The leaked internal Google briefing “The Good Censor” [PDF] has received suspiciously little attention from the Main Stream Media, but it represents the crassest statement yet of the Tech oligopolies’ intention to impose Silicon Valley Political Correctness on the U.S.
As American Thinker Editor Thomas Lifson puts it:
“I congratulate Breitbart.com for the scoop, and I urge everyone -I am looking at you, President Trump and Congress – to read and ponder the fate of the Republic unless this company is defanged, most likely by antitrust action, but possibly also via civil courts.” [Stunning 85-page Google memo ‘The Good Censor’ leaked to Breitbart, October 10, 2018]
What are Trump’s options? He’s certainly thinking about the issue.
The Washington Post reported recently that the White House was backing off a proposed executive order that would have required federal agencies to “investigate and/or prosecute” tech giants for bias. Administration officials told WaPo:
“Although the White House is concerned about the conduct of online platforms and their impact on society, this document is not the result of an official White House policymaking process.” [White House distances itself from reports that Trump could target Facebook, Google and Twitter with a new executive order, by Tony Romm and Josh Dawsey, September 22, 2018]
WaPo reported Trump has demanded an executive order on this matter for some time, but all of the drafts have been deemed “unworkable.” Sources tell the Watcher that the fallout from the leak deterred the President but he still considers the issue a top priority for his base and he wants it addressed.
Of course, first, we have to shoot down True Conservative notions that it’s not the government’s job to resolve tech censorship. Dogmatic Conservatism Incers insist the free market will magically fix the problem and government intervention would somehow be worse than suppression of right-wing views. Some—such as The Weekly Standard’sJonathan Last—have even celebrated this censorship as a necessary measure against “repugnant” voices. [The Case for Banning Alex Jones, August 8, 2018]
All of these opinions are absolutely ridiculous and predicated on the notion that Big Tech won’t go after “respectable” conservatives, which isn’t even the case. PragerU, a mainstream conservative outlet, has been censored numerous times by Facebook and YouTube, in spite of its painfully respectable brand. And others will soon face the same treatment once the T ech Totalitarians realize they can continue this malfeasance with impunity. [Facebook Censors PragerU Videos And Shadow Bans Posts, by Kyle Perisec, The Daily Caller, August 17, 2018]
The “free market” can’t do anything about it. Google has cornered over 92 percent of the search engine market—a higher market share percentage than Standard Oil at its peak. Big Tech has made sure that Gab, a free speech alternative to Twitter, is barredfrom ever posing a serious challenge. And no one wants to use a “conservative” Facebook. [Hate speech crackdown spreads to behind-the-scenes tech, by Tony Romm and Elizabeth Dwoskin, Washington Post, August 10, 2018]
Big Tech has manipulated the free market to benefit its own interests and power. Tech execs know they don’t have to worry about conservative competition putting an end to their malpractices.
That leaves only one serious alternative: government intervention.
It is in America’s interest for this to happen. The public forums and printing presses of our day are Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. If you are barred from these platforms, you are effectively eliminated from the public square. Big Tech wants to ensure right-wing viewpoints are consigned to the dustbin and no one has the freedom to share those views in public.
This is where Donald Trump can step in and halt these disturbing efforts.
MORE ON GOOGLE:
Speaking Tuth To Power (When power does not want to listen)
In almost every democratic nation our right of free speech is under attack. In Britain, Australia, Canada and all the main European Union member states we see harsh punishments imposed on those found guilty of ‘hate speech,’ laws, which protect certain minorities from any criticism, no matter how reasonable, made by people from the mainstream of society …