YouTube is now censoring journalism for the Biden administration
With the help of corrupt Big Tech, the Ruling Class has used Jan. 6 to wage a jihad against its political opposition, including an assault on our most basic rights such as free speech.
June 7, 2022 7:49pm Updated
MORE ON:CENSORSHIP
Big Tech censors strike again — nixing key interview with Capitol rioter
YouTube deletes Post interview with judge’s son who stormed Capitol, citing ‘misinformation’
SCOTUS blocks Texas law that would let individuals retaliate against social media ‘censorship’
Facebook censors GOP senator’s post about men competing in women’s sports
For as ugly as the worst acts of those who descended on Washington, DC, on Jan. 6, 2021, were, none could justify the chilling assault on liberty and justice that has followed in their wake.
The Ruling Class has used Jan. 6 to wage a jihad against its political opposition, including an assault on our most basic rights such as free speech.
Big Tech has reinforced the narrative that views antithetical to regime orthodoxy are dangerous and must be policed accordingly.
In the latest example, YouTube deleted a Jan. 6, 2021, interview conducted by a Post reporter with a Capitol breach participant.
In the video, Aaron Mostofsky, son of a Brooklyn Supreme Court judge, explains why he was compelled to come to the Capitol, namely “to express … [his] opinion as a free American … that this election was stolen.”
To Google-owned YouTube, the footage contains dangerous “misinformation” — speech that it equates with harm — meriting removal. In its removal notice, it asserts that “it’s our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all,” arguing that “content that advances false claims that widespread fraud … changed the outcome of the US 2020 presidential election is not allowed …”
Brooklyn protester outside Senate chamber
Play Video
In so doing, Google would appear to be doing the administration’s bidding.
The Biden administration’s June 2021 National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism states that “narratives of fraud in the recent general election … will almost certainly spur some DVEs [domestic violent extremists] to try to engage in violence.”
Relatedly, the FBI classified the Capitol breach as an act of domestic terrorism, and the Justice Department has linked defendants’ views on the 2020 presidential election to wrongdoing.
The administration’s domestic terror strategy had called for “enhancing faith in government” by countering “dangerous conspiracy theories that can provide a gateway to terrorist violence,” and vowed to “collaborate on addressing terrorist content … with technology companies.”
AP/Jose Luis Magana
Repeatedly, the administration has used the bully pulpit to badger social media companies to censor and deplatform such “wrongthink,” and indicated it has done the same in private.
YouTube’s move is as hypocritical as it is detrimental to our discourse. Don’t hold your breath looking for instances of it disappearing corporate media interviews in which prominent Democrats lie, let alone Xi Jinping’s speeches.
Big Tech is selectively censoring that which is obviously journalism, coinciding with the broadcasting of the Democrats’ hearings about January 6.
AP/J. Scott Applewhite
The committee will make the case that claims like Mostofsky’s of a stolen election constituted dangerous misinformation, inciting a violent insurrection. It will try to link individuals and organizations through communications and dollar flows to Donald Trump, demonstrating a conspiracy. In essence, it will be acting as if, and perhaps arguing that, MAGA equals terrorist.
Keep up with today's most important news
Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update.
Enter your email address
By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
YouTube reinforces this effort by purging “dangerous” rhetoric on election fraud, which must not be allowed to persist lest it incite violence.
Big Tech has become a significant partner in enforcing regime orthodoxy by suppressing dissent under the guise of national security.
Ironically, of course, the censorship on election integrity — an issue manifestly at the heart of our politics, robust speech about which is core to the First Amendment — will only further erode trust for the millions who have lost faith in our system.
Benjamin Weingarten is RealClearInvestigations deputy editor, a senior contributor to The Federalist and a Claremont Institute fellow.
Tired of missing the real news? Tired of censorship? Tired of our corrupt liberal mainstream press? Subscribe to Ineptocracy Chronicles today and get the other side of the story in your inbox daily. It’s free.
Ineptocracy
A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.