by Chris Black
To err is human, or at least that’s what they say. But the question is, how come that Internet behemoths like Google/YouTube, Facebook and Twitter always make ‘mistakes’ when it comes to their right wing users, Donald Trump (whose Twitter account was ‘deleted’ by mistake recently) included? This question has an obvious and not very politically correct answer, but I’ll let you sort it out on your own. Today we learned that Google owned YouTube ‘accidentally’ deleted a number of conservative/right wing channels and/or videos, following the Florida high-school massacre. Obviously, Google claims it was done by mistake, but all the content in question was made by “the right side of the force”, which begs the question already mentioned in the first paragraph.
Here’s from the Bloomberg piece:
‘YouTube’s new moderators, brought in to spot fake, misleading and extreme videos, stumbled in one of their first major tests, mistakenly removing some clips and channels in the midst of a nationwide debate on gun control. The Google division said in December it would assign more than 10,000 people to moderate content after a year of scandals over fake and inappropriate content on the world’s largest video site. In the wake of the Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, some YouTube moderators mistakenly removed several videos and some channels from right-wing, pro-gun video producers and outlets.’
Now, is it just me, or it’s time to extend First Amendment protections to social media? Spare me the “private company” line, as big tech companies are basically a monopoly (or a cartel if you like) that controls 2/3, or 66 percent of the traffic. Google alone controls 70%, and also a big chunk of the Internet advertising market. Interestingly enough, Google and Facebook were funded with CIA/DARPA seed money, which means OUR tax money. I think that entitles us to some ownership/control over protecting free speech on these platforms. And speaking of “accidentally removing conservative channels/content”, just like they ‘accidentally’ use the radical left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center as a ‘trusted flagger’, and then ultimately delete videos or entire channels? In case you don’t know what I am talking about, it was recently revealed that YouTube relies on the left wing SPLC to flag/identify so-called “extremist content”. YouTube uses what they describe as trusted flaggers to police their platform, looking for terror related content and hate speech among other things. It’s worth mentioning that the Southern Poverty Law Center once labeled pedestrian conservative groups as hate groups, and that’s just an example:
‘In 2010, the Southern Poverty Law Center designated the Family Research Council a “hate group” because of its orthodox position on homosexuality, and its occasionally incendiary defenses of that position. In 2012, Floyd Corkins showed up at the Family Research Council headquarters with a gun. I don’t mean to imply that these two things were connected. I’m telling you that they were connected. We know because the shooter told the FBI where he got the idea.’
Let us not forget how the SPLC transferred millions out of the U.S into off shore tax havens in the Caymans in 2014. They hold more than 328 million in assets and raised more that 50 million in 2015 despite the fact they spent only $ 61,000.00 on legal services. A totally unprecedented and a huge red flag step for a 501 c3 organization to pull such a stunt.
The SPLC and the ADL are just two of the over 100 NGOs and government agencies working in YouTube’s Trusted Flaggers program, and all of them have signed NDAs/confidentiality agreements with the tech giant. The vast majority of YouTube censorship is due to algorithms, which automatically flag/remove content, making it easy for the company to claim that it wasn’t them, but those pesky AI algos. However, judging from what’s happening, it’s pretty clear that the bias in the algorithms is due to the people who wrote and implemented the code in the first place, the “internal experts” who designed the AI policing software.
As a fun factoid, the SPLC started back in 1971 and served a good purpose then. However, when the white-supremacist movements faded in influence, the anti-white-supremacist mavens like M. Deese, a hustler from his undergrad days, and his SPLC, had to find new sources of revenue to feed the fixed overhead costs (aka, their lavish salaries), so they “progressively” labeled more and more conservative groups as “racist” or crypto white-supremacist groups. There was big money to be made selling hate. Now, it itself has morphed into a hate group every bit as virulent as those it prosecuted in the early days. The ACLU, with a more extreme leftist history, has taken a similar trail and is now, instead of defending the laws for the rights of all citizens, is openly challenging US immigration law, and those who would enforce it, in defense of illegally-resident aliens and the corrupt politicians of the extreme left who seek to undermine US laws and citizenship.
by Chris Black