We all know it’s happening. Social media suppresses conservative voices, articles, and videos all the time.
One person in particular who has been censored both overtly and behind the scenes is Steven Crowder, who claimed that his content was being censored. It turned out that he was right, and that his videos would not pop up if you searched for them by name.
They would continuously show themselves in overseas countries, but in America, they were being censored. Crowder created a video to show first-hand screenshots.
UPDATE: We've been able to confirm that @TeamYouTube's #YouTube2020ElectionBlacklist is still blocking our content for some searches, but ONLY in the United States. The implications are alarming… pic.twitter.com/n0ESF6qvZ0
— Steven Crowder (@scrowder) October 1, 2019
As Crowder says in the video, this happening in the United States, where we celebrate free speech, has some very dark implications.
The problem is that it doesn’t end there.
Paul Joseph Watson of Summit News also did an experiment and searched for a video specifically by name called “Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight.” The video features Clinton caught telling lies about her political positions as you can see.
Entering the name of the video directly into YouTube’s search function yields many results, but not this video as you Watson shows in a screenshot.
I recreated the search myself and got the same exact result.
Meaning that YouTube is actively censoring this video about Clinton, and one that would be damning to her if she were to ever run again, which is a rumor that is floating around at this time. In its place are mainstream sources for videos giving commentary and one promotional video by Clinton herself.
While I wouldn’t call all the videos presented flattering to Clinton (with the obvious exception of one) I wouldn’t exactly call them damaging, unlike the one showing her blatantly lying is.
Google’s attempting to protect and promote Clinton has not been anything new. In fact, as a pro-Clinton author detailed, the relationship between Google and Hillary, and noted that it goes much deeper than support from Google employees for her campaign as he detailed in a series of tweets:
Now, switching to Hillary Clinton: This is going to hurt me to write, because I & my whole extended family have been strong supporters of the Clintons for decades. I have a framed, signed letter from Bill on the wall near my desk. But Hillary should be ashamed of herself.
Hillary has long depended on Google for both money & votes. Her largest donor in 2016 was Alphabet/Google. Her Chief Technology Officer during the campaign was Stephanie Hannon, a former Google exec. And then there’s Eric Schmidt, longtime head of Google …
A leaked email showed that in 2014 Google’s Eric Schmidt offered to run Hillary’s tech campaign (see pic). In 2015, Schmidt in fact funded The Groundwork, a highly secretive tech company, the sole purpose of which was to put Clinton into office.
About 96% of 2016 campaign donations from Google employees went to Hillary. And Elan Kriegel, Hillary’s Chief Analytics Officer, credits his 2012 tech team, informally supervised by Eric Schmidt, for half of Obama’s win margin: nearly 2.5 million votes.
Even if Clinton doesn’t run, what we have here is pretty solid evidence that Google is willing to rig searches in order to better benefit a Democratic candidate.