Google and YouTube: Too Big for Their Britches

First Google filtered out a lot of anti-Islamic content from its search engine. Then they enforced a “no pseudonym” policy on Google Plus — making anonymity difficult for whistle-blowers, corporate and government protest organizers and those who would risk their safety to criticize Islam. Now they’re removing videos critical of Islam from YouTube. Google/YouTube are near-monopolies who have no problem, whatsoever, throwing their weight around. These social networking giants need a lesson in social responsibility.

I don’t know about you, but censorship of freethought is unthinkable to me. How dare they silence our freedom of expression! The world NEEDS our perspective, our concerns, our voice. Google has repeatedly demonstrated a wrong-headed, accommodationist, cowardly, propensity to forfeit democratic ideals to placate vocal majorities. As the great American, Adlai Stevenson, once pointed out: “My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular.” Being a minority should not mean being expendable.

If you value freedom of expression and hate censorship, please let Google and YouTube know that you will not tolerate our inalienable rights taken away so cavalierly. They’re big now but they’re establishing a history of cowardice that will come back to bite them on the ass. Their continued success is not guaranteed and it will be the users they alienated that will boost the fortunes of their competitors.

Something else you can do is to download all the freethought videos you can from YouTube, before they disappear, and repost them over and over. Or you can make your own freethought videos and post them over and over. Actually, I’m not sure that’s workable but you get my gist . . . punish YouTube. We could learn a lesson from the “squeaky wheel” religious zealots and make a big noise of our own.

6 thoughts on “Google and YouTube: Too Big for Their Britches”

  1. I was reading an article from ZME abut GRB 090510 and gamma ray bursts, I will keep looking back at all the articles I have read and let you know which one, it explained it had detected wavelengths surpassing 10to the minus 43rd power and that should not have been possible. I will keep you updated.


  2. No computer chips in your shoulder to let doctors know what drugs you are on and how sick you are. Abd required to keep SS costs down.


    1. Hi Dave,
      Our right to privacy is being eroded by technology. Such technology should be “opt-in”, not opt-out. And what does “abd” mean (I know it’s not All But Dissertation).


      1. Sorry about that, I was trying to say under the guise of saving money and keeping us safe the federal government will require people on social security disability to have a computer chip installed to be certain narcotics and pre-existing conditions are known to doctors before they treat you. And that is onlt the begining. Soon if you have a criminal record or bad credit that will be on that chip to, then all your genetic sequence to be sure you do not pass a disease or trait. If you want SSD, are mentally ill or a criminal you won’t be able to opt out.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s