Are YouTube Restrictions Targeted on Conservative and Gun Channels?
David Codrea – April 8, 2017
Are YouTube and social media giants Facebook and Twitter discriminating against conservatives and gun owners? And if so, what can be done about it?
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “BREAKING: YouTube gun channels in danger of disappearing forever,” The Firearm Blog reported Thursday. “It appears that all gun related videos on YouTube have been flagged as restricted material. That means that either YouTube’s algorithm or users have flagged them as inappropriate for one reason or another. Once a video is flagged it is no longer eligible for monetization.”
“YouTube gun channels rocked by demonetization,” Guns.com corroborates. “In the latest installment of friction between popular firearm vloggers and the online video-sharing website, many gun channels are reporting that YouTube has greatly reduced their ability to run ads.”
“YouTube’s new ad strategy: Hide and filter conservative channels,” Red Alert Politics elaborates:
YouTube is addressing a corporate boycott: Advertising sponsors are withdrawing ads, but the solution involves disproportionately censoring channels that are not politically correct, specifically anything remotely conservative … In an effort to comply with corporate demands, YouTube has secretly enforced their restricted mode to hide age-inappropriate content, shield comments from all videos, and allow third-party media firms to evaluate which channels and videos should receive ad revenue.
This is all consistent with a report posted March 31 by AmmoLand Shooting Sports News highlighting political and social commentator Paul Joseph Watson’s warning that “Many of your favorite YouTubers could be about to disappear.” As we further explored, the suppression of non-“progressive” ideas is not just limited to YouTube, but also reflects in the corporate practices of the two other members of the social media Big Three.
It should be noted that conservative and gun channels aren’t the only ones that have been reported as financially impacted, and that YouTube’s “advertiser friendly content guidelines” appear “non-partisan,” albeit arbitrary and subjective:
Content that is considered “not advertiser-friendly” includes, but is not limited to:
- Sexually suggestive content, including partial nudity and sexual humor
- Violence, including display of serious injury and events related to violent extremism
- Inappropriate language, including harassment, profanity and vulgar language
- Promotion of drugs and regulated substances, including selling, use and abuse of such items
- Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown
So the questions become are the rules evenly applied, or can discrimination be shown. And how does that tie in with what is happening with the other social media giants?
Aside from abetting censorship from repressive regimes, Breitbart reports Facebook has introduced the Orwellian-named “Initiative for Civil Courage Online” and other policy directives designed to stifle and even remove “conservative” views by smearing them as “racist,” “xenophobic,” “hateful,” and/or “fake news.” That’s on the heels of Team Zuckerberg banning private gun sales, a policy evidently enforced by an army of “progressive” snitches, with one of their leaders (who declares “It’s time to take everyone’s guns. It’s past time”) showing a financial tie between his livelihood and George Soros.
Read more at Ammoland
If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.