WATCH: James O’Keefe releases BLOCKBUSTER video exposing how Pinterest blocks Live Action, conservative websites, Christian searches and much more…

James O’Keefe has released a blockbuster video this morning detailing how the social media website Pinterest is heavily blocking websites that they disagree with including Live Action. They are also blocking search terms related to the Bible and Christianity as well as commentaries by Ben Shapiro on Islam and Muslims.

This information comes from an insider who sat down with O’Keefe to expose all of this.

O’Keefe spends a good portion of the video discussing how Pinterest has blocked Live Action by putting it on a porn block list. By doing this it prevents a ‘pin’ from being created with Live Action’s website domain.



O’Keefe also points out that there are other conservative websites in the blocked porn list like Zero Hedge, PJ Media, and American Thinker. Here’s a screenshot I took from the video showing some of those domains:

There’s no telling how many other conservative domains are blocked. We could be on the list ourselves…

O’Keefe then exposes how Pinterest is blocking searches about Christianity and the Bible using a sensitive keyword list. They also use this keyword list to block any searches for Ben Shapiro and his commentary on Islam and Muslims.

On top of all of this, they have a ‘conspiracy list’ which blocks content they consider to be conspiracies against companies or individuals. On that list is the David Daleiden’s exposing of Planned Parenthood for selling baby body parts.

I’ve never used Pinterest myself but I must tell you that with this level of grotesque bias against conservatives and Christianity, there’s no way I’m going to start. And if I had an account I would delete it immediately.

UPDATE: Project Veritas says Pinterest has responded:

Pinterest REACTS. LiveAction.org is no longer on their “Porn Domain Blacklist”
Pinterest REACTS AGAIN. LiveAction’s Pinterest Account has been permanently suspended.

They remove Live Action from the block list but then suspend it permanently? Sounds to me like they are doubling down.

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.

272 thoughts on “WATCH: James O’Keefe releases BLOCKBUSTER video exposing how Pinterest blocks Live Action, conservative websites, Christian searches and much more…

  1. Do people go to Pinterest for politics? I thought is was mostly craft and cooking ideas and home decorating. I don’t think politics needs to be everywhere, can’t we have some common ground?

    I haven’t been on Pinterest much, but my daughters love it, they are all very Conservative… I asked around and they say they’ve never really seen much politics on there. A little but mild. So maybe they just want to make sure it stays about crafting and cooking and stuff and not politics.

    Maybe we can not make everything political. I’d sign a petition to keep politics off Pinterest.

    I am fine with getting father’s day card ideas from a liberal, even if they are pro-choice.

    1. Didn’t know they did politics either. But apparently they do and apparently they are blocking out all things Christian and/or Conservative. I don’t like that.

    2. Pinterest is a subsidiary of Etsy. It’s where people go when to find a creative project they might like, utterly fail at doing it themselves, and then log on to Etsy to go buy it from someone else.

      1. Someone on Etsy (Germany) offered consecrated hosts from a Catholic Church for use in a ‘black mass’.
        Etsy claims they removed the offering (after backlash). I guess that’s fine but now I think twice about shopping on Etsy because it was a clear violation of their terms and yet… oh my, it just somehow got through.

        https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/05/14/sale-of-consecrated-hosts-violates-etsys-policies-website-confirms/

        https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/for-sale-on-etsy-nine-consecrated-communion-hosts-for-abuse

    3. I never use it intentionally myself, but google images does link to there a lot and i have noticed there are far left type images on there quite often. If liberal views are allowed then so should opposite views, i get your point though don’t get me wrong.

    4. To your point — it would be interesting to find out if Planned Parenthood has a Pinterest account. If so, is it subject to the same treatment as Pro-Life organizations and Churches? If they are apolitical across the board? No problem. If their bias leans one way – big problem – you’ve chosen sides and failed to inform your users. Now they know.

    5. I dont go there for politics, but I did pin a pretty picture with a bible verse there and it was my most shared pin for several months.

  2. I wish journalists would do their job as well as James O’Keefe…. Its been a while since I saw wrongdoing uncovered in the mainstream media.

  3. American Thinker.com?!?!
    TeaParty.org?!?!?
    George Soros funding anti-conservative groups is a conspiracy theory?!?!?

    At the very least, viewers should know how their content is being censored. This is insidious and the perpetrators are no different than any other evil propagandist.

  4. We can argue whether or not Conservatives should be in favor of government regulation of these media platforms. There are good points on both sides.

    But what should be obvious to *everyone*… this is scary. It was bad enough that the media was left-leaning back in the days before the Internet; but the power of these big tech social media companies is much greater.

    Back in the day, when you weren’t watching the news or reading a paper, your leisure and personal pursuits were fairly untouched by politics. These days, these social media companies touch everything. They are on our phones, all over our leisurely web surfing, … everywhere.

    Politics are everywhere because social media and media are everywhere.

    1. Exactly!

      The left ruins everything: https://www.prageru.com/video/the-left-ruins-everything/

      I’m taking a graduate history class (more historiology) where “tradionalists” are dismissed out of hand as being racists, but there is a debate between “revisionists” and “cultural contructionists.” They don’t care about history, they care about creating a “usable past” – manipulate history to push their political agenda.

      It’s sickening.

    2. But what should be obvious to *everyone*… this is scary.

      Oh bullshit. Y’know, when I still subscribed to a newspaper, every single day I’d get a lot of information – and a “style” section that just could not shut up about homosexuality. Every single day they had some fluff piece of some homosexual’s herb garden or one-man show or wedding plans. Every day. And do you honestly think that the editorials section had much from the right-wing point of view? No. They just wouldn’t publish that kind of stuff. You were free to create it and send it to them, but I guarantee it always ended in the trash.

      You know what? I just chucked the style section and I ignored the editorials. And if I wanted news from a conservative, I had to go looking for it.

      This is no different. It’s just digital instead of print. Now, you can whine and fuss about platforms vs publishers until you’re blue in the face – but that’s missing the point. The point is, my rights were not deprived in any way shape or form because the major news source I had back in the day shoved leftism down my through and marginalized right-wing viewpoints. And you know what I did when I finally got tired of it?

      I stopped reading that newspaper. I didn’t insist that they owed me some fair amount of space on their page. I didn’t screech about information control or censorship. I just chucked the newspaper in the trash.

      FFS, the hysterics over this subject are ridiculous.

    1. @squirrelly Yup, this is what I was saying below. Because they have lobbyists in DC, nothing happens to them when they should have their “platform protections” taken away and be liable for what they publish on their sites.

      Get the government out and allow them to fend by themselves like the rest of us!

  5. Pinterest? Really? Social media is truly becoming a vast wasteland to avoid. Never been on Pinterest. Never will be now.

  6. Just closed my Pinterest account. Hopefully I can get other family members to do the same.

  7. Bravo James. I don’t use Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, etc. I am weaning myself from FB. I applaud James’ work and wish him well.

  8. Plus another thing I can’t stand about Pinterest, and Google is equally to blame for this is when you do an image search on Google the bulk of the images come from Pinterest. And if you hit one of those Pinterest image links not only will it not take you to the image you clicked on but Pinterest will request that you join their site. I hate them!

      1. I am in agreement with both of you. I hate the tactics of Yelp and Pinterest — but they always show up then it is ‘sorry, you’re out of luck unless you join.’ I’ve learned/am learning to avoid both like the plague.

  9. When we allow businesses to ignore a culture of freedom of speech we will get more and more of this.

    1. You don’t get freedom speech in my business either.

      If I hear anything positive about the Patriots or Tom Brady, you’re out.

      Clearly I’m a tyrant.

      1. @atomicsentinel I think I have seen enough of you shilling for tech monopolies. Its wearing thin. :silly:

  10. Enough is enough! Where is the DOJ!? Take these damn discriminatory and monopolistic companies to the cleaners–MAKE AN EXAMPLE!! They are obviously doing it because they know they can get away with it because other companies like Google and Twitter are getting away with it!

    And we need to start protecting political leanings in addition to the other protected classes!!

    1. It’s very simple, get the government out of it. Take away their “platform protection” and reclassify them as publishers where they can do what they want, but can be held liable for content on their site.

      We do NOT need regulation by the government as that will not end well for freedom.

      1. But they aren’t publishers–they are platforms and hence are restricted on how/when they censor content on individual publishers. Government regulation is already there and should be applied to these platforms like it’s applied to utilities.

        1. @Abe Lincoln I understand that they are platforms but the government is NOT holding them accountable as they should. These companies have tons of lobbyists and politicians are looking the other way and letting these companies get away with censoring people they disagree with, namely anyone that doesn’t agree with the far leftist idiology.

          That’s why I believe they should take the government protection of a “platform” away and make them all publishers, hence responsible for the content, they can censor all they want, but they are also not immune to lawsuits for discrimination.

    2. I don’t see Pinterest as being monopolistic. Anything there can be found using the internet. It’s an aggregate of information.

      1. It’s not just a search engine, there are other features it provides no other service provides. I’m not expert at it, but I know it’s a social media geared around specific points of interest.

        1. Right but it’s just aggregated information. I think people can communicate through it. I’ve only used it for my own purposes and have no use for interacting with anyone on such a site. Could be I just haven’t explored all of its capabilities – I know I haven’t – so maybe it does things I’m completely ignorant about. I just don’t think there is anything there that’s exclusive to Pinterest.

        2. Pinterest is no monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. Or are you going to define the term “monopoly” so narrowly it becomes meaningless? Oh, Pinterest has cornered the market (and actively prevents others from competing) in the image aggregation with some social features business? There’s a zillion companies out there that allow people to post their own pics and comment on them.

  11. I despise Pinterest. People keep taking my photos from my site and posting them on Pinterest. Sure they’ll post a link to my site below my photos but for the most part Pinterest gets the lions share of hits not me. Off of my photos. I don’t mind sharing my photos but at least ask me first before you use them don’t just take.

  12. After reading this I immediately unsubscribed. I am so sick of this crap. Social media has staged an information coup and still many on the right use them. WTF?

      1. Good for you Nana. It’s hypocritical to complain and then continue to use them. Although I will miss the Minions. 😉

  13. I saw this earlier this morning. I’ve used Pinterest for projects at home so go to it sometimes. It’s all just information aggregated from the internet by its users so nothing I can’t find by searching the interwebs. I have uninstalled it from my phone and left a 1 star review noting that they play politics so I don’t need their app.

    1. It appears the app stores are either throttling reviews or removing one star reviews because of this report, much like Yelp does when a business is in the news.

      1. Even Rotten Tomatoes – the movie review site – has got in on censoring one star reviews. A site that is supposed to provide insight on movies and the publics response is now censoring those reviews. In what world does that make sense? It makes them unreliable and worthless — I no longer trust their reviews AT ALL. I was burned by a horrible movie that was made by someone it’s not polite to criticize in today’s world. Literally the ratings it gave the movie made absolutely no sense — people were leaving early from the theater. That’s when I discovered they’ve sold out and are altering the ratings. RT and sites that do what Pinterest and others are doing lose all credibility and are written-off as untrustworthy.

  14. I say it every time when speaking about Project Veritas and/or James O’Keefe = “National Treasure!” What’s sickening is that the enemy is caught red-handed and usually gets away with it anyway. May God bless and protect James O’Keefe and his team. They are invaluable.

    1. Project Veritas and Judicial Watch are all we have in regards to investigative reporting. The rest of the media is the DNC PR arm!

      1. Sharyl Attkisson is a good reporter and tells the truth not her opinion.
        John Kass of the Chicago Tribute is also mostly fair. How he manages that in a city like Chicago is a mystery.

        1. @kenoshamarge Lara Logan is another good reporter. She just worked with Sharyl Attkisson on some projects. Lara is one tough cookie. She did a 3 1/2 hour sit down with a Navy Seal named Mike Ritland on his program called “Mike Drop” and she talked about her life and harrowing tails in the middle east where she was almost raped and killed in the middle of a mob. Definitely worth the watch. I had it playing while I was working on the computer one afternoon.

          I found the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZlVx-phlPk

          1. Agreed – Logan is great. I’m sure there are a few others here and there although right now I can’t think of any but the vast majority wouldn’t make a pimple on a real newsperson’s butt.

  15. Pintwist is for pinheads.

    Appears that Satan has tight control of social media organizations.

  16. Pinterest publicly accused LiveAction of spreading “misinformation”.

    That’s libel and should be actionable.

  17. These platform protections from the government need to be taken away. These companies are acting as publishers and censoring content so they do not qualify as a platform with the protections granted by the government.

    As soon as they are on an even playing field without government protection, they can do whatever they damn well please. Can we please understand this difference? If you’re a private company, have at it, ban who you please, but you are also subject to discrimination lawsuits like any business.

    If you want to truly be a platform where all speech is welcome and have the protections the government affords platforms, then this is not how you are able to behave. Choose. 😡 😡 😡

  18. I read once a comment stating that perhaps it’s best to not become overly beholden to any amusement that requires a monitor. I was, and am, inclined to agree.

  19. Do people go to Pinterest for politics? I thought is was mostly craft and cooking ideas and home decorating. I don’t think politics needs to be everywhere, can’t we have some common ground?

    I haven’t been on Pinterest much, but my daughters love it, they are all very Conservative… I asked around and they say they’ve never really seen much politics on there. A little but mild. So maybe they just want to make sure it stays about crafting and cooking and stuff and not politics.

    Maybe we can not make everything political. I’d sign a petition to keep politics off Pinterest.

    I am fine with getting father’s day card ideas from a liberal, even if they are pro-choice.

    1. Didn’t know they did politics either. But apparently they do and apparently they are blocking out all things Christian and/or Conservative. I don’t like that.

    2. I dont go there for politics, but I did pin a pretty picture with a bible verse there and it was my most shared pin for several months.

    3. Pinterest is a subsidiary of Etsy. It’s where people go when to find a creative project they might like, utterly fail at doing it themselves, and then log on to Etsy to go buy it from someone else.

      1. Someone on Etsy (Germany) offered consecrated hosts from a Catholic Church for use in a ‘black mass’.
        Etsy claims they removed the offering (after backlash). I guess that’s fine but now I think twice about shopping on Etsy because it was a clear violation of their terms and yet… oh my, it just somehow got through.

        https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/05/14/sale-of-consecrated-hosts-violates-etsys-policies-website-confirms/

        https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/for-sale-on-etsy-nine-consecrated-communion-hosts-for-abuse

    4. I never use it intentionally myself, but google images does link to there a lot and i have noticed there are far left type images on there quite often. If liberal views are allowed then so should opposite views, i get your point though don’t get me wrong.

    5. To your point — it would be interesting to find out if Planned Parenthood has a Pinterest account. If so, is it subject to the same treatment as Pro-Life organizations and Churches? If they are apolitical across the board? No problem. If their bias leans one way – big problem – you’ve chosen sides and failed to inform your users. Now they know.

  20. When we allow businesses to ignore a culture of freedom of speech we will get more and more of this.

    1. You don’t get freedom speech in my business either.

      If I hear anything positive about the Patriots or Tom Brady, you’re out.

      Clearly I’m a tyrant.

      1. @atomicsentinel I think I have seen enough of you shilling for tech monopolies. Its wearing thin. :silly:

          1. Now @atomicsentinel are you attempting to chase away people from these forums with that remark? 💡

            1. No. You stated a problem you were having, and I offered you a solution.

              I’m helping. I’m a helpful person. The nicest person on the internet.

              1. The problem I’m having is reading past all the bilge you post. I will manage somehow, but your solution is not helpful at all.

                1. Try the scroll wheel. You can just zip right past it all.

                  Won’t quite get you the echo chamber you’re looking for, but it’s pretty close.

                2. @atomicsentinel I can scroll past, but the arguement is worn out, you keep repeating the same dumb crap you posted before.

                  Has nothing to do with desiring an echo chamber, you are half the posts here.

                3. What can I say. There’s a lot of incorrect stuff to correct.

                  Or mock.

                  Stop being wrong all the time and I’d post less.

                4. If shilling for tech corporations suppressing speech they dont like is right – I’m happy to be wrong.

                5. There’s a certain irony to be found in you complaining about speech you don’t like on a free website that someone’s hosting to let you speak your mind.

  21. They removed it from the blacklist probably to try to claim it was a mistake or even hide evidence it was even there, as that would give support to a discrimination or defamation lawsuit by Live Action. It think it’s an attempt to cover their tracks, but too late.

  22. So….if they block anything that attacks something that someone else finds sacred, does that mean they block pro-choice content? Something tells me no.

  23. Want to share pics with friends? Accept being a second class citizen if you’re a Christian.

    Want to watch cute kitten videos? Accept being bombarded by leftist, bigoted videos.

    Want to search for a documentary on Sweden? Google will filter out results they don’t want you to see.

    Want to take a history class? Expect 11 weeks of non-stop political debate over racism and sexism, but no history.

    As @trytothink points out below, politics is injected into everything. The left turns everything and every place into a battleground. When Zero told them to get in our faces, they obeyed.

    The left ruins everything: https://www.prageru.com/video/the-left-ruins-everything/

    1. Want to share pics with friends?

      I have email. And text messaging. And envelopes with stamps on them.

      Want to watch cute kitten videos?

      Are the leftist videos a prerequisite to the kitten videos or something? Like, “Watch 5 videos of Karl Marx indoctrination before watching the kitty play with the laser pointer?”

      Want to search for a documentary on Sweden?

      I suppose I could always check the library.

      Want to take a history class?

      Well that’s a problem with the classroom, not with the youtubes.

      When Zero told them to get in our faces, they obeyed.

      Eh, I mostly ignore them. They’re basically like tiny yappy dogs.

      1. And then AT wonders why the world has passed her right by and everything has gone to h3ll in a handbasket.

        1. I don’t wonder that. The answer is painfully obvious. Entitlement mentality is going to choke this worthless species to death.

          And good riddance.

        2. @finrod , you used a feminine pronoun!! …be careful out there.

          @atomicsentinel was mentioning yesterday how …er… ze? zi? it? zit? was transitioning, but the destination sex, gender, species, material state is still “to be determined.”

  24. Unbelievably stupid of Pinterest to admit their bias by first contacting Project Veritas to remove them from the porn list and then permanently suspend their account in retaliation for embarrassing them! Then again,I never,ever accuse liberals of being smart! Smart liberal is an oxymoron,or as my 8 year old grandson called it,an ox moron! Works either way!

  25. Pinterest, another disgusting, delusional, and pathetic corporation fully in lockstep with Planned Parenthood… LiveAction speaks truth in a gracious manner… LiveAction spreads Light in the darkness. Pinterest’s silencing of them is reprehensible… Pinterest supports a culture of death.

    1. Pinterest, another disgusting, delusional, and pathetic corporation fully in lockstep with Planned Parenthood

      Yes. But omg I’m so desperate to use them!

      1. Stop attributing your own insanity to others. GH said nothing close to what you are claiming.

        1. I didn’t say he did. I just think it’s so strange how the right-wing is so obsessed with using these, and only these, services.

          1. Yes you did. You used his comment in your post. You are the one in need of the waaaaaambulance.

          2. Nobody is this obtuse, so you’re either willfully ignorant, in denial, or just a troll.

            The “social” in social media has to do with the nature in “human nature.” People go where other people are. If conservatives abandon these publishing sites or are kicked out, then a massive number of people with only a passing political interest will develop a very warped worldview.

            They go to talk about kittens, puppies, fudge recipes, and then they have politics shoved down their foolishly consenting throats without their consent.

            1. If conservatives abandon these publishing sites or are kicked out, then a massive number of people with only a passing political interest will develop a very warped worldview.

              A person’s education and understanding of the world is their own responsibility. Not somebody else’s to provide it to them in the way YOU define as most fair.

              They go to talk about kittens, puppies, fudge recipes, and then they have politics shoved down their foolishly consenting throats without their consent.

              “And the snake looked up and grinned, ‘Foolish boy, you knew what I was when you picked me up.'”

              1. So you’re not affected by how others vote?

                Several of the founders, not the least of which were John Adams and George Washington, explained at great length how important an educated and well informed electorate was for our republic and to maintaining liberty.

                …but you’re just another person who wants to watch it all burn down out of spite and resentment. See, you share another trait with leftists…you’re quintessentially destructive.

                1. Yes, they explained it and it’s very important.

                  But you can’t compel people to become educated and well informed. That’s ones own responsibility, which far too many Americans willingly abdicate.

                  But… for example, if you’re going to vote Donald because he’s not Hillary, that’s a monumentally stupid thing to do. I can try to talk you out of it, but I can’t shove all the reasoning and principles down your throat and force you to accept them. You have to do that on your own, based on your own judgment.

                  And if one judgment is determined by only ever going to echo chambers to hear what they want to hear, that’s on them. If one only wants to provide an echo chamber for one tune of voices, that’s also fair game in a free society. I think it’s a failing in one’s civic duty – but you can’t compel that either, can you.

              2. Uhh, wrong on that last bit. There are tons of people who don’t know it’s a snake in the nicely presented gift bag of ‘Come here and share what interests you.’. It’s the deception, AT. Not the freedom to block content that’s the issue. The deceit.

                1. So you’re all more or less jilted lovers then, is that it?

                  (ps. I knew what it was the moment it showed its face. Which is why I never got on board with any of them. What’s everyone else’s excuse?)

  26. Pinterest? Really? Social media is truly becoming a vast wasteland to avoid. Never been on Pinterest. Never will be now.

  27. We can argue whether or not Conservatives should be in favor of government regulation of these media platforms. There are good points on both sides.

    But what should be obvious to *everyone*… this is scary. It was bad enough that the media was left-leaning back in the days before the Internet; but the power of these big tech social media companies is much greater.

    Back in the day, when you weren’t watching the news or reading a paper, your leisure and personal pursuits were fairly untouched by politics. These days, these social media companies touch everything. They are on our phones, all over our leisurely web surfing, … everywhere.

    Politics are everywhere because social media and media are everywhere.

    1. Exactly!

      The left ruins everything: https://www.prageru.com/video/the-left-ruins-everything/

      I’m taking a graduate history class (more historiology) where “tradionalists” are dismissed out of hand as being racists, but there is a debate between “revisionists” and “cultural contructionists.” They don’t care about history, they care about creating a “usable past” – manipulate history to push their political agenda.

      It’s sickening.

    2. But what should be obvious to *everyone*… this is scary.

      Oh bullshit. Y’know, when I still subscribed to a newspaper, every single day I’d get a lot of information – and a “style” section that just could not shut up about homosexuality. Every single day they had some fluff piece of some homosexual’s herb garden or one-man show or wedding plans. Every day. And do you honestly think that the editorials section had much from the right-wing point of view? No. They just wouldn’t publish that kind of stuff. You were free to create it and send it to them, but I guarantee it always ended in the trash.

      You know what? I just chucked the style section and I ignored the editorials. And if I wanted news from a conservative, I had to go looking for it.

      This is no different. It’s just digital instead of print. Now, you can whine and fuss about platforms vs publishers until you’re blue in the face – but that’s missing the point. The point is, my rights were not deprived in any way shape or form because the major news source I had back in the day shoved leftism down my through and marginalized right-wing viewpoints. And you know what I did when I finally got tired of it?

      I stopped reading that newspaper. I didn’t insist that they owed me some fair amount of space on their page. I didn’t screech about information control or censorship. I just chucked the newspaper in the trash.

      FFS, the hysterics over this subject are ridiculous.

      1. …and there were/are laws and regulations preventing a single entity from gaining a controlling interest in information providers within an area because we recognized too much power in too few hands is a threat to representative government.

        1. because we recognized too much power in too few hands

          Which it isn’t. There’s a vast internet out there. Pinterest doesn’t control nearly as much information as you seem to believe it does.

            1. I don’t use Pinterest (or Facebook or publish Youtube videos) in the first place. Have I been deprived something?

              1. Social media on online communications is the currency of the day. For example, if you are a marketer (or work in media at all) and you’re not using it — then you have failed. Direct mail postcards and Comcast television spots are a money waste… get with the times.

                1. That doesn’t really answer my question. Have I suffered some kind of loss of rights or freedom because I never used these things in the first place? Have I been wrongfully deprived of something by not using them?

      2. Fascinating. Maybe next time you can read my post before responding to something else.

  28. Bravo James. I don’t use Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, etc. I am weaning myself from FB. I applaud James’ work and wish him well.

  29. American Thinker.com?!?!
    TeaParty.org?!?!?
    George Soros funding anti-conservative groups is a conspiracy theory?!?!?

    At the very least, viewers should know how their content is being censored. This is insidious and the perpetrators are no different than any other evil propagandist.

  30. Just closed my Pinterest account. Hopefully I can get other family members to do the same.

  31. Plus another thing I can’t stand about Pinterest, and Google is equally to blame for this is when you do an image search on Google the bulk of the images come from Pinterest. And if you hit one of those Pinterest image links not only will it not take you to the image you clicked on but Pinterest will request that you join their site. I hate them!

      1. I am in agreement with both of you. I hate the tactics of Yelp and Pinterest — but they always show up then it is ‘sorry, you’re out of luck unless you join.’ I’ve learned/am learning to avoid both like the plague.

    1. @squirrelly Yup, this is what I was saying below. Because they have lobbyists in DC, nothing happens to them when they should have their “platform protections” taken away and be liable for what they publish on their sites.

      Get the government out and allow them to fend by themselves like the rest of us!

    1. I agree wholeheartedly. Sure, they are free to do what they want with their companies, however, they should not be considered “platforms” anymore and we, the people, should be able to sue them. The government should no longer give them special protections.

  32. I read once a comment stating that perhaps it’s best to not become overly beholden to any amusement that requires a monitor. I was, and am, inclined to agree.

  33. Pinterest publicly accused LiveAction of spreading “misinformation”.

    That’s libel and should be actionable.

  34. These platform protections from the government need to be taken away. These companies are acting as publishers and censoring content so they do not qualify as a platform with the protections granted by the government.

    As soon as they are on an even playing field without government protection, they can do whatever they damn well please. Can we please understand this difference? If you’re a private company, have at it, ban who you please, but you are also subject to discrimination lawsuits like any business.

    If you want to truly be a platform where all speech is welcome and have the protections the government affords platforms, then this is not how you are able to behave. Choose. 😡 😡 😡

  35. I despise Pinterest. People keep taking my photos from my site and posting them on Pinterest. Sure they’ll post a link to my site below my photos but for the most part Pinterest gets the lions share of hits not me. Off of my photos. I don’t mind sharing my photos but at least ask me first before you use them don’t just take.

      1. I don’t have the money nor time to go around being litigious. You can have them taken down if you request it. The problem is there are literally hundreds of my photos up there. To even find them all would be a major task. Then filing a request per photo. Plus what’s to stop someone posting even more of my photos in the mean time? I have other things I’d rather be doing.

        1. Well, if you want your photos gone from Pinterest, that’s what you’ll have to do.

  36. After reading this I immediately unsubscribed. I am so sick of this crap. Social media has staged an information coup and still many on the right use them. WTF?

      1. Good for you Nana. It’s hypocritical to complain and then continue to use them. Although I will miss the Minions. 😉

  37. I wish journalists would do their job as well as James O’Keefe…. Its been a while since I saw wrongdoing uncovered in the mainstream media.

  38. Sigh…there goes my crafts, Snoopy cartoons, doggie cuteness, hair cuts,…gone from my computer. O’Keefe is a treasure.

      1. @kenoshamarge Do you mean without bias? or without shadow banning? Because any website can have bias, it makes a difference if they are banning people or letting free speech reign.

        1. Maybe what I mean is “fair”. I have no problem with people posting “their” side of an issue but I want BOTH sides to have that prerogative. And if you have a rule against certain things – say such as vulgar language and hateful rhetoric then enforce it for everyone.

  39. I saw this earlier this morning. I’ve used Pinterest for projects at home so go to it sometimes. It’s all just information aggregated from the internet by its users so nothing I can’t find by searching the interwebs. I have uninstalled it from my phone and left a 1 star review noting that they play politics so I don’t need their app.

    1. It appears the app stores are either throttling reviews or removing one star reviews because of this report, much like Yelp does when a business is in the news.

      1. Even Rotten Tomatoes – the movie review site – has got in on censoring one star reviews. A site that is supposed to provide insight on movies and the publics response is now censoring those reviews. In what world does that make sense? It makes them unreliable and worthless — I no longer trust their reviews AT ALL. I was burned by a horrible movie that was made by someone it’s not polite to criticize in today’s world. Literally the ratings it gave the movie made absolutely no sense — people were leaving early from the theater. That’s when I discovered they’ve sold out and are altering the ratings. RT and sites that do what Pinterest and others are doing lose all credibility and are written-off as untrustworthy.

  40. Pintwist is for pinheads.

    Appears that Satan has tight control of social media organizations.

  41. Hey, that’s not fair. I am entitled to Pinterest. Read the federalist papers. All citizens shall have an absolute entitlement to have their work searchable on Pinterest. Don’t source that, just trust me on it.

    Y’know, they don’t have a copy of the book I wrote at the library either. It’s not even IN their dewey decimal system. Libraries are fascist tyrants. How am I supposed to spread my message if nobody can find it!

    I have the right to YOUR tools, your work-product, in order to spread my message. Just like I have a right to a car to drive to the public speaking forum. Gimme a car. I’m entitled.

    It’s not fair. Life’s not fair. Help me government, you’re my only hope.

    1. The vast majority of public businesses are not platforms afforded legal protection from lawsuits under the guise that they operate a neutral and unbiased network for people to share ideas openly that aren’t illegal or against community standards. Just like YouTube, Pinterest is operating deceptively and counter to their legally protected status as a platform.

      1. So what is it you want then? To sue them? For what? What wrong have you suffered? How have your rights been deprived? What’s your grievance for which you seek restitution? Hmm? Tell me. I’m all ears.

        1. Don’t tell me you’ve never complained about the refereeing in a sports contest. Why, there are hundreds of ways you can entertain yourself without watching sports! Why are you complaining that the referees are blatantly making calls in favor of the other team?

          1. Don’t tell me you’ve never complained about the refereeing in a sports contest.

            Sure. It’s a whine about unfairness. Not some kind of rights violation or social injustice.

        2. Day drinking is not a good look. Live action has cause to sue pinterest. They publicly smeared them. Just like Covington Catholic students were smeared. Yes, people have a right to sue and that is none if your business. And if these platforms are like publishers, they should be regulated as such.

          1. They publicly smeared them.

            That’s an entirely different issue than them blocking LA.

            And if these platforms are like publishers, they should be regulated as such.

            Oh god yes, more. Calls for government regulation get me so hot. Big government is the best.

        3. No, I don’t want to sue them, I want them to be like any other business and to follow the law. These platforms are governed by parts of the 1996 Communication Decency Act, an act I heavily lobbied against during that era as it started out as a way to regulate speech online (anyone remember the time we web developers made the backgrounds of our sites black in protest to stand for free speech online?). Thankfully the more egregious parts of the act were struck down in court, but the part that remained (Section 230) affords legal protections to sites as platforms:

          “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

          This legal shield has been vital in protecting online speech and expression for years. However, many of these online services (YouTube, Twitter, now Pintrest) are now acting as publishers while still wanting protections as a platform. They can’t have both legally, so what I want is for them to choose which path they want to take and follow the law governing that choice. There is nothing wrong with YouTube banning anyone they want from their platform, as long as they give up the protections of being a platform and abide by the law as a publisher. Same goes for Facebook, Twitter, Pintrest, et al. However, when you engage with the public as a protected online service and change the rules to exclude those that broke no laws, or provisions of the CDA, then you’ve crossed a line into deceptive business practices and are in violation of the CDA.

          1. See below about the wooden platform I built in my lawn. It doesn’t magically become a publishing company just because I tell people that they can freely use it for anything EXCEPT celebrating Patriots football. That’s the one thing that’s 100% forbidden.

            It’s still just a wooden platform. It’s not publishing jack squat.

            1. It’s also not a digital service provider governed by the CDA, but as private property it is governed by other laws. For instance, what happens when someone you invited onto your private property to stand on your wooden platform injures themself? Are you protected by the government from any legal repercussions or lawsuits? Of course not, you can be sued and your home owners insurance will need to settle the claim. These platforms are afforded protections for legal actions that even your wooden platform aren’t granted. The reason? Because in your analogy YOU get to choose who is allowed on your property and who isn’t. If these groups want to operate like that, I have no problem, but they then can’t be allowed the protections under the CDA.

              1. For instance, what happens when someone you invited onto your private property to stand on your wooden platform injures themself?

                Except it’s not my platform that caused them harm. It’s the conduct of the guy on it. Take it up with him.

                Because in your analogy YOU get to choose who is allowed on your property and who isn’t.

                No, really, anyone can come onto the platform.

                Except Pats fans.

                1. Except it’s not my platform that caused them harm. It’s the conduct of the guy on it. Take it up with him.

                  I never said his conduct caused the injury. He can claim harm by your platform and drag you into court since the injury/harm allegedly happened on your property and you have no legal protections against such a lawsuit. Platforms are not goverened by the same standard thanks to the CDA.

    2. AT, your Utopian RINO viewpoints don’t apply to the current real world! We have civil liberty laws that protect against this specific type of discrimination especially from monopolistic entities. You are essentially saying these protection laws only apply to the far left and Conservatives should not benefit from them!

      1. If there was a conservative youtube that wanted to tell Jezebel or AOC or Jim Acosta to go pound sand, I’d support that too.

        1. Well, your POV is meaningless to the leftists. If YouTube was biased against leftists, you can bet the farm that they would have come down hard on them already using all means available to them!

          1. Yes, but that’s a gripe about the double standards.

            They exist. It’s not fair, it’s not right, but there it is anyway. You can whine about them, or rise above them.

            1. “rise above them” like the scum in a septic tank?

              @AT, no need to whine or “rise above” the “double standard” when you can do something about it!!!

              1. But you can’t do anything about it. That’s the lie you keep telling yourself. Can’t do jack squat about it, not without exerting an unjust degree of control over others. Is that what you want?

                (Also, I think it’s very telling how you regard being a better person and overcoming obstacles as “scum.” Wow.)

                1. “But you can’t do anything about it.”

                  You are such a typical RINO. How in the heck do you know you can’t do anything unless you try?? This is a clear violation of religious freedom which is exactly why SCOTUS ruled for Baker on Wedding Cake case! So you prefer that Conservatives get trampled on just so we don’t trample on anyone else’s rights? How compassionate of you! You definitely know how to lose–I give you that.

                  It’s not being better to be a spineless pacifist instead of standing up for what’s right. You just don’t get it!

                2. You are such a typical RINO. How in the heck do you know you can’t do anything unless you try??

                  Try what exactly? Is this the part where we impotently stamp our feet and whine about fairness, or the part where we run to mommy government and tell it to assume control of our enemies? Tell me, which progressive avenue are you looking at here?

                  This is a clear violation of religious freedom which is exactly why SCOTUS ruled for Baker on Wedding Cake case!

                  They ruled for him because he didn’t do anything wrong. He didn’t deprive anyone of their rights, didn’t wrongfully discriminate, and he was within his right to refuse a service contract.

                  Don’t know why you’re trying to equate this to that. One has nothing to do with the other. You’re basically screaming at Youtube/Pinterest “BAKE THE CAKE!”

                  So you prefer that Conservatives get trampled on just so we don’t trample on anyone else’s rights?

                  But we’re not getting trampled on. We haven’t lost any kind of right or freedom of any kind.

                  It’s not being better to be a spineless pacifist instead of standing up for what’s right.

                  I am standing up for what’s right. That’s put me in the shitty position of having to defend leftist companies in their freedom to condition their service however they damn well please.

                  But I do it, because it’s the right thing to do.

                  I stand for maximized freedom, Abe. Not for sides.

    3. Pinheadterest like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, are all acting now as publishers, not just platforms. They are censoring speech. They all should be regulated as a publisher.

      1. Yea, that’s the argument people keep trying to use and it’s bogus.

        If you build a wooden platform on your lawn and freely offer it to anyone who wants to make a speech, do an act, or put their cat on it – that wooden platform doesn’t magically transform into a publishing company simply because you tell some people to take their act somewhere else.

        1. The Supreme Court disagrees with you. Munn vs. Illinois, 1876.

          This was the case that upheld state regulation of the prices charged by grain elevator cooperatives, even though there was no monopoly in grain elevators.

        1. From Merriam-Webster’s website:

          censor (verb)
          censored; censoring\ ˈsen(t)-​sə-​riŋ , ˈsen(t)s-​riŋ \
          Definition of censor (Entry 2 of 2)
          transitive verb
          : to examine in order to suppress (see SUPPRESS sense 2) or delete anything considered objectionable
          censor the news
          also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
          censor out indecent passages

          Nothing in there that says it has to be government that censors.

          You are wrong.

    4. These companies acting as publishers are using the public airwaves and censoring speech they don’t like. They don’t get to claim they are a platform for all then censor speech they do not like. Learn the difference.

      1. They are guilty of violating their own TOS and by claiming to be something they’re not. I think people should sue them for TOS violations, not the publisher/platform thing.

        Like it or not, just about all blogs (like this one) are in the same place. Is TRS a publisher or a platform? As long as the TOS is adhered to, there’s no problem for anybody.

      1. I just can’t take the unfairness of it all, FF. So unfair. I can’t believe other people don’t recognize my right to what they’re providing. Waaah. Waaaaaaaah.

        1. You really should seriously consider stepping away from the keyboard for a week or two, because lately you’ve been stuck on stupid.

          1. This is why I have no hope for the future of this country. The right wing has gone just as off the rails as the left. They’re entitled. Life’s not fair. We’re owed. We must assert CONTROL over our enemies! The government’s got to DO SOMETHING for me! Blah blah f-ing blah.

            It’s pathetic.

            1. Don’t let the back button hit you in your fourth point of contact on your way out. If you don’t like the opinions here, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.

              After all, isn’t that what you’re telling everyone else to do?

              1. I don’t have a problem with the opinions. I can respect when people disagree.

                I guess that just makes me better than Youtube/Pinterest.

                1. Hence your “Waaaaaah waaaaah waaaaaah” comments, because you’re better or some such bullsh!t.

            2. This is why I have no hope for the future of this country.

              There’s no future in this country because for decades, people like you (RINOs) keep retreating from leftist fascist tactics instead of fighting them!

              The right wing has gone just as off the rails as the left.

              @atomicsentinel how in the heck is using existing laws to fight for our rights going “off the rails”? You just don’t make any sense and you are a leftist apologist!.

              1. instead of fighting them!

                What does that even mean? I voted for a non-progressive in the last election. It was futile. What more do you want?

                how in the heck is using existing laws to fight for our rights

                Why are you fighting for your rights? They haven’t been taken away. Do you even know what you’re fighting and why, or are you just lashing out in blind rage at Other Tribe?

            1. Instead of posting your nonsense, go read your past posts on how you hate cops. Don’t play like you don’t.

              1. I don’t have any past posts of that nature. No idea what you’re talking about. Let alone what it could possibly have to do with this discussion.

                I’m starting to think you have some kind of personal problem here.

                1. You attacked me personally when I called you out for your post saying all cops should die. A post the moderators deleted and warned you about. Many here know your extreme hatred for law enforcement. Sounds like you are too cowardly to own your words and now you lie.

                2. I have never said such a thing and you know damn well you couldn’t cite anything even remotely close it it if you tried.

                  I have no hatred for law enforcement. Serious issues with their abuses/overreach, which ignorant shitbags support, do not equal hate.

    5. Your analogy does not work.

      I have not one problem with a library that is only going to carry one kind of book — for instance a medical library that carries only medical books. But don’t tell me it is an open library with all kinds of books available to peruse, and then when I get in there it is only a selection limited by the curator to only medical books (focused on heart conditions). You sold me on one thing, got me in there, and I found out differently.

      This expose has actually provided a service that Pinterest should have provided — clear information on what exactly they promote and what they ban — so informed customers can chose to use or not. Given their audience, I suspect a lot of Pinterest users will find it of great interest what is banned (as can be seen by the comments here).

      1. It’s an open library with a wide variety of subjects. But they refuse to put my book about how martians are probably capitalists on the shelves in the non-fiction section. I’m censored. Wah.

        This expose has actually provided a service that Pinterest should have provided — clear information on what exactly they promote and what they ban — so informed customers can chose to use or not.

        I agree that these service-providers should be more upfront about what they will and won’t provide. I disagree that they’re committing any wrong whatsoever in deplatforming or demonetizing.

        They may be doing something shitty, but they’re not doing anything wrong.

        1. So this expose’ has provided a service. Now we know what they curate. Be open about it. Don’t lie to your audience.

          1. A good moral maxim, to be sure. But hardly anything one can compel when you’re demanding something from a free website.

            1. That’s why we need groups like Project Veritas – since the Social Media giants won’t disclose their leftist bias themselves, it is done for them. So we can make informed decisions on where to spend money and time. I appreciate the knowledge myself, it has helped me to determine what is worthwhile investing in and what is not — sometimes I use it anyway (Instagram) – sometimes the extreme bias just makes me drop it partially or for good (FB and Twitter). It is good to know where to invest time, energy, and money and where not. If the audience you are reaching or your community is not welcome on a platform then why waste the time?

              1. If the audience you are reaching or your community is not welcome on a platform then why waste the time?

                Precisely. Which is why I cannot understand the obsession the right has with using a platform where they know they’re not going to get a fair shake. It’s such an entitlement mentality, and I can’t figure out why people can’t SEE that.

                They’re like homosexuals who want the Church – and only the Church – to marry them. No. It’s not going to happen. Go away.

                And honestly, from where I’m sitting, it smacks less of some injustice they want corrected and more of wanting to stick it to an enemy. In which case, people need to grow up.

                It’s a big internet out there. We’re not beholden to youtube, facebook, and pinterest – much as people would like to pretend they are.

                1. Churches are honest. Go to a Church that welcomes you. Social Media has not been honest – and acted like they are welcoming. But they’re not. Now we know. That’s the difference. It’s not a look they want, but it is one they deserve.

                2. That’s fair. If the gripe is dishonesty, that’s a fair one. If it’s “some legal wrong has been committed and harm caused,” then I call BS.

  42. Enough is enough! Where is the DOJ!? Take these damn discriminatory and monopolistic companies to the cleaners–MAKE AN EXAMPLE!! They are obviously doing it because they know they can get away with it because other companies like Google and Twitter are getting away with it!

    And we need to start protecting political leanings in addition to the other protected classes!!

    1. I don’t see Pinterest as being monopolistic. Anything there can be found using the internet. It’s an aggregate of information.

      1. It’s not just a search engine, there are other features it provides no other service provides. I’m not expert at it, but I know it’s a social media geared around specific points of interest.

        1. Right but it’s just aggregated information. I think people can communicate through it. I’ve only used it for my own purposes and have no use for interacting with anyone on such a site. Could be I just haven’t explored all of its capabilities – I know I haven’t – so maybe it does things I’m completely ignorant about. I just don’t think there is anything there that’s exclusive to Pinterest.

          1. Like I said, I’m no expert and I wouldn’t even call myself as having average knowledge of it, but you know how I determine one of these social media entities a monopoly? When I see websites having quick links to them on their pages without providing a competitive alternative. For example, we generally see YouTube, FB, Twitter and now most recently Pintrest on all major websites. And they all provide different services, so they aren’t considered alternatives. Kinda like VISA, Check, money transfer aren’t competitive alternatives.

            1. Sorry, but that does not mean they are a monopoly. It means that “major websites” (however the freak you determine that) choose to list them. Nobody is under any compulsion to list any links. It’s called freedom.

              Oh my freaking geez! Nothing prevents you from setting up a Pinterest alternative tomorrow in your basement. And nothing prevents TRS or my blog from listing it.

              Just because you don’t get to be on NBC doesn’t mean your right to free speech is under attack.

              1. And then when their Pinterest alternative gets targeted by leftists who pressure the credit card companies to not process their transactions, your response will be “go set up your own multi-billion credit card company!”.

                Bogus and wrong.

              2. So in your wisdom and definition of monopoly, there is no such thing as monopoly!? After all, there were many alternatives to MS when it was deemed a monopoly!

        2. Pinterest is no monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. Or are you going to define the term “monopoly” so narrowly it becomes meaningless? Oh, Pinterest has cornered the market (and actively prevents others from competing) in the image aggregation with some social features business? There’s a zillion companies out there that allow people to post their own pics and comment on them.

    2. It’s very simple, get the government out of it. Take away their “platform protection” and reclassify them as publishers where they can do what they want, but can be held liable for content on their site.

      We do NOT need regulation by the government as that will not end well for freedom.

      1. But they aren’t publishers–they are platforms and hence are restricted on how/when they censor content on individual publishers. Government regulation is already there and should be applied to these platforms like it’s applied to utilities.

        1. @Abe Lincoln I understand that they are platforms but the government is NOT holding them accountable as they should. These companies have tons of lobbyists and politicians are looking the other way and letting these companies get away with censoring people they disagree with, namely anyone that doesn’t agree with the far leftist idiology.

          That’s why I believe they should take the government protection of a “platform” away and make them all publishers, hence responsible for the content, they can censor all they want, but they are also not immune to lawsuits for discrimination.

  43. I say it every time when speaking about Project Veritas and/or James O’Keefe = “National Treasure!” What’s sickening is that the enemy is caught red-handed and usually gets away with it anyway. May God bless and protect James O’Keefe and his team. They are invaluable.

    1. Project Veritas and Judicial Watch are all we have in regards to investigative reporting. The rest of the media is the DNC PR arm!

      1. Sharyl Attkisson is a good reporter and tells the truth not her opinion.
        John Kass of the Chicago Tribute is also mostly fair. How he manages that in a city like Chicago is a mystery.

        1. @kenoshamarge Lara Logan is another good reporter. She just worked with Sharyl Attkisson on some projects. Lara is one tough cookie. She did a 3 1/2 hour sit down with a Navy Seal named Mike Ritland on his program called “Mike Drop” and she talked about her life and harrowing tails in the middle east where she was almost raped and killed in the middle of a mob. Definitely worth the watch. I had it playing while I was working on the computer one afternoon.

          I found the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZlVx-phlPk

          1. Agreed – Logan is great. I’m sure there are a few others here and there although right now I can’t think of any but the vast majority wouldn’t make a pimple on a real newsperson’s butt.

  44. They removed it from the blacklist probably to try to claim it was a mistake or even hide evidence it was even there, as that would give support to a discrimination or defamation lawsuit by Live Action. It think it’s an attempt to cover their tracks, but too late.

  45. Unbelievably stupid of Pinterest to admit their bias by first contacting Project Veritas to remove them from the porn list and then permanently suspend their account in retaliation for embarrassing them! Then again,I never,ever accuse liberals of being smart! Smart liberal is an oxymoron,or as my 8 year old grandson called it,an ox moron! Works either way!

  46. Pinterest, another disgusting, delusional, and pathetic corporation fully in lockstep with Planned Parenthood… LiveAction speaks truth in a gracious manner… LiveAction spreads Light in the darkness. Pinterest’s silencing of them is reprehensible… Pinterest supports a culture of death.

    1. Pinterest, another disgusting, delusional, and pathetic corporation fully in lockstep with Planned Parenthood

      Yes. But omg I’m so desperate to use them!

      1. Stop attributing your own insanity to others. GH said nothing close to what you are claiming.

        1. I didn’t say he did. I just think it’s so strange how the right-wing is so obsessed with using these, and only these, services.

    1. I agree wholeheartedly. Sure, they are free to do what they want with their companies, however, they should not be considered “platforms” anymore and we, the people, should be able to sue them. The government should no longer give them special protections.

  47. Sigh…there goes my crafts, Snoopy cartoons, doggie cuteness, hair cuts,…gone from my computer. O’Keefe is a treasure.

      1. @kenoshamarge Do you mean without bias? or without shadow banning? Because any website can have bias, it makes a difference if they are banning people or letting free speech reign.

  48. Hey, that’s not fair. I am entitled to Pinterest. Read the federalist papers. All citizens shall have an absolute entitlement to have their work searchable on Pinterest. Don’t source that, just trust me on it.

    Y’know, they don’t have a copy of the book I wrote at the library either. It’s not even IN their dewey decimal system. Libraries are fascist tyrants. How am I supposed to spread my message if nobody can find it!

    I have the right to YOUR tools, your work-product, in order to spread my message. Just like I have a right to a car to drive to the public speaking forum. Gimme a car. I’m entitled.

    It’s not fair. Life’s not fair. Help me government, you’re my only hope.

    1. Your analogy does not work.

      I have not one problem with a library that is only going to carry one kind of book — for instance a medical library that carries only medical books. But don’t tell me it is an open library with all kinds of books available to peruse, and then when I get in there it is only a selection limited by the curator to only medical books (focused on heart conditions). You sold me on one thing, got me in there, and I found out differently.

      This expose has actually provided a service that Pinterest should have provided — clear information on what exactly they promote and what they ban — so informed customers can chose to use or not. Given their audience, I suspect a lot of Pinterest users will find it of great interest what is banned (as can be seen by the comments here).

      1. It’s an open library with a wide variety of subjects. But they refuse to put my book about how martians are probably capitalists on the shelves in the non-fiction section. I’m censored. Wah.

        This expose has actually provided a service that Pinterest should have provided — clear information on what exactly they promote and what they ban — so informed customers can chose to use or not.

        I agree that these service-providers should be more upfront about what they will and won’t provide. I disagree that they’re committing any wrong whatsoever in deplatforming or demonetizing.

        They may be doing something shitty, but they’re not doing anything wrong.

        1. So this expose’ has provided a service. Now we know what they curate. Be open about it. Don’t lie to your audience.

    2. Pinheadterest like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, are all acting now as publishers, not just platforms. They are censoring speech. They all should be regulated as a publisher.

      1. Yea, that’s the argument people keep trying to use and it’s bogus.

        If you build a wooden platform on your lawn and freely offer it to anyone who wants to make a speech, do an act, or put their cat on it – that wooden platform doesn’t magically transform into a publishing company simply because you tell some people to take their act somewhere else.

    3. AT, your Utopian RINO viewpoints don’t apply to the current real world! We have civil liberty laws that protect against this specific type of discrimination especially from monopolistic entities. You are essentially saying these protection laws only apply to the far left and Conservatives should not benefit from them!

      1. If there was a conservative youtube that wanted to tell Jezebel or AOC or Jim Acosta to go pound sand, I’d support that too.

    4. These companies acting as publishers are using the public airwaves and censoring speech they don’t like. They don’t get to claim they are a platform for all then censor speech they do not like. Learn the difference.

      1. They are guilty of violating their own TOS and by claiming to be something they’re not. I think people should sue them for TOS violations, not the publisher/platform thing.

        Like it or not, just about all blogs (like this one) are in the same place. Is TRS a publisher or a platform? As long as the TOS is adhered to, there’s no problem for anybody.

    5. The vast majority of public businesses are not platforms afforded legal protection from lawsuits under the guise that they operate a neutral and unbiased network for people to share ideas openly that aren’t illegal or against community standards. Just like YouTube, Pinterest is operating deceptively and counter to their legally protected status as a platform.

      1. So what is it you want then? To sue them? For what? What wrong have you suffered? How have your rights been deprived? What’s your grievance for which you seek restitution? Hmm? Tell me. I’m all ears.

        1. Day drinking is not a good look. Live action has cause to sue pinterest. They publicly smeared them. Just like Covington Catholic students were smeared. Yes, people have a right to sue and that is none if your business. And if these platforms are like publishers, they should be regulated as such.

          1. They publicly smeared them.

            That’s an entirely different issue than them blocking LA.

            And if these platforms are like publishers, they should be regulated as such.

            Oh god yes, more. Calls for government regulation get me so hot. Big government is the best.

        2. Don’t tell me you’ve never complained about the refereeing in a sports contest. Why, there are hundreds of ways you can entertain yourself without watching sports! Why are you complaining that the referees are blatantly making calls in favor of the other team?

          1. Don’t tell me you’ve never complained about the refereeing in a sports contest.

            Sure. It’s a whine about unfairness. Not some kind of rights violation or social injustice.

      1. I just can’t take the unfairness of it all, FF. So unfair. I can’t believe other people don’t recognize my right to what they’re providing. Waaah. Waaaaaaaah.

        1. You really should seriously consider stepping away from the keyboard for a week or two, because lately you’ve been stuck on stupid.

Comments are closed.