Next News Network

Google’s latest act of censorship nailed PragerU when the organization’s app was ousted from the Google Play store. Labeling PragerU as a ‘hate speech’ perpetrator due to its radical Islam-focused documentary, Google showed once more that its bias takes precedence over free speech. Google’s trumped-up charges against PragerU only confirm their relentless pursuit of silencing conservative voices.

Google justifies its decision by alleging PragerU violated its Developer Program Policies. However, let’s get down to brass tacks. PragerU created a documentary titled “Dear Infidels,” which conveyed the untold narratives of those who had witnessed the nightmares of radical Islam. The film was intended to serve as a wakeup call to the West about the perils posed by radical Islam.

Dennis Prager, the founder of PragerU, in his statement, drew attention to radical Islam’s daunting threats to Western values. But Google’s reaction to this exposition revealed their refusal to tolerate any critique against radical Islam, vainly citing hate speech, violence promotion, and discrimination as grounds for removal.

While silencing PragerU, Google remains surprisingly tolerant towards the video and its trailers on their own platform, YouTube. This seemingly hypocritical practice reeks of double standards and selective censorship.

PragerU’s expulsion from the Google play store isn’t an isolated incident. Observations from last year provide a snapshot of Google’s sympathy towards radical Islam. When questioned about Hamas, Google’s AI chatbot Bard (now Gemini) backed off. The platform again failed to address issues regarding Hezbollah and Hamas’s terroristic activities.

Recently, when Google’s AI chatbot Gemini was accused of downplaying brutal sexual assaults by Hamas members on Israeli women, Google scrambled, apologizing for the chatbot’s inaccuracies and promising improvements. However, one must question the frequency of such “inaccuracies” and the influence they have on public opinion.

Google’s audacious defense in the Gonzalez vs. Google case, where it sought immunity for promoting Islamic terrorist content, comes under scrutiny. While Google effectively used section 230 immunity to justify its actions, it blatantly denied PragerU the same defense when it dared to raise its voice against radical Islam.

Google’s silence following the removal of PragerU’s app from their store is, unfortunately, not surprising. Given its history of censorship and bias against conservative views, this only solidifies the urgent need for transparency and accountability from Big Tech.

Conservative voices are under constant attack. It’s critical to demand Google be held accountable for its lack of transparency surrounding hate speech and unequal treatment of conservative voices. Let there be no mistake, Big Tech giants like Google should not be the ones dictating the voicing of public opinion. We should insist on them mirroring the principles put forth by the First Amendment while offering transparency and a fair platform for all.

SOURCE