Google had Alex Jones’ Infowars channel shut down on YouTube. Meanwhile Facebook, Apple, and Spotify removed Infowars content from their services. This all happened as a coordinated effort to limit the visibility of Infowars content across major social media distribution platforms.
The news quickly began to trend after longtime subscribers and visitors of Infowars found out that the social media pages across the aforementioned services were no longer available. There was a post on the Infowars website about the banning from major media outlets, including a number of high-profile Twitter users such as Wikileaks and Britain’s own Nigel Farage who spoke up in support of Infowars and out against what they called big tech “collusion”.
— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 6, 2018
On August 6th, 2018 Paul Joseph Watson explained that Facebook that permanently disabled four of Infowars pages.
According to Watson, Facebook posted the following message for their reasoning in bringing the pages down…
“More content from the same Pages has been reported to us — upon review, we have taken it down for glorifying violence, which violates our graphic violence policy, and using dehumanizing language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants, which violates our hate speech policies,”
Watson also explained that Apple removed five of the main Infowars podcasts from its service directory. Paul Joseph Watson’s own YouTube channel is still alive under his namesake, with 1.3 million YouTube followers.
Google, Facebook, and Twitter have all made multiple claims in the past about “removing” hate speech from their platforms, but never publicly defined what constituted “hate speech”.
Google has been using filters as part of their “Authority” algorithm to de-list and filter out news organizations and alternative media websites that don’t have enough domain authority. This even affected some far Left websites such as Alternet and WSW.
Various webmasters have been complaining incessantly on the Google webmasters forums about being filtered or de-listed from certain search topics and trends, but Google insists that the “Authority” algorithm is focused on promoting content from domains that they deem a news authority, even though the algorithm has – on several occasions – filtered out legitimate news and promoted literal fake news from mainstream news outlets.
Even the Electronic Frontier Foundation criticized Google for their overreaching arm when it comes to censorship and filtering content that they label as “hate speech” without defining the terms of hate speech.
Some people have argued that Google, Facebook, and Apple have every right to collectively censor content from their platforms since they’re private corporations, even though they’re traded publicly. However, not everyone agrees that companies that control nearly all of our information news access should be able to operate without any sort of oversight or regulation.
According to Tech Crunch, Twitter’s consistent filtering of Conservative voices led Iowa Republican Representative Steve King to pursue proposals about turning major social media organizations into public utilities, which would prevent them from operating on an ideological basis.
Some people are for the major social media networks being brought under the umbrella of government oversight, while others don’t want the government getting involved due to censorship concerns. However, in this case, all of the major networks that control a majority of the news most Westerners consume is already being operated under a kleptocracy feigning technocratic aims. One would have to question if major social media platforms would be better or worse under government oversight?
(Thanks for the news tip GrandmasterShadow)