YouTube’s Glaring Double Standard

In the last two years, YouTube, which is owned by Google, removed the trailer for a Christian movie about homosexuality, removed a video about the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, and removed some Prager University videos about Islam (while restricting access to some of their other videos). Yet when David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, released a virulently anti-Semitic video, YouTube found nothing wrong with it. For good reason, even political leaders are outraged over the double standard.

Before we get to the David Duke video, let’s look at these other examples of YouTube censorship.

The Audacity of Pulling Audacity

In July, 2015, the trailer for a Ray Comfort-produced movie called Audacity was removed from YouTube after quickly receiving 130,000 views. On what basis? “This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy against spam, scams, and commercially deceptive content.”

In reality, neither the trailer nor the movie contained any spam, scams, or commercially deceptive content — not a hint or trace of any such thing — and the most likely reason it was pulled was because a number of viewers protested the content of the video. Heaven forbid you share a biblical view of homosexuality on YouTube!

For the record, anyone watching the movie — let alone the trailer — would know there was not an ounce of hateful or disparaging or deceptive content in the video, which made this act of censorship all the more bizarre.

Thankfully, after vigorous protests, the video was restored, but it should never have been removed in the first place.

Christian Persecution Video Pulled

In February, 2016, TheBlaze carried a headline which announced, “Christian Filmmakers Ask if YouTube Is Targeting Their Worldview After Their Video Was Pulled and Branded ‘Inappropriate’.”

The video in question “included no nudity, profanity or explicit onscreen violence,” yet it “was removed by YouTube, which called the film ‘inappropriate’ and in violation of YouTube’s Community Guidelines.

“The video presents the scenario of what it might look like were the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere to arrive in the U.S., including scenes that hinted of the Islamic State group. The film does, however, include several Bible verses being read.”

Within minutes of the video going public, Josh Troester, the director and producer of the movie Chased, states that “we received notice that our video was ‘flagged for inappropriate content.’ YouTube’s notice stated that ‘after reviewing the content, we’ve determined that the videos violate our Community Guidelines.’”

The article also notes that, “Other video producers working to educate the West about violence and incitement in the Middle East have experienced YouTube removing their videos or shutting down their channels, including the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and Palestinian Media Watch. Both groups translate the Arabic-language videos of jihadist leaders and others as an educational service.”

Prager U Censored

Despite all this, however, it was still quite a shock when some of the Prager U videos were put on restricted access and others were removed.

Videos on this YouTube channel are professionally done, fairly presented (with some of the lecturers including respected professors and Pulitzer Prize winners), and are viewed by millions. Yet in October, 2016, YouTube removed or restricted access to 16 videos on the site (originally it was 21). On what basis?

In a petition that was launched to protest YouTube’s actions, “PragerU claims that YouTube has entirely removed PragerU’s new video with Kasim Hafeez, a British Muslim who is a pro-Israel activist.” In the video, Hafeez explains how he overcame the anti-Semitic indoctrination that radicalized him from an early age.

“Within hours of the video’s release Monday morning, YouTube flagged it for ‘hate speech’ and took it down.”

This is utterly outrageous, and the petition caught fire for good reason.

It is against this backdrop that YouTube’s latest actions are completely indefensible.

But David Duke’s Anti-Semitic Rage Stays

The David Duke video is titled “Jews admit organizing White Genocide,” yet YouTube claims it does not contain “hate speech,” despite ridiculous and incendiary statements like, “the Zionists have already ethnically cleansed the Palestinians, why not do the same thing to Europeans and Americans?”

Duke refers to the “Zionist racist” state of Israel and claims that “comparing Israel to apartheid is like comparing an atomic bomb to a bee-bee gun,” adding, “Unlike Israel, South Africa never dropped tens of thousands of bombs that have burnt children alive while they slept in their beds.”

No, there’s nothing hateful about this content at all, nothing that violates YouTube’s community guidelines, nothing worthy of removal from their site. Right. Yet the video of a pro-Israel, British Muslims explaining “how he overcame the anti-Semitic indoctrination that radicalized him from an early age” violates YouTube’s standards and must be removed.

What hypocrisy.

Trends like this are deeply disturbing and deserve our attention and our action, and while Google-YouTube can run its company however it pleases, it must be called to account for its double standards.

Please write to me if you feel you were the victim of unfair treatment on YouTube (thus far, my own experience with YouTube has been fair), and let’s redouble our efforts to get the truth out — as long as we have the opportunity.

This is how we keep our freedoms intact. (For more from the author of “YouTube’s Glaring Double Standard” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.


Group Claims YouTube Is Restricting PragerU Educational Videos

YouTube is restricting educational videos from a well-known conservative advocacy organization, prompting the nonprofit website to petition for restoration of the content.

PragerU, an institution that, according to its website, “presents the most important ideas in free, five-minute videos,” is currently being restricted by YouTube. YouTube has restricted 21 of the organization’s videos.

Videos are restricted on YouTube based on vulgar language, violence and disturbing imagery, nudity and sexually suggestive content, and portrayal of harmful or dangerous activities, according to YouTube. Videos that are age-restricted “are not visible to users who are logged out, are under 18 years of age, or have restricted mode enabled,” according to YouTube.

The list of restricted videos include, “Are The Police Racist?,” “Why Don’t Feminists Fight for Muslim Women?,” “Why Did America Fight the Korean War?,” “Who’s More Pro-Choice: Europe or America?,” and “What ISIS Wants.”

“Over the last several months, PragerU and YouTube have been in communication regarding a number of PragerU videos that YouTube has listed under ‘restricted mode,’” Jared Sichel, PragerU’s communications director, said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. “That number has since grown to 21 videos. Restricted mode is something that many parents and schools use so that children don’t watch explicit adult and sexual content—not so they can’t find animated, educational videos on topics ranging from history and economics to happiness and philosophy.”

YouTube was bought by Google in 2006 and is a subsidiary company of the search engine giant. According to a PragerU press release, PragerU filed a complaint with Google executives but received a generic response.

“In response to an official complaint PragerU filed, Google specialists defended their restriction of our videos, and said, ‘We don’t censor anyone,’ although they do ‘take into consideration what the intent of the video is’ and ‘what the focus of the video is,’” the press release said.

The Daily Signal contacted YouTube about the restrictions on PragerU’s videos, but they did not respond.

Sichel said that in an effort to protest and end YouTube’s restrictions, they have launched a petition for viewers to sign.

“After months of official and back-channel communication with YouTube and Google led nowhere, PragerU released [yesterday] a petition against YouTube to stop restricting these 21 videos. That petition already has over 15,000 signatures, and it’s growing fast,” Sichel said.

“Based on our review of YouTube’s policies and user guidelines, none of our videos meet the requirements of being inappropriate, sexually explicit, or hate speech,” Elisha Krauss, director of outreach at PragerU, told The Daily Signal in an email. “Some places of employment and many libraries and schools use restricted mode to prevent vulgar and inappropriate content. So we know students and adults are being prevented from doing research and using our videos as a source.” (For more from the author of “Group Claims YouTube Is Restricting PragerU Educational Videos” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Issa: White House Warned YouTube Over Anti-Islam Video During Benghazi Attack

Photo Credit: APRepublican Rep. Darrell Issa claimed that an email he’s reviewed shows the White House decided to reach out to YouTube within hours of the Benghazi terror attack, to warn the website about the consequences of posting an anti-Islam video.

The email would suggest the White House was connecting the attack to the video almost from the outset — though their initial claim that the attack sprung out of protests over the film would later be proven false.

According to Issa, who discussed excerpts from the otherwise classified emails on Wednesday, the email was sent at 9:11 p.m. ET on Sept. 11 to the Diplomatic Security Command Center.

According to Issa, the email said: “White House is reaching out to UTube to advise ramifications of the posting of the Pastor Jon Video.”

Issa said this email is “troubling” because it “contradicts” White House claims that the faulty storyline on the video was drawn from the intelligence community’s talking points.

Read more from this story HERE.

Court Orders Anti-Muslim Film to Be Pulled From YouTube

Photo credit: tinou baoAn appeals court on Wednesday ordered Google to remove from its YouTube video-sharing website an anti-Islamic film that had sparked protests across the Muslim world.

By a 2-1 vote, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Google’s assertion that the removal of the film “Innocence of Muslims” amounted to a prior restraint of speech that violated the Constitution.

The plaintiff, Cindy Lee Garcia, had objected to the film after learning that it incorporated a clip she had made for a different movie, which had been partially dubbed and in which she appeared to be asking: “Is your Mohammed a child molester?”

In a statement, Google said: “We strongly disagree with this ruling and will fight it.”

Cris Armenta, a lawyer for Garcia, said she is delighted with the decision.

Read more this story HERE.

Google Refuses Obama’s Request to Take Down Anti-Muslim Video but Restricts Access in Muslim Countries

Google is refusing a White House request to take down an anti-Muslim clip on YouTube, but is restricting access to it in certain countries.

The White House said Friday that it had asked YouTube to review whether the video violated its terms of use. Google owns YouTube, the online video sharing site.

YouTube said in a statement Friday that the video is widely available on the Web and is “clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube.”

The short film “Innocence of Muslims” denigrates Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. It played a role in igniting mob violence against U.S. embassies across the Middle East. And it has been blamed for playing a role in violence in Libya, where the U.S. ambassador and three others were killed though the exact cause of the attacks is under investigation.

U.S. and Libyan officials are investigating whether the protests in Libya were a cover for militants, possibly al-Qaida sympathizers, to carry out a coordinated attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and kill Americans. Washington has deployed FBI investigators to try and track down militants behind the attack.

Read more from this story HERE.