This is not good.
John Stossel reveals that on his Youtube video entitled “The Paris Climate Fraud”, that Google added a disclaimer on the video that refutes it’s main point.
.@YouTube has added a disclaimer to my global warming video, saying: "evidence show[s] that the climate system is warming."— John Stossel (@JohnStossel) August 15, 2018
I say that in my video, too. But does YouTube really need to inject its opinion? Is there no room for nuance?https://t.co/yvSuiUj6j6
As he points out, he even says as much in the video. Unbelievable!
Here’s a screenshot of the disclaimer under his video:
Of course Google says this is just ‘topical information’ related to the video. But we know what it really is – their passive version of fact-checking.
But the problem is much worse than it appears in this video.
As Doug Wead pointed out this morning, Google actually disabled his account for trying to promote a video with hate speech, or so they claimed. Wead was bumfuzzled because there was no hate speech in the video.
Within days, Google blocked my ad and informed my team that we had violated their policies. I called Google. The problem, they explained, was that the video had hate speech.
It was a Fox Business News video with Trish Regan interviewing me about the Russian collusion investigation. The Google employee could not find the exact offending words, but referred me to various other supervisors up the ladder.
It took much of the day listening to elevator music as I waited, playing “Civilization V” interspersed by brief conversations with successive employees reciting Google policies that they admitted explained nothing. We concluded I should re-submit the ad and whoever was offended at Google would be forced to surface.
Once again my ad was blocked, and this time my Google account was suspended. I felt like Roseanne Barr. Once again I called Google and spent a day trying to figure out what was wrong. “This call may be monitored,” they announced, and I announced back that I would do the same. So the discussion began. Was I too nice to President Trump? Should I have been more critical? Was it something Regan had said? She seems to fairly cover all sides of an issue. Why would they have a problem with her?
Google employees appeared to be baffled. Could they call me back tomorrow, they asked? The next day, Nurse Ratched at Google finally emerged. I was never given her name, but conversations with her employees indicated her sex. It was nothing that I or Regan had said in the video, her team explained. Huh?
No, no, the problem, I was told, was in the “crawler of words along the bottom of the video.” It was a quote of Trump declaring that the Robert Mueller investigation was a “witch hunt.” This was apparently hate speech.
A news crawler about a Trump “witch hunt” quote was hate speech? How absurdly ridiculous.
And what’s worse is that instead of reprimanding the person who made this decision, Google said they would only reenable Wead’s account if he refused to stop trying to promote the video.
Wead goes on to point out and explain how he was recently shadow-banned by Google. You’ll have to click over to read about that – it’s too long to quote here.
We are clearly living in a time when the tech world, which is run by liberals, is actively squelching conservative content on their platforms. And the problem – outside of the obvious – is that it could piss so many people off that they vote for the government to regulate these tech companies like public utilities. A conservative friend of mine has already decided that is the way to go.