Why is Drudge encouraging a free speech crackdown?

Emblazoned across the Drudge report this morning was the following headline, “GOOGLE LETS ANTISEMITIC VIDEOS STAY ON YOUTUBE – PROFITS FROM HATE.” Wow, sounds bad, right?

The headline links to an article at the Sunday Times, the largest-selling British national newspaper. However, you can only read a few paragraphs before hitting a wall asking you to register with the paper before continuing. If you’re like me, you aren’t in the mood to give out your email on a Saturday morning, so we’re left to imagine sinister videos describing, I don’t know? “How to build a gas chamber for your Jewish neighbors?”

Hmm, I wonder if this article would be considered antisemitic in the eyes of Drudge and the media’s thought police? It didn’t take long to see where this was headed…

One of the top Google searches of the Drudge headline is a Brietbart article that quotes extensively from The original Sunday Times piece.

In response, Google is now directing its review teams to flag content that might come across as upsetting or offensive in search results.

Now, a video that calls for imminent violence against a group or an individual is obviously something that Youtube wouldn’t want to host (and should be reported to the police), but I have a sneaky suspicion that the offending videos don’t rise to this level. This is a good time to revisit what the ACLU says about free speech. *I’m aware that Youtube, as a private company, isn’t bound by the Bill of Rights, however Youtube claims to be a place for free expression.

How much we value the right of free speech is put to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life warrants the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible: When one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied. Since its founding in 1920, the ACLU has fought for the free expression of all ideas, popular or unpopular. That’s the constitutional mandate. Where racist, sexist and homophobic speech is concerned, the ACLU believes that more speech — not less — is the best revenge. – ACLU

Here is what is being alleged:

Content of the videos varied, but relied on common themes that claimed Jews start global conflicts for profit, or perpetuate the ancient blood libel that Jews kill Christian children while keeping others as slaves. Holocaust denial is another thematic variation.

A spokeswoman told the Times: “Google believes in the right for people to express views that we and many others find abhorrent, but we do not tolerate hate speech. We have clear policies against inciting violence or hatred and we remove content that breaks our rules or is illegal when we’re made aware of it.” – Breitbart

I have a hard time believing that Youtube is gleefully raking in the profits from antisemitic videos. I have a feeling that what’s really going on here is jealousy. People are getting their news, on the left and the right, from Youtube and non-traditional sources.

We can’t have that.