Google bans website ZeroHedge from its ad platform over comments on protest articles - A Google spokesperson said in an email that it took action after determining the website violated its policies on content related to race.[More]A tangentially related quote published on Zero Hedge:
Google and other companies were given protections under Section 320 because it has claimed to being a neutral supplier of virtual space for people to speak with one another. It is now effectively shutting down sites because they allow others to comment freely on their sites. This biased targeting of sites has led to congressional objections and renewed threats to amend the federal law. Indeed, Google is undermining the support with some of us who viewed protections are fostering free speech values. It is now using its role to stifle and regulate speech, the very antithesis of not just free speech but the federal protections.What's curious is WarOnGuns is on Blogspot, which is owned by Google, and one of the features it offers is unmoderated comments. I don't allow those here for several reasons, not the least of which is it could then be used to shut me down. And yeah, I know-- why don't I move? I probably will, but right now I have more urgent priorities that occupy my pressed time, plus the blog is all done on my dime. In any case, I'm careful about how I say things to convey thoughts without crossing a line that appears to be ever moving inward no matter where your site resides.
Case in point, Zero Hedge has been banned from the ad platform and The Federalist has been warned to mend its unwoke ways, and the thought strikes: Using the "incognito browser" function, because you never know whose watching (or Tor for those who want the extra layer), let's look at the results of searching for "the n-word" (inarguably designated by The Keepers as the most toxically racist and unforgivable word in the English language) on multi-billion dollar business oligarch Google:
"About 37,600,000 results"Yes, I know the word is out there, and I know the search yields what is, but I'm trying to use the "logic" of the left here, such as it is, and that tells me -- bottom line -- this for-profit tech titan is spreading and enabling the propagation of the word they condemn those they wish to suppress over.
It's also curious that the most hits go to Wikipedia, and the Top Ten results also include The Washington Post, a state university, Merriam-Webster (of redefining "racism" notoriety), The Atlantic, and The New Yorker, "liberal" bastions all. And those aren't the results of third-party comments. Again with the "logic" of the left, only a very specific subset of humanity is designated "authorized" to use the unexpurgated word.
In fairness, Google did remove the clause...
Be funny if this post is what finally got me booted...
1 comment:
I think they just removed "Don't".
Post a Comment