A Distinction Without a Difference?

I am a BIG fan of Dennis Prager (not so much Hugh Hewitt, although they are often found together).  I am an EVEN BIGGER fan of the 5-minute videos produced by Prager University.  In fact, if I were a schoolteacher, teaching from the 7th grade up, I would start every day with a PragerU video and have a class discussion about it.

Essentially, it’s Conservatives and the few young adults with open minds that tend to enjoy and share the PragerU videos.  They are popular because they address national and international topics, mostly politically-incorrect issues in open, logical and fact-filled ways that usually contradict positions held by the Left.  (If you have not heard or seen a PragerU video try this link: https://www.prageru.com/5-minute-videos/.  You can even subscribe to get them delivered to your email, along with solicitations to support PragerU.)

Unfortunately, YouTube and Google have effectively CENSORED the PragerU videos by filtering them to the bottom or completely out of general search inquiry results and/or simply refusing to include them in results due to their “hate speech” content (as YouTube and Google defines them).  Spotify and Twitter have both refused to allow PragerU from buying advertising on their services.

As a result of these politically motivated decisions to black-list PragerU from “publishing” (or otherwise reaching the People), the top Corporation's platforms in the social intercourse business, namely Google, YouTube, Twitter, Spotify, et al, are violating the law.  PragerU has elected to use this Country’s woefully unpredictable Judicial System, to essentially impose 1st Amendment, “Freedom of Speech” protections in PragerU’s behalf.  After all, THEY have a monopoly!

It just ain’t fair!  Someone should make them give PragerU the same opportunities that they give to Daily Kos, Mother Jones, Salon Politics, and the like.  It’s time that the government took notice of this inequality and took action to correct it!  Don’cha think?

Hmmmm…  Wait just a minute.  What if we made a couple of changes to this situation, just to simplify?  Take a look at it from THIS hypothetical scenario:

What if Google (just to use a name) actually baked wedding cakes, and PragerU (let’s say they are a couple of gay men) walks into the Google Bakery and DEMAND that this NON-government “bakery” put two naked men in a compromising position atop their three-tiered wedding cake.  In response, the baker (Google) says, politely, “No.  Sorry, we can't do that.  It is just not consistent with our beliefs, our principles, or our policies.  But look, there's another bakery (Bing, Yahoo, Ask.com, or even DuckDuckGo) that will do it for you.”

But the gay guys (PragerU) say, “No Way, buddy (to Google)!  I only want YOU to make it!  I’m gonna sue!”

As a Conservative, how would you prefer this hypothetical disagreement to go?

Of course, we would want it to be ruled in favor of the baker, in this case, Google.

This is where there is a distinction between the two scenarios (facts and fiction), but there is actually no difference

The REAL circumstances are no different than my hypothetical.  Google is a private company and therefore permitted its own principles and policies as long as they are exercised equally and without predetermined biases.  That doesn't mean they have to accept PragerU submittals as long as they also do not accept any Conservative-perspective videos from other Conservative submitters.  The same would be true of YouTube, Twitter, Spotify, and the rest.  As long as they are NOT an agency of the government or a GFO company, the government has no authority over their policies, principles, or even the beliefs of the company’s executive management.  They are “free” to determine their own rules or criteria for selecting (or deselecting) the appearance of PragerU videos on their “published” social media platforms.  They should be able to pick the videos they think will attract as many views as possible, without driving the existing viewers away.  It is "viewer-hits" that draw Google's paying customers, the advertisers who buy exposure to us, the public consumers, in the form of advertising.  But you know that, right?  (We don't need to talk about their profits from privacy invasion or data mining sold to God knows whom, OK?)

Of course, our normally out-of-control government noted for doing exactly the wrong things for both the wrong and right reasons could jump in using the very subjective elements of anti-trust laws.  For example:

  • Do they REALLY have a monopoly in their markets?
  • Do they have multiple “suppliers” of videos (which are ultimately their suppliers)?
  • Do they say, “You can’t have THAT product unless you take THIS product, too?”

Their history, in cases the size of this, has been remarkably UN-remarkable in terms of final impact.  (I am sure that many, many lawyers and a few political officials somehow found remarkable sums of money freshly deposited into their retirement accounts, aren't you?)  Case in point:

When the government broke up AA&T, we went from a solitary Nationwide monopoly to 7 Regional monopolies…  right?

And then, there was that “sue-age” to break up Micro-Soft’s stranglehold on IBM based PC Operating Systems.  Actually, the government won both the case, and the appeal, but the penalties and required changes that we demanded by the government did very little to benefit the consumer's side of the market.  I guess since then, Linux has penetrated the monopoly to a relatively small degree.  But there is still no equal to Bill Gates' wealth building "racket."

So what do you think the solution should be?

  • Force Google (et al) to end the black-balling of Conservative materials in the search criteria and the censoring of Conservative messages contributed to keeping them from the public?
  • Can we, a significant part of America’s Social Media, wane ourselves off the addiction for real-time news and information (true and fake), and instead, visit ONLY pro-conservative sources – you know, shop with our feet, as they say.
  • Quit whining. It’s your choice alone to search out and use sites and sources of legitimate news and information (like that old standby, Fox News, or even the Drudge Report).  You don’t HAVE TO use Google, etc. 

I’m sure that whatever we find, it will have its own rules, policies, procedures, and biases, but if we agree with them, no big deal.

It’s just that I think that bringing the government into the issue to resolve it to OUR benefit is just as egregious an interference in the marketplace as is the decision by these companies to insult, deny service, and, thereby, eliminate a very significant portion of their potential customers.

Some will call it non-realistic purism, or something, but I really believe that if “they” are acting unfairly with devious, unethical practices, WE can defeat them with a better, more reliable (and may I conscript one of their favorite phrases?), and some “Fair to all” products or services.  Conservatives believe that fair markets allow and encourage companies to provide trusted products and services at reasonable prices.  And that the companies that break that product trust and reasonable pricing conventions will, eventually, lose their share.  They will either comply with successful standards or wither away.

When we “artificially” force those changes, I’m afraid that not too far into the future they can be reversed – “artificially.”  Is our "Conservatism" flexible or adaptable enough to be contradictive to "Conservatism" when we choose it to be?

As Thomas Jefferson has been quoted, “I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.”

Do we need to know more?  Are we not aware that some companies are trying to mold an opinion for our Nation that is contrary to ours?  Our government is based on The People being Informed, not jumping in and out of control via our dubious, publically influenced judicial system.  Like Jefferson do we trust our fellows?  We must not stand by and allow them to be duped, nor should we encourage them to take extraordinary action.  How about we stand up to our duty of keeping them informed?

 

Views: 191

Comment

You need to be a member of Arizona Freedom Alliance to add comments!

Join Arizona Freedom Alliance

Comment by Larry Grafanakis on March 12, 2019 at 8:33pm

Eric:  I'd like to move forward on this.  Do you have any suggestions how to proceed.  You see, in my opinion THIS has one of the biggest problems that "lay people" have had for a long time ...... no channel for input and no "Think Tank" of our own and loyal to "US".  The people chosen to be on the council (and it could be done by national referendum) would automatically have the power of integrity, similar to what the Supreme Court.  Though without the power to make lawful rulings, its "conclusions" may actually hold as much power as a Supreme Court ruling. 

Others on AFA may comment and suggest as well.  You know, Sheriff's investigation into Obama's birth certificate began with a suggestion at the Surprise, AZ Tea Party.  Let's keep the ball rolling.

Comment by Eric Barnes on March 12, 2019 at 11:31am

Excellent post, Larry.  Would also work well by having its decisions automatically emailed to every member of Congress.  Even  that doesn't guarantee anything as there are numbers of "FLAPPERS" (from Gulliver's Travels") between the information and the intended recipient.

However, when the solution is "...but to inform their discretion.", how does one go about that when the other person has closed both ears and mind to the solution???

Comment by Larry Grafanakis on March 12, 2019 at 2:57am

Eric:  not a corporation, but a Council of Ethics.  With people like Bill Whittle and Patrick Wood and Judge Napolitano and G. Edward Griffin on it ...... and of course you and me.   A Council of Ethics that could and would purview the decisions of government and give it a thumbs up or down.   A Council decision would not necessarily stop a ruling or law from going into effect, but it could give a strong moral perspective to a ruling or law .... perhaps even before it went into effect. 

Comment by Eric Barnes on March 11, 2019 at 10:26am

If we wish to see those things which are being politically censored by Left Wing Corporations, it would make the most sense to form a corporation of like minded technologists who can create the necessary place for Freedom to ring its chimes on the internet.  That will take money.

Comment by Walter Myers on March 11, 2019 at 6:38am

Eric - you said: "I'm not so opposed to the Supremes, as long as they cease making social decisions which are not in direct line with the Constitution."  I see the problem being that the "Supremes" have twisted the Constitution of 1787 into what is called the "Annotated Constitution"; a 3000 page document that is now the basis for governing. Bottom line: I see the "Supremes" as an unelected body that in essence comprises a dictatorship.

Comment by Arizona Freedom Alliance on March 10, 2019 at 12:00pm

There are alternatives to FB if you just search that on duckduckgo or some other reliable search engine NOT google.  Also, if you are a twitter fan, GAB.ai is a very good alternative.  Plenty of people there engaged in political discussion, no censoring.

To Harry: We just searched youtube from duckduckgo and found plenty of videos from that platform.  Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=prager+university

Comment by Harry Mathews on March 10, 2019 at 11:55am

To Arizona Freedon Alliance

DuckDuckGo is good but there are videos by D. Prager and others that are banned from Youtube and no search engine can find them becaue they are not there

Comment by Eric Barnes on March 10, 2019 at 10:51am

No argument at all, Walter.  I, too, have given up a number of your listed "social" sites and never joined the others.

I'm not so opposed to the Supremes, as long as they cease making social decisions which are not in direct line with the Constitution.  That they are appointed to that heady Court mostly by someone who was elected by (supposedly) someone who (supposedly) has sworn to uphold the Constitution, things should (supposedly) go fairly correctly.  Considering the pit which now dominates Congress, themselves breaking laws every day and ignoring the Constitution to which they've sworn to uphold, what kind of results can be expected?

Comment by Harry Mathews on March 10, 2019 at 10:40am

Another conservative video producer is "Intellectual Froglegs" 

(and, BTW, if you haven't been checking them out you are doing yourself a great disservice. The videos will have you laughing you rear parts off.  There is no profanity, or anything that could be deemed offensive...unless you are a Regressive Socialist. Check out Intellectual Froglegs: http://intellectualfroglegs.com )

who has been banned so much by Youtube and Vimeo that they have launched their own video platform. Half of the country voted for the "T" word so why don't we have a search/video/news platform for THAT half? There is certainly a base that is big enough for it. 

We need conservative versions or "ROKU" type devices that can stream channels that are disallowed by the Deep State. There is no reason for Google to have a monopoly because they a only serve half of the market.

Any entrepenuers out there willing to take on any of these tasks? I smell big $$$$$$$$! And what happens when there is competition? Google and their Deep State allies will have to change their ways or lose market share. Hey, either way we will all be better off. And, the same goes for our public schools which are meerly Day Concentration Camps for poisoning the minds and souls of children. Just sayin.

Comment by Larry Grafanakis on March 9, 2019 at 10:06pm

I don't Spotify or Twitter or Facebook or Google or Moveon or LinkedIn.  I don't support platforms that are out for my destruction and the destruction of America. 

If anyone in this forum is on these platforms, you should quit them.  I didn't say 'consider quitting them', I said 'quit them'.  Find another social media platform, tell the friends that you connect with and BOYCOTT these other NWO platforms. 

It doesn't matter which one's the best ..... as long as you're on the same platform, right?  Stop supporting and start fighting these monsters today.

THOUGHTS

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Click for **BLOW YOUR MIND READING LIST**  

New Books added for you.

The best in books to make every conservative start thinking in new ways about America and the world being controlled by the Obama Administrations AND Republicans and Democrats.  Some surprises are in store for those who look!

         

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Suppose the earth and its inhabitants exist in order to identify just what causes mankind continually to suffer so many troublesome problems and afflictions.

 

GOD, PLEASE BLESS AMERICA!  AMERICA, PLEASE BLESS GOD.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO PRAY, KEEP ON PRAYING. HE HAS HEARD OUR CRY AND HE IS ANSWERING.

##########################

 

 

© 2019   Created by Arizona Freedom Alliance.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service