“The name’s Francis Sawyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I’ll kill you.” – Stripes
Yes, YouTube® gave themselves a free speech award. It’s not parody – this happened.
The Mrs., Mark (LINK) and I have a little podcast we’ve been working on for a while. It’s not very big, but I don’t advertise it much, either. We livestream every Wednesday at 9pm Eastern. You can find it here (LINK) if you’re interested. It’s a lot like The Grand Tour® (or old Top Gear©) with me as Clarkson, Mark as May, and The Mrs. as Hammond. Note: The Mrs. does not wreck nearly as often as Hammond does.
What we have been doing with it is practicing – we’ve practiced format, and types of stories, and even how we interact. I like to think that in the last few months we’re getting better on all points. I think we’re getting better, because more recently after completing the podcast I feel “up” and excited, like we did a good job and I know we did. The podcast content is pretty lightweight, mainly commentary on the news and making fun of The Powers That Be.
One thing that has always been in the back of my mind was that we would (at some point) be censored.
Our first strike was a copyright strike.
Why?
How does a polygamist hippie count his wives? “One Mrs. Hippie, Two Mrs. Hippe, Three Mrs. Hippie . . .“
The Mrs. used a bit of Rockin’ in the Free World to make fun of Neil Young and his blatant attempt to gain publicity in order to censor Joe Rogan’s ‘Rona commentary that differed from The Narrative. The irony on that one is hilarious. It’s obvious that Neil’s idea of an ideal “free world” would probably make Stalin red with envy.
So, that was the first censorship. The Mrs. replaced the now-verboten Rockin’ in the Free World with a public domain music bed and that podcast was re-uploaded. The fact that we were using only a snippet of Neil’s music and then criticizing him for being a hirsute hippie hypocrite of questionable personal hygiene would probably have made a claim of Fair Use quite defensible.
But, whatever. It was easy enough to cut out that bearded road apple’s music.
This time, however, I accidently touched one of YouTube’s® third rails – an absolutely verboten opinion. Here’s what I said in the podcast:
“There is a theory that I’m working on: Wilder’s Theory of Greatest Amusement. What would be the most amusing 2016 election? Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump. What’s the most amusing outcome? Donald Trump winning. Let’s go to 2020: what’s the most amusing opponent for Trump? Joe “Dementia” Biden. What’s the most amusing outcome? Biden stealing the election.”
That’s what I said, more or less. I can’t give you the exact quote because YouTube™ nuked the podcast not only from external view, but we can’t see it ourselves. When Google® is serious about putting something in the memory hole, they are serious.
They did highlight the offending bit: “Biden stealing the election.”
Out of a fifty-minute podcast (more or less) it was a throwaway line. The Mrs. appealed the strike. It turns out of you appeal a strike and the strike is upheld, the appeal is a second strike. The end sentence in her request for an appeal? “Lighten up, Francis.”
When I played baseball we couldn’t wear Adidas©. Three stripes and you’re out.
I’m not sure that the millennial who is in charge of determining if we violated “community standards” will get the reference. But if his, her, or xirs name is Francis? Maybe he’ll lighten up. I don’t think they’ll accept the appeal – and in that case we get an immediate suspension.
But if we get three? They delete our channel forever.
That’s okay. Our channel has an approximate net worth of . . . zero. There are literally an infinite number of channel names we can come up with, and an infinite number of email addresses we can us to create those channels. It’s not like the podcast team is worried about losing out this name. Heck, we’re not even a streaming channel that investors spent $250 million putting together.
Here’s the policy that they say we violated:
- Election integrity: Content that advances false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches changed the outcome of select past national elections, after final election results are officially certified. This currently applies to:
- Any past U.S. Presidential election
-
-
- The 2021 German federal election
- The 2018 Brazilian Presidential election
-
Free and fair elections?
So, the result is simple: if there is ample evidence that there was fraud that impacted the 2020 election, (and there is) you can’t make that claim on YouTube®. Why? Because they have already determined that those claims are “false”. 2,000 voters all registered to one address in Georgia? One person committing multiple felonies on film by delivering votes to boxes? Stacy Abrams eating the votes that had “Trump” marked on them?
I did searches of those very serious stories, and there were no hits on YouTube®. Zero, despite evidence on film of these things having occurred. Obviously, according to YouTube®, those things never happened. They’re facts (well, not the Stacy Abrams thing), but facts that YouTube® suppresses like a 1915 woman voter.
The classroom even had a duck. They made it wear a mask. It was strange looking, but it fit the bill.
It actually gets worse. If a person’s YouTube™ videos are nothing but, oh, I don’t know, hairstyles for squirrels, but it turns out that you actually write and perform disco music? Okay, that might be justified. But the reality is that once a person becomes “unpersoned” it happens across all platforms at the same time. Facebook™, Twitter©, and YouTube® (and others) will permaban you.
And you’re done. There’s no appeal. And if you have information stored on their services? Gone. Where do you do your recovery passwords? Records? Past email files?
Strangely, this cast of characters is very familiar . . .
From the trends that I’ve seen, eventually, all media on the Right that questions The Narrative will get banned. One website I try to visit regularly has been under DDOS attack for weeks. Others, like Western Rifle Shooters Association, were deleted (and came back, thankfully!). But tonight, I tried to hit one of WRSA’s links and found . . . .
No such page. There are tons of reasons other than censorship, but, let’s be real. It’s censorship. Some of my most popular posts led to unwanted attention, to virus attacks, and to being taken offline.
The momentum is headed towards more, not less censorship right now. The Digital Services Act recently passed by the EU parliament increases censorship. Expect more here in the United States.
If Hillary wins in 2024, I’m moving to Benghazi. At least I know she’ll leave me alone there.
They say that it’s darkest before the dawn, but sometimes it’s darkest before things go pitch black. I fear the times will get even darker. That’s okay. It just makes some of us search ever harder for the Truth, and we all know: the signal can’t be stopped.