The Censorship Crusade Continues

“ORWELLIAN MANUEUVERS”

by Jeff Crouere, ©2019

Image credit: geralt at Pixabay

(Jun. 7, 2019) — Throughout our history, free speech has been cherished in the United States of America. Thankfully, we have the First Amendment which mandates that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” It not only protects this right, but also the free press and other precious liberties such as the right to exercise religious beliefs, assemble, and “petition the Government for the redress of grievances.”

Unfortunately, in recent years, there has been an assault on free speech. On many college campuses, conservative speakers are not welcome. Often, when a conservative is invited, progressive groups attempt to persuade the administration to cancel the speech. If that is not successful, protesters will try to shut down the speech, frequently using violence.

This paucity of conservative speakers can also be found at college graduation ceremonies. Commencement addresses are the highest profile speech that can be given on any college campus. Unfortunately, students and parents are usually only exposed to a speaker who is an avowed liberal, progressive or socialist.

A study of college commencement addresses was conducted by Young America’s Foundation in 2018. The results were unsettling, but not surprising. It discovered that liberals exceeded conservatives by an astounding 12-1 margin. These invitees reflected the values of college professors and administrators, who are overwhelmingly liberal.

Sadly, the ongoing censorship of conservatism is not limited to college campuses. It is especially apparent every day in our media environment. The mainstream news media has been dominated by liberals for decades. So, positive news about conservative policies or politicians is regularly censored. The disturbing situation was documented in a recent Media Research Center study. It showed that during a three-month period in 2018, approximately 92% of the news coverage of President Trump on the three major broadcast networks was negative.

Americans hoping for a better result among social media platforms have been thoroughly disappointed. In recent months, there have been regular reports that conservative commentators have either been marginalized or completely removed from certain social media sites.

This week, YouTube demonetized the site of Stephen Crowder, a conservative comedian. Even though he developed a tremendous audience of 4 million subscribers, YouTube targeted him because of complaints from Carlos Maza, a Vox journalist. Maza complained that Crowder engaged in regular “homophobic attacks” over a two-year period.

While Crowder’s targeting of Maza as a “lipsy queer” is certainly unfortunate, the best response is not censorship, but more free speech. YouTube should not silence controversial or even distasteful views of commentators but allow the publication of other opinions.

As media outlets promoted Crowder’s punishment for lampooning Maza, there was very little investigation into the background of the “victim.” Several weeks ago, Maza tweeted that Brexit opponents in the UK throw milkshakes at politicians who wanted to leave the European Union and “Humiliate them at every turn.”

In October of 2017, Maza blasted Sean Hannity of Fox News for criticizing violent Antifa protests. He called the valid complaints of Hannity and other outraged Americans a plot to “demonize legitimate protest movements.”

Prior to working at Vox, Maza was employed by Media Matters, a progressive organization committed to destroying conservative programs by targeting their advertisers and pressuring them to cease their financial support.

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) noted that YouTube penalized Crowder, but continues to allow liberal commentators such as Samantha Bee on their site. This so-called comedian regularly insults conservatives and had to apologize for a horrible slur she directed at Ivanka Trump. According to Cruz, YouTube has “no coherent standard” and the best idea is “DON’T BLACKLIST ANYBODY.”

Instead of supporting free speech, the standard for YouTube and other social media sites is to censor conservatives while allowing liberals the independence to make any kind of comment. Of course, this type of policy is more than troubling. As Cruz warned, “YouTube is not the Star Chamber-stop playing God and silencing those voices you disagree with.”

These actions should alarm every American, regardless of party or ideology. Our country should reject these Orwellian maneuvers to institute a liberal groupthink.

Ideas need to be vigorously debated and Americans should be exposed to as many viewpoints as possible. The problem is that liberals cannot withstand a hearty debate and do not want to engage in a defense of their ideas. They know their positions will not prevail against conservative arguments, so their strategy is to eliminate the discussion by calling conservatives “racist,” among many other insults.

In the upcoming election, the issue of censorship needs to be at the forefront. It is a threat to the future survival of the United States and demands our attention. If this trend is not reversed, the consequences for the “land of the free” will be very frightening to say the least.

————————-

Jeff Crouere is a native New Orleanian and his award winning program, “Ringside Politics,” airs locally at 7:30 p.m. Fridays and at 10:00 p.m. Sundays on PBS affiliate WLAE-TV, Channel 32, and from 7-11 a.m. weekdays on WGSO 990-AM & www.Wgso.com. He is a political columnist, the author of America’s Last Chance and provides regular commentaries on the Jeff Crouere YouTube channel and on www.JeffCrouere.com. For more information, email him at jeff@jeffcrouere.com

11 Responses to "The Censorship Crusade Continues"

  1. Robert Laity   Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 12:59 AM

    Wyatt Hunt, Every American has the right to express his/her opinion. Not just liberals. For liberals to purposely undertake to stifle opposing discourse is in derogation of other’s right to say what’s on their minds. If liberals are to enjoy their right to “protest campus speakers” then conversely conservatives have that SAME right to protest liberal speakers when that point of view is the sole points of view being promoted by said school. BTW, Facebook and YouTube are social media. The Post and Email is an online NEWS paper. The P&E is protected by Freedom of the Press and as such has striven to maintain the highest standards of Journalism.

  2. Robert Laity   Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 12:49 AM

    Rattler, I do not believe that this site censors liberals. I am sure that they are welcome here. Your comment, for example, got published. The P & E may be popular with conseervatives, however it is NOT “unfair” nor does it shut out responsible unabusive debate or discourse.

  3. Wyatt Hunt   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 5:24 PM

    So where does The Post & Email owner stand on this question?

    Does the P&E agree with the owners of the other social media sites that they have the right to determine the content of their site?

  4. Sharon Rondeau   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 12:36 PM

    OK, but let’s keep it upbeat and avoid back-and-forth with other commenters: https://www.thepostemail.com/about/

  5. Rattlerjake   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 12:17 PM

    james carter – Yet that is NOT all they moderate. I know because they have removed my comments in the past and even blocked me from commenting without any explanation other than the same crap that farcebook, twitter, and instagram use.

    If I say that evolution is a lie and you remove that comment because your indoctrination tells you that it is fact, that is censorship, because you cannot prove evolution is real, neither can the liars in government and science that make those claims and back it with “THEORIES” and no true physical evidence. Science is full of lies. There are numerous articles that have been done proving that medical journals and scientific journals will publish anything “for a dollar”. The problem is that today’s society has become a society of easily offended victims. They totally believe that if it offends them, even if it is true, no one should be able to say it or write it. This is exactly what the anti-semitism, racism, homophobia, islamophobia, etc.labels do – they create censorship based purely on subjective opinion.

  6. Rattlerjake   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 12:02 PM

    Wyatt Hunt – When a social Media site is open to the public to post information or comments, it is no longer “private”. Farcebook, twitter, and instagram mediate the content based on SUBJECTIVE OPINION, as well as selectively censoring based on political or religious views their site rules are very vague; if they were very specific then they would be sued every time they censor someones comment because of how easy it would be to prove they are being selective based on their subjective opinion. In reality, these social media sites are no different than the public library, in that they are supposed to accept any published material and make it available to the public, unless it actually breaks the law, like child pornography. But they are unlike a newspaper that selects from unpublished submissions for their articles or comments. Someone making a negative comment about a race, sexual preference, religious group, etc. is NOT discrimination if it is based on fact, it is merely stating a fact. Likewise, just because someone makes a derogatory statement or uses a derogatory word in reference to someone based on race, sex, religion, etc. doesn’t make it hateful, bigoted, intolerant, or discriminatory – that is entirely subjective and based on opinion. Just because someone is “offended” doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be said or needs to be censored.

  7. Wyatt Hunt   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 9:07 AM

    In the name of free speech should the free speech rights of students to protest campus conservative speakers be taken away?

    The Constitution prohibits Congress from making any law abridging the freedom of speech. Does this also cover the owners of private sites like Facebook, YouTube or The Post & E-Mail? Can a private site owner make policies that prevent someone from posting comments?

    It’s a pickle.

  8. James Carter   Monday, June 10, 2019 at 8:02 AM

    Rattlerjake1

    Maybe, just maybe, “Your comment is awaiting moderation” is how this site precludes obvious spam or blatant LIES.from having to be removed.

  9. Sharon Rondeau   Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 5:36 PM

    I am not sure who you are addressing or what you mean.

  10. Rattlerjake1   Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 5:19 PM

    “Your comment is awaiting moderation”, isn’t that the same as “Your comment is awaiting censorship”?!!!!! Just because you don’t like or agree with something that someone writes, doesn’t mean you have a right to remove it or censor it in any way, especially when many of those “negative” comments are based on fact. I do, however, agree that obvious spam or blatant LIES should be removed.

  11. Rattlerjake1   Sunday, June 9, 2019 at 5:13 PM

    Interesting how you publish an article saying it is unfair for Farcebook to engage in censorship, yet your site does it too! Censorship should not be allowed on ANY social media site that allows comments – the only thing that should be allowed is the removal of obvious spam!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.