On Wednesday, the Chicago Blackhawks banned fans from wearing Native American-style headgear during games at the United Center.
“We have always maintained an expectation that our fans uphold an atmosphere of respect, and after extensive and meaningful conversations with our Native American partners, we have decided to formalize those expectations,” the team said in a statement as reported by ESPN. “Moving forward, headdresses will be prohibited for fans entering Blackhawks-sanctioned events or the United Center when Blackhawks home games resume. These symbols are sacred, traditionally reserved for leaders who have earned a place of great respect in their Tribe and should not be generalized or used as a costume or for everyday wear.”
Recently, the team decided not to dump its name of 94 years and would continue being named after the team founder’s World War I military unit, the Blackhawk Division. The unit itself was named after Indian Chief Black Hawk, head of the Sauk Nation of Indians in the early 1800s, and who led a short war against U.S. militia in Illinois in 1832.
On July 8, the team said its name is a tribute to an “important and historic person.”
“The Chicago Blackhawks name and logo symbolizes an important and historic person, Black Hawk of Illinois’ Sac & Fox Nation, whose leadership and life has inspired generations of Native Americans, veterans, and the public,” the team said.
“We celebrate Black Hawk’s legacy by offering ongoing reverent examples of Native American culture, traditions, and contributions, providing a platform for genuine dialogue with local and national Native American groups. As the team’s popularity grew over the past decade, so did that platform and our work with these important organizations,” the statement continued.
“We recognize there is a fine line between respect and disrespect, and we commend other teams for their willingness to engage in that conversation. Moving forward, we are committed to raising the bar even higher to expand awareness of Black Hawk and the important contributions of all Native American people,” the Hawks concluded.
The team noted this week that the banning of the headgear is only the start of its plans to advance “dialogue” about racism.
When it comes to prosecutions, it doesn’t get much more political. St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, the prosecutor who decided to bring weapons charges against a couple who made national news last month for displaying weapons to deter a mob of Black Lives Matter “protesters” trespassing on private property, is using her decision to…
Long Island’s Nassau County certainly isn’t New York City, but it’s close enough that any sort of pushback on the current defund-the-police chic is news. That’s even more true when that pushback involves well over a thousand people in one of the largest “Back the Blue” rallies in the United States. According to the Long…
On Monday, Twitter placed a “sensitive content” warning on a religious-based motivational video posted by Tim Tebow.
In the post, Tebow wrote, “This could be your time. That breakthrough could be tomorrow, or it could be next year. But, you have the opportunity to turn however you’re being tested into a testimony. So many heroes were wounded deeply before they were used greatly!”
Tebow then added a video where he talked of the heroes in the Bible who were “wounded deeply before they were ever used greatly.” Tebow went on the say that you may not know what victories God is preparing you for, but you should persevere so that you don’t miss out on the possible great moments in your life.
But, instead of leaving the video visible for all Twitter users to see, Twitter blocked the video with its “sensitive content” banner. Users had to click the word “view” to be able to see Tebow’s video.
The contents of the video were entirely not offensive.
“Bible believers, when we look at the Bible, and we see a lot of the heroes, a lot of times they truly were wounded deeply before they were ever used greatly,” Tebow said in the video. “So maybe you’re going through a time in your life where you feel like you’ve just been wounded greatly. It hasn’t been your year, hasn’t been your day — you just don’t feel like this is your time.”
Tebow went on to urge people to rely on God’s providence.
“You never know what God is doing with your life. You never know what he is preparing you for. So many times in the Bible,” he said, “when we look at the heroes, there were times in their life where — if they stopped, if they quit, if they said, ‘No, God, I’ve had enough’ — then they would have missed out on the most impactful, most influential times of their life.
“Maybe that is the next step for you. Maybe that is tomorrow. Maybe that is next week, maybe that is next year. But when we quit, we will never know what we missed out on. We will never know what’s in store for us,” he continued.
“We get to trust an unknown future to a known God, because we know how much he loves us,” he said. “We know what he did for us in sending his son. He gave his best for us.
“Right where you’re at, whatever you’re doing, whatever you’re going through, he loves you,” the minor leaguer concluded. “You were enough for his son to die on the cross, that’s how much you’re loved. Hold onto that in your time of need.”
Twitter later told The Blaze that the censorship was an error and that the situation had been corrected.
Television and film mogul Tyler Perry came out strongly against calls to defund police agencies and actually called for more police officers during an interview with CNN on Wednesday. Perry, who is black, was asked by CNN host Anderson Cooper if he was “optimistic, now, in a way that you haven’t been before when you…
It kind of looks like it – Trader Joe’s has decided to reverse course and not change all the brand labels of its products to satisfy the wokeness demands of a tiny, largely white, racism-parsing left-wing mob. Here’s their statement: (emphasis ours)
To Our Valued Customers:
In light of recent feedback and attention we’ve received about our product naming, we have some things we’d like to say to clarify our approach.
A few weeks ago, an online petition was launched calling on us to “remove racist packaging from [our] products.” Following were inaccurate reports that the petition prompted us to take action. We want to be clear: we disagree that any of these labels are racist. We do not make decisions based on petitions.
We make decisions based on what customers purchase, as well as the feedback we receive from our customers and Crew Members. If we feel there is need for change, we do not hesitate to take action.
Decades ago, our Buying Team started using product names, like Trader Giotto’s, Trader José’s, Trader Ming’s, etc. We thought then—and still do—that this naming of products could be fun and show appreciation for other cultures. For example, we named our Mexican beer “Trader José Premium” and a couple guacamole products are called “Avocado’s Number” in a kitschy reference to a mathematical theory. These products have been really popular with our customers, including some budding mathematicians.
We constantly reevaluate what we are doing to ensure it makes sense for our business and aligns with customers’ expectations. A couple years ago we asked our Buying Team to review all our products to see if we needed to update any older packages, and also see if the associated brands developed years ago needed to be refreshed. We found that some of the older names or products just weren’t connecting or selling very well; so, they were discontinued. It’s kind of what we do.
Recently we have heard from many customers reaffirming that these name variations are largely viewed in exactly the way they were intended—as an attempt to have fun with our product marketing. We continue our ongoing evaluation, and those products that resonate with our customers and sell well will remain on our shelves.
Trader Joe’s has been a unique, fun and neighborly place to shop for over 50 years. We look forward to taking care of our wonderful customers for many future decades.
That’s a big change from all the cancel culture that’s taking every minority face off food-label packaging, from Mrs. Butterworth, to the Cream of Wheat man, to Aunt Jemima, to Eskimo Pies, to the Land O’Lakes Indian maiden and more, leaving just the faces of whites on the packages. Trader Jose, Trader Ming, Arabian Joe, Maitre Pierre, Trader Giotto, Trader Joe San and the rest, though, look like they might just stay, just as their customers like.
Reading through the lines of the corporate statement tells us a lot of just why, and almost all of it is commendable:
1. They refute flat out that their products are racist:
We want to be clear: we disagree that any of these labels are racist.
Glad they got that out of the way, nice to see a full frontal from what had been a bunch of corporate jellyfish.
2. They note that they are hearing from people:
We make decisions based on what customers purchase, as well as the feedback we receive from our customers and Crew Members.
…and…
Recently we have heard from many customers reaffirming that these name variations are largely viewed in exactly the way they were intended—as an attempt to have fun with our product marketing.
…and it’s scaring them straight. They must have been flooded with angry customers disgusted at seeing their beloved company cave in to political correctness. What next, replacing all the spicy food with bland pabulum, to keep all the cultural appropriation out and satisfy the far-left mob? Make the high-chair spoon throwers happy? Obviously, the customers rebelled.
3. They remember that they are a business:
We make decisions based on what customers purchase,
…and…
those products that resonate with our customers and sell well will remain on our shelves.
Nice to see a company remember what it is — no Silicon Valley/Portland/Seattle-style claptrap about ‘changing the world’ from them. If something’s profitable, they keep their customers happy. And what’s more, customers agree. Here are some very recent comments that went onto the Change.org petition to force the company to take its cutesy ethnic names off its products:
One little white lie mars Trader Joe’s excellent pullback from its earlier stance – its claim that the petition to take the names off the shelves had no effect on it. Here’s an excerpt of what they were saying via the Change.org petition to shut their brands down:
“While this approach to product naming may have been rooted in a lighthearted attempt at inclusiveness, we recognize that it may now have the opposite effect— one that is contrary to the welcoming, rewarding customer experience we strive to create every day.”
“…we made the decision several years ago to use only the Trader Joe’s name on our products moving forward. Since then, we have been in the process of updating older labels and replacing any variations with the name Trader Joe’s, and we will continue do so until we complete this important work.”
Yes, it did have an effect, and now the lefties are gathering more signatures to complain further. See how Change.org arranged the two statements and framed the issue on its site. They thought they had a cave-in from Big Corporate, and now are upset that they don’t.
But the rest of us see something good happening.
Trader Joe’s must have taken a look at who was behind the petition and decided it was total bee ess. Who’s behind it? A rich little wokester white high school teenager no doubt eager to please her teachers and college admissions committees named Briones Bedell.
Rest assured she knows nothing about racism, she’s just another Karen looking to ‘atone.’
Second, she drew very few signatures to her petition, a miserable 4,900 at last count, falling short of her 5,000 goal. This, despite fawning media profiles linked on her Twitter feed and copious glowing press. Seriously, she got less than 5,000 signatures and a lot of people trolling her. That doesn’t sound like the person who’s earned a right to push around big corporations, except that she knows they’ll let her. Maybe not now.
The remark by the Trader Joe’s employee above tells the real story – that Trader Joe’s introduces Americans to a wonderful variety of unique food they might not ever taste were there no Trader Joe’s. It’s cultural sharing in the best sense of the word and it delights millions and millions. Who would have tasted Alsace Tarte Tatin or Dukkah spice (please, please Trader Joe’s BRING IT BACK), or Mandarin orange chicken, the top-selling item in the store, or Salvadoran coffee, or Indian Palak Paneer, or Thai eggplant, or Peruvian chimichurri rice without it? So many tasty things to be found there, and tons of things that adapt to special diets, love the sugar-free sliced turkey they stock, try to find it elsewhere. The Middle Eastern ghee, by the way, should be labeled ‘ghee’ and not ‘clarified butter’ and come in a bigger jar, what’s with the white-bread sanitizing there? Bottom line, though, is that Trader Joe’s introduces American palates to new kinds of foods and that’s a heckuva lot better than mushed blandness, the same no matter where you go, all designed for high-chair wokester tastes.
What this sniveling ignorant little white teenager doesn’t get is there’s a difference between appropriation and appreciation, as a far smarter and more brilliant black teenager has explained exquisitely here:
Morgan Bullock is an African-American Irish dancer from Richmond, Virginia
After a TikTok video of her lightning-footed jigs went viral, she was accused of "cultural appropriation"
Q: You were misappropriating the Irish dancing culture?
A: I mean, my understanding of the term is that it means, when you’re taking something from another culture, claiming it as your own without recognizing where it comes from, and that couldn’t be further from what I’m doing.
It’s important for people to recognize that there’s a difference between appropriation and appreciation.
(The lovely video clip is edifying and well worth the time to watch). Here’s more backstory to that.
And as long as we are deep in teenager world, teen affairs being more important than, say Chinese espionage, let’s return to a previous story about appropriation and appreciation – remember this?
When Keziah Daum sported a traditional, Chinese cheongsam dress to her senior prom in Utah last month, she likely never intended her photos to go viral or be slammed as a “closet racist” over accusations of cultural appropriation. But days later, the 18-year-old began winning praise from an unexpected source — Chinese audiences and social media users.
“Very elegant and beautiful! Really don’t understand the people who are against her, they are wrong!” a supporter chimed in of the cheongsam, otherwise known as a qiapo. “I suggest the Chinese government, state television or fashion company invite her to China to display her cheongsam!”
“It is not cultural theft. It is cultural appreciation and cultural respect,” another agreed.
and this nonsense from someone who nakedly appropriates British culture, combined with sensible smackdowns from China, from Glamour:
"I suppose I was frustrated by it mainly because it looks out of context,” says Melissa Legarda, 25, a Filipino British journalist who initially shared the story with the group. "I always have such a skepticism when I see a [non-POC] wearing a dress of another country or tradition that’s not [their own] because most of the time, they don’t appreciate the traditions involved in that culture." Legarda’s sentiment mirrors the reaction shared by many Asians in the West who have taken to Twitter to voice their dissent. One particular tweet, accusing Daum of cultural appropriation, has been retweeted over 41,000 times at publish time.
On Facebook, where I still keep in touch with my friends from Hong Kong, my feed tells a completely different story. Karen Chiang, one of my Hong Kong–based friends, shared a BuzzFeed article covering the controversy, writing, “This girl rocked it. Full stop.” Other commenters agreed, echoing the effusive feedback thousands of Chinese netizens have shared on Weibo, China’s answer to Twitter. The message was clear: To the Chinese, Daum totally rocked the dress—no offense taken.
"I didn’t think there was a more appropriate or respectful way for a foreigner to pay homage to qipaos and the Chinese culture, especially compared to occasions where Chinese culture is reduced to a fans, dragons, and chopstick-in-a-top-bun kind of moment," Chiang writes in an email. The 25-year-old wellness blogger and freelance writer grew up in Hong Kong, and has seen many white expats in Hong Kong partake in the aforementioned type of dress—but didn’t see any hints of malice or racism.
"I probably raised an eyebrow [at these people], because they look quite silly most of the time. But as long as people are trying their best to respect and appreciate a culture, I’m cool with it. It’s still better than if they didn’t bother to open their minds at all."
It seems the good guys are winning now. Enjoying another culture is not racism, it’s white Karenism, done by wokester teens with absolutely nothing intelligent to say. Glad Trader Joe’s woke up and smelled the coffee.
The most powerful tech CEOs in the country, representing Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook, appeared before the House Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel to discuss their market dominance and censorship yesterday. Here are some of the most misleading answers the CEOs gave Congress.
Yesterday, the CEO’s of major American tech firms Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook appeared before the House Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel to discuss the market dominance of their firms and issues relating to censorship on their platforms. During the hearing, the CEOs made a number of claims relating to their platforms and the competition they face. Each of the CEOs made extremely misleading statements, with Google CEO Sundar Pichai regularly misrepresenting how Google operates or the competition the tech giant faces.
Here are six instances where the Masters of the Universe stretched the truth:
1: Google’s Sundar Pichai Claims it ‘Faces New Competition Every Day’
During the hearing, Google CEO Sundar Pichai told Congress that the company faces intense competition, and that “new competitors emerge every day.”
Pichai stated: “Just as America’s technology leadership is not inevitable, Google’s continued success is not guaranteed. New competitors emerge every day, and today users have more access to information than ever before. Competition drives us to innovate, and it also leads to better products, lower choices, and more choices for everyone.”
However, while it is true that many companies may make an attempt to compete with Google, the chances of them being successful are extremely slim. For example, Google accounts for 90 percent of online searches according to GlobalStats, while competitors such as Microsoft’s Bing and the privacy-focused DuckDuckGo may attempt to compete with Google, the company faces no real threat or competition.
Google’s search dominance is one of the reasons that the company was able to suppress the search results of Breitbart News and other conservative news websites, essentially “purging Breitbart content from search results since the 2016 election,” according to Breitbart News’ reporter Allum Bokhari.
2: Google CEO Sundar Pichai: ‘We Don’t Approach Work With Any Political Viewpoint’
Pichai claimed during yesterday’s hearing that the tech giant does not approach its work with any particular political viewpoint, a concept disproved by Breitbart News’ extensive reporting on the company’s political bias. During yesterday’s hearing, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) addressed Pichai, stating:
You said something today different than you did with Ms. Lofgren, you confessed that there is a manual component to the way in which you blacklist content. It seems to be no coincidence that sites like Gateway Pundit, the Western Journal, American Spectator, Daily Caller, and Breitbart that receive the ire or the negative treatment as a consequence of your manual tooling.
And it also seems noteworthy that whistleblowers at your own comapny have spoken out. You said that one of the reasons you maintain this manual tool is to stop election interference, I believe it is in fact your company that is engaging in elction interference. You’re using your market dominance in search to accomplish that election interference.
Pichai responded:
I strongly disagree with that characterization.
We don’t approach this work with any political viewpoint. We do that to comply with law, known copyright violations, very narrow circumstances and we have to do that to comply with the law, and in many cases, those requests come [from] law enforcement agencies.
Breitbart News reported as far back as 2017 that political bias was rampant at Google, with senior management reportedly “on the verge of tears” following President Trump’s election. One Google insider told Breitbart News at the time: “After the 2016 election, we had an entire TGIF dedicated to the election result, in which several of our top management gave emotional speeches as though the world was going to end, and seemed to be on the verge of tears. It was embarrassing.”
Recently Breitbart News reported that Breitbart’s ranking in Google’s search engine had diminished significantly following our publication of a story in 2016 that at an internal meeting leaked to Breitbart News, top Google executives, including Sundar Pichai, Sergey Brin, and Kent Walker, expressed their anger over President Trump’s election and compared Trump voters to “extremists.” During the meeting, the executives discussed their desire to make Trump’s election and the populist movement a “blip” in history.
Breitbart News reporter Allum Bokhari writes:
Search visibility is a key industry measure of how findable a publisher’s content is in Google search. New data shows that Google has suppressed Breitbart’s search visibility by 99.7 percent since 2016.
On April 4, 2016, Breitbart ranked in the top ten search positions (i.e., on the first page of Google search results) for 355 key search terms; but now, as of July 20, 2020, Breitbart ranks in the top ten search positions for only one search term. And, on April 4, 2016, Breitbart ranked in the top 100 search positions for 16,820 key search terms; but now, as of July 20, 2020, Breitbart ranks in the top 100 search positions for only 55 search terms.
Moreover, organic Google search traffic to Breitbart (measured by unique visitors) is down 63 percent when comparing the first half of 2016 with the first half of 2020.
Breitbart News has repeatedly revealed Google’s political bias, yet the company’s CEO still attempts to claim that the tech giant does not approach its work “with any political viewpoint.”
3: Sundar Pichai Claims Google Has ‘Limited Presence in China’
While it is true that due to China’s restrictive “Great Firewall” many U.S. companies such as Facebook and Google are unable to operate directly within the country, that hasn’t stopped Google from making multiple deals with the Chinese government and attempting to launch a censored search engine for government officials.
The search app, codenamed “Project Dragonfly,” would have featured a list of unsearchable terms based on topics that are blocked by the government of China. It would also have linked users’ searches to personal phone numbers. Leakers also claimed that Google’s privacy team had been denied access to the project, something the company denied. A senior Google researcher, Jack Poulson, resigned in protest at the project in September of 2018.
After details of Google’s Project Dragonfly search engine leaked, many came out in opposition to the company’s plans to operate in China. 14 human rights organizations published an open letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai which stated: “Google risks becoming complicit in the Chinese government’s repression of freedom of speech and other human rights in China.”
Vice President Mike Pence stated: “Google should immediately end development of the ‘Dragonfly’ app that will strengthen Communist Party censorship and compromise the privacy of Chinese customers.”
Google has stated that they are “not close” to launching a search engine in China but leaked discussions paint a different picture. Google’s Keith Enright told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee on September 26th that there “is a Project Dragonfly,” but said, “we are not close to launching a product in China.” Google’s search engine chief, Ben Gomes, told a BBC reporter at Google’s 20th-anniversary celebration event: “Right now, all we’ve done is some exploration, but since we don’t have any plans to launch something, there’s nothing much I can say about it.”
But privately, discussions surrounding Project Dragonfly have painted a different picture. According to one Google source, Gomes’s comments to the BBC about Project Dragonfly were “bullshit.” Sources told the Intercept that Gomes informed employees in July 2019 that the company planned to release the censored Chinese search engine as soon as possible and employees were to prepare the engine to be “brought off the shelf and quickly deployed” once they received approval from Beijing.
4: Apple CEO Tim Cook Claims All App Developers Treated Equally
Google’s Sundar Pichai was not the only tech CEO to misrepresent how his company operates, Apple’s Tim Cook also made the bold claim that all iOS developers that attempt to have their app listed on Apple’s App Store are treated equally.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) addressed Cook, stating: “Mr. Cook, with over one hundred million iPhone users in the United States alone and with Apple’s ownership of the app store giving Apple the ability to control which apps are allowed to be marketed to Apple users, you wield immense power over small businesses to grow and prosper. Apple is the sole decision-maker as to whether an app is made available to app users through Apple’s app store isn’t that correct?”
Cook responded: “If it’s a native app, yes sir.” Johnson then outlined an investigation that found that app developers are very much at Apple’s mercy when it comes to demands and changes to the App Store. Johnson stated: “The app store is said to also discriminate between app developers with similar apps on the Apple app platform, and also as to smaller app developers versus large app developers. So, Mr. Cook, does Apple not treat all app developers equally?”
Cook responded: “Sir, we treat every developer the same, we have open and transparent rules, its a rigorous process. Because we care so deeply about privacy and security and quality, we do look at every app before it goes on, but those rules apply evenly to everyone…”
However, Breitbart News has reported that Apple has a long history of removing apps from its store for a number of reasons and often with little cause. Breitbart News reported in 2016 that the app of the upstart social media network Gab was removed from the App Store by apple over content posted by users on the platform, not content generated by the app itself.
Gab CEO Andrew Torba commented at the time: “The double standards of Silicon Valley are on full display with this app store rejection from Apple. Apps like Tumblr, Reddit, and Twitter are flooded with pornographic content and allowed to remain on the App store.”
“Gab empowers users to filter out this type of content, mute users who share it, and also features a reporting system to flag illegal content,” he continued. “Apple went out of their way to seek out this content and find any reason to reject our app. We will continue to appeal this decision and defend free speech for everyone. In the meantime, Gab can be accessed from any mobile browser as always.” The Gab app is still unavailable in Apple’s app store.
5: Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos Alleges Company Makes Up Less Than 1 Percent of Global Retail — Fails to Note U.S. Online Retail Market Dominance
Jeff Bezos, the richest man in the world and CEO of e-commerce giant Amazon, noted in his opening remarks claiming that Amazon was not a monopoly that: “Amazon accounts for less than 1 percent of the [$]25 trillion in the global retail market and less than 4 percent of U.S. retail.”
Bezos is correct about those figures, but conveniently leaves out an extremely important one: Amazon accounts for 38 percent of all U.S. online shopping. Research firm eMarketer reports that Amazon accounts for approximately 38 percent of U.S. e-commerce sales, generating around $260.86 billion in revenue. The reserach firm writes:
We forecast that Amazon’s 2020 US retail ecommerce sales will rise 17.2% to $260.86 billion—4 percentage points higher than the expected overall growth rate for US retail ecommerce sales. As a result, Amazon’s market share will increase from 37.3% in 2019 to 38.7% this year while expanding its lead over the No. 2 player from 31.7 points to 33.4 points. We expect this momentum to continue into 2021 when it will reach 39.7% market share.
Andrew Lipsman, eMarketer principal analyst and report author, noted: “What’s surprising is that despite accounting for nearly four in 10 e-commerce dollars, the company continues to gain market share and extend its lead.”
So while Bezos is correct that in terms of global retail Amazon does not have a monopoly, it does have a stranglehold on e-commerce in the United States and a large chunk globally.
6: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Exaggerates Company’s Competition
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg made a similar claim to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, that the tech giant regularly faces competition from other tech firms. Zuckerberg did this by suggesting that Facebook was competing with every single tech product that connects people, this would include video calling services such as Zoom or even niche social networks such as Pinterest.
“The space of people connecting with other people is a very large space,” Zuckerberg told Congress. This is technically true but what the CEO failed to mention is that 69 percent of Americans are using Facebook, according to the Pew Research Center. The next most popular social media network is the Facebook-owned photo and video-sharing app Instagram, which is used by 37 percent of U.S. adults.
Zuckerberg may be able to argue that in the broad definition of tech that connects users together Facebook does not dominate the market, but in terms of actual social media network dominance, Facebook’s power is unparalleled.
Read more about the tech CEO’s recent hearing before Congress at Breitbart News here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolanor contact via secure email at the address lucasnolan@protonmail.com
In a Thursday appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) weighed in on the Big Tech hearings regarding the silencing of conservatives on their platforms.
Kennedy noted that most tech CEOs and their employees are “left of Lenin liberals” who value money first and their politics second. He went on to point out the “irony” that “Democrats are mad” the companies “don’t discriminate enough.”
“They do discriminate against conservative points of view,” Kennedy advised. “Now the irony is that the Democrats are mad at them because they think, the Democrats think, they mean that the platforms, don’t discriminate enough. One option is to consider breaking them up, another option is to ask the FTC to do its job and make them stop discriminating one way or the other.”
Host Sandra Smith told Kennedy the companies have pushed back against the notion that they stifle conservatives.
“They’re lying,” he exclaimed. “And the FTC needs to do its job.”
Smith asked Kennedy if he is calling to break up the big tech companies, but he said he would prefer the Federal Trade Commission do its job and not allow companies to silence political opinions.
Breitbart News provides a “much truer understanding of the world” than the New York Times, noted Dennis Prager, sharing his assessment of this news media outlet in an interview with Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow on Wednesday’s edition of the former’s eponymous radio show.
“You do a great job,” said Prager to Marlow. “Breitbart.com is one of the most important sites in America.”
Prager added, “If you only read the New York Times or only read by Breitbart, you would have a much truer understanding of the world with the latter. So, keep up the good work, Alex.”
“One of the most powerful voices on the Internet in the world is Breitbart,” stated Prager, “and they have an enormous readership as they deserve.”
LISTEN:
The New York Times markets itself as a politically objective and non-partisan news media outlet.
Marlow described Google’s political manipulation of its search engine to hide conservative news media outlets such as Breitbart News from its users, drawing on a Tuesday-published report outlining the technology giant’s purging of Breitbart News from its search results.
“There is a statistic called [the] visibility index,” Marlow explained. “This is like the Nielsen score for search. … Our visibility index is down 99.7 percent overall. So that means two-thirds of our traffic is gone.”
Marlow held, “I think this is a hundred percent about influencing the election.” He recalled how Google executives lamented the election of President Donald Trump days after 2016’s presidential election. “It is about making it so that people who are not already Breitbart readers will not get Breitbart’s take on the news.”
“That’s what it’s all about,” added Marlow. “This is for all the marbles. They’re rigging the election, right now. … It’s so clearly political.”
Traffic to Breitbart News from Google’s search engine, until recently, composed “about nine percent” of this news media outlet’s total traffic, shared Marlow. Recently, traffic to Breitbart News from Google is “dropping off a cliff,” he added.
Prager and Marlow observed how digital censorship employees working for Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other technology companies are coordinating some of their suppression of information under the guise of public health during the coronavirus outbreak.
Marlow highlighted the anonymity of digital censors and nebulous rationale provided for their arbitrary decisions on what information and users to purge, suppress, and otherwise censor.
Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Joel Pollak described Google’s suppression of Breitbart News content on its search engine is part of a broader strategy to “steal the 2020 election for Joe Biden and the radical left.”
In an interview with Mark Levin, Pollak explained how a Google search for “Joe Biden” led to 30,000 impressions for Breitbart News links on May 1, and then zero after May 5.
