define that, I’m not going to take them seriously when they say it.

    what is safe speech, what’s not

    Or that.

    It’s all just a recipe for arbitrary and capriciousness.

    Which I guess is their right. We all have a right to be a jerk to people we don’t like. But hiding behind that kind of weak sister garbage is lame.

    1. Words and sentences, heck, whole paragraphs can’t harm people. The left are such pussies.

      1. “Sticks and stones just break my bones, but names will cause lasting, searing emotional trauma.”
        -Treacher

  3. What the….???!!! That lady doing the interview threw me for a loop when “she” began to talk. Holy crap it’s a freaking dude!

    1. At least…. couldn’t…. the interviewer … at least try speaking in an upper range? I don’t get it. You want to be a girl. You put on the dress and the hair and all that…. but you won’t adjust how you speak? Dude….. yeah, I said it, dude…. clear give away.

  4. What’s interesting is how they assume authority as to what “hate speech” is. Based upon their own disgusting pig ideology.

  5. I don’t have a problem with them weeding out extreme speech. I don’t want to give an example but we are all aware that some of it is so bad it could cause people to get killed. If someone talks like that around here the comment will be removed as well.

    The problem is they don’t base their judgement on that. They base it on PC and what the left disagrees with. They are turning themselves into corporate brownshirts for the left.

    Surely there has to be a way to restrict their ability to ban perfectly accepted points of view.

  6. I don’t EVER use Google, Facebook, Pinterest, Snapchat, Twitter, etc. – all of that is trash. However, I have used YouTube due to the abundance and variety of content – wish I didn’t. And I participate with this excellent site (and The Resurgent). But too much of what’s out there is dangerous and addictive. Even the current POTUS isn’t immune (unfortunately).

  7. “This isn’t about ‘safe speech’ at all. This is a war on speech they disagree with and want to suppress.”

    That solidly sums it up. Leftist devils have taken over social media and most public/ cable media in one way or another. They have been increasingly censoring media and content to their own tastes and as a result, have poisoned the minds of the gullible and ignorant – useful idiots.

    To me, this is evil. And until people with more benevolent or honest intentions start up a viable alternative, the world is screwed. Humanity will be warped – because the tools contain funny, entertaining and distracting content that’s compelling to the passive consumer. My daughter (unfortunately) and most people of her generation are already hopelessly addicted to this crap. So we need wholesome alternatives.

  8. Censoring speech is anti-freedom and anti-American. Our Founding Fathers knew this, which is why they gave us the First Amendment.

  9. When these platforms act like a publisher deciding who is silenced, what speech is not permitted, they lose all protection of a platform. They can’t claim to be something they are not. Yes, these entities have a right to do whatever they with their product but they don’t have a right to have it both ways. They act as a publisher, they are a publisher.

  10. I will delete your comments because:
    -They are false
    -they are offensive
    -I don’t agree with them

    This is called CENSORSHIP

  11. Let’s keep it simple. Google CEO admits that Google is against free speech, and opposes open discussion. Google supports Muslim terrorists, but suppresses American Conservatives.

  12. Here is a link to YouTube’s “Harassment and Cyberbullyiing Policy.”

    https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802268?hl=en

    I believe YouTube indicated that Crowder was not in violation, but based on the policy as written it seems that YOuTube just as easily could have determined that he was. But I guess what constitutes “bullying” and “harassment” is open to interpretation.

  13. Who decides what is hateful and harmful and where did they get the authority to judge? That’s rhetorical BTW.

  14. I don’t have a problem with them weeding out extreme speech. I don’t want to give an example but we are all aware that some of it is so bad it could cause people to get killed. If someone talks like that around here the comment will be removed as well.

    The problem is they don’t base their judgement on that. They base it on PC and what the left disagrees with. They are turning themselves into corporate brownshirts for the left.

    Surely there has to be a way to restrict their ability to ban perfectly accepted points of view.

    1. Or…. stay with me here…. don’t.

      Unless the speech breaks some kind of established law (eg. child pornography, inciting riots, etc), then just let people speak it regardless of who it offends. And if someone can prove demonstrable harm as a result of someone’s speech, file action against the guy.

      We don’t need flags and panels and control control control. Just let people exercise harmless freedom, and accept the fact that sometimes they’ll exercise freedoms you don’t like.

      That’s called life in a free society. No harm, no foul, so leave me alone.

      1. @atomicsentinel I agree with your first point about letting comments go as long as they don’t violate any laws or incite riots or violence. That’s what I was talking about with filtering out the extremes. You’d still need flags to get a review because moderators can’t catch everything.

        The problem is that’s not what we’re getting. They’re banning content on the basis of political views and PC guidelines. I’m saying there needs to be a way to restrict their interference to only what you yourself said needs to be chopped off.

        1. Well, there’s no solution to that. Because freedom also means I don’t have to put up with anyone’s crap under my own roof. So, to your second point, which is what I’ve said from the beginning – we need to quit grovelling to youtube to give us a fair shake, and use the market to build some competition.

          1. @atomicsentinel The only way that’s going to happen is if there’s a mass exodus of conservatives that create a new market for the competition to cater to.

            1. Yes, and like leftists in Walmart, it’ll never happen. They don’t have the will. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

              Which is why I can’t take anyone seriously as they try to rationalize their stupid positions on this one.

      2. @atomicsentinel Maybe mass banning of conservatives could be a blessing in disguise. It could possibly lead to a competing social network that doesn’t ban based on leftist whims.

    1. He/She/It is a freak of nature. The fact they even used this person sends a message which side they are on.

  15. I don’t EVER use Google, Facebook, Pinterest, Snapchat, Twitter, etc. – all of that is trash. However, I have used YouTube due to the abundance and variety of content – wish I didn’t. And I participate with this excellent site (and The Resurgent). But too much of what’s out there is dangerous and addictive. Even the current POTUS isn’t immune (unfortunately).

  16. Censoring speech is anti-freedom and anti-American. Our Founding Fathers knew this, which is why they gave us the First Amendment.

  17. “This isn’t about ‘safe speech’ at all. This is a war on speech they disagree with and want to suppress.”

    That solidly sums it up. Leftist devils have taken over social media and most public/ cable media in one way or another. They have been increasingly censoring media and content to their own tastes and as a result, have poisoned the minds of the gullible and ignorant – useful idiots.

    To me, this is evil. And until people with more benevolent or honest intentions start up a viable alternative, the world is screwed. Humanity will be warped – because the tools contain funny, entertaining and distracting content that’s compelling to the passive consumer. My daughter (unfortunately) and most people of her generation are already hopelessly addicted to this crap. So we need wholesome alternatives.

  18. What’s interesting is how they assume authority as to what “hate speech” is. Based upon their own disgusting pig ideology.

  19. What the….???!!! That lady doing the interview threw me for a loop when “she” began to talk. Holy crap it’s a freaking dude!

    1. At least…. couldn’t…. the interviewer … at least try speaking in an upper range? I don’t get it. You want to be a girl. You put on the dress and the hair and all that…. but you won’t adjust how you speak? Dude….. yeah, I said it, dude…. clear give away.

      1. @dayenu I have more respect for cross dressers that only do it at night. How this man got a job as a journalist and is allowed to interview people is beyond me. I wouldn’t be able to take the interview seriously.

  20. Conservatives just need to start living without using these platforms. You don’t need google, you don’t need youtube, you don’t need twitter, facebook or pinterest. Go enjoy life and screw these leftist fascists.

    1. I’ll stay on twitter until everyone has moved over to Parler. Right now there is too much good information there. Once Trump moves to Parler it will be game over for twitter.

    2. You don’t need google, you don’t need youtube, you don’t need twitter, facebook or pinterest.

      The average individual doesn’t need them, but the caveat is in this day and age if you own a business advertising on social media is a must. These platforms have become interwoven into the way we conduct business that it’s very difficult to divorce them completely, and they know this.

      1. I understand the business side. Dishing out more money to these leftists for advertising isn’t going to help conservative causes either. People will have to pick either fight against these leftists now or lose everything if they get full control.

    3. Not true. I need it. I can’t exercise freedom of speech without it. Also I’m entitled.

      And other leftist arguments.

  21. but which can still cause harm

    If they’re not going to define that, I’m not going to take them seriously when they say it.

    what is safe speech, what’s not

    Or that.

    It’s all just a recipe for arbitrary and capriciousness.

    Which I guess is their right. We all have a right to be a jerk to people we don’t like. But hiding behind that kind of weak sister garbage is lame.

    1. Words and sentences, heck, whole paragraphs can’t harm people. The left are such pussies.

      1. “Sticks and stones just break my bones, but names will cause lasting, searing emotional trauma.”
        -Treacher

  22. Dan Bongino keeps talking about working on a “Plan B” for his Youtube content. I assume that it’s another video hosting platform.

    BlazeTV already has a decent Internet footprint and infrastructure. It would seem like a good business idea for them to start to get into hosting independent content that may have trouble finding a home on Youtube.

  23. Who decides what is hateful and harmful and where did they get the authority to judge? That’s rhetorical BTW.

  24. Dan Bongino keeps talking about working on a “Plan B” for his Youtube content. I assume that it’s another video hosting platform.

    BlazeTV already has a decent Internet footprint and infrastructure. It would seem like a good business idea for them to start to get into hosting independent content that may have trouble finding a home on Youtube.

Comments are closed.