In the same time period that Prager University decided to lobby against Google in order to use the government gun to force them to do business in a way that goes against their wishes, the rest of the world exploded over the ending of a regulation that.......really wasn't doing anything anyway. The internet is in peril, and Everybody is angry.
On November 9th, Right wing educational advocate Prager University put a video up featuring the infamous Google Memo Writer James Damore. The title of the video was "What happens when Google disagrees with you." Very shortly after that, they put out a petition that request a congressional demand for Google to treat all webpages equally in terms of Search results. The comment section on Instagram exploded, and I can't imagine Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube being any different. I admit, I left one of the comment, but it wasn't what any of my readers would guess.
I write a blog, and the platform I write it on, the very platform that you, dear reader, are using right now, is owned by Google. When I placed my first critical comment, I prefaced it by saying "I write a conservative blog that is currently being censored by Google." It's nearly impossible for me to get page hits on a Google search. I've looked. It frustrates me, but it's really ok. As many of the left leaning critics pointed out in the Instagram comment feed that I participated in, the situation is actually quite similar to the gay wedding cake issue. While most of the liberals who jumped at the chance to cite that issue were using it to sneer Republicans, it was actually right on the money. Google is a private corporation, that is run by individuals with rights. Like the bakery owners, the Directors at Google have the rights to conduct business in whatever way they choose. Those who wish to utilize the service have to deal with it, or find another medium to use. It's the same argument that conservatives use when they speak out against YouTube for demonetizing their videos. It seems to be the entire reason that CRTV was created. It is difficult to get around Google in today's world. Chrome seems to be the most stable browser out there. The most common mobile device on the market is run by a Google Operating System. The only real major alternatives out there are Apple, Microsoft, and Kindle, but all three are owned by people who have very similar ideals, so we'd be having this discussion again a year later with a different name in it
The millennial left loves to throw the word fascism around when it comes to any idea that the right has, so it's been largely discredited over the years. But I have to call it the way that it is. Calling on the government to force a business to conduct itself a certain way at gunpoint is textbook fascism. It's no different from forcing the baker to make the cake that violates his beliefs. I found myself to quite enjoy Prager's videos in the past, but this is a double standard that I can't ignore. It must sting to have your videos demonetized, but Google has every right to control the private medium by which they are shared. The message of the university is protected by the freedom of speech, but Google and YouTube are not public utilities, and they are protected by the freedom of the press. That means, as long as it's not libelous, they can post anything that they want, and control what comes up on their search bars. They can also choose what not to post, by their own beliefs. Just like the baker.
It's very interesting that this issue came up in the wake of Net Neutrality. I was very surprised with the sheer number of people that were completely passionate about the issue. It's funny, because in 2015, I completely missed the news when this became an issue. I was paying pretty close attention to the news by 2015, and somehow that didn't make it into any of my feeds. With the level of passion that surrounded it, you'd thing that it would have as many memes when it was formed as when it was being repealed. The reality is that when the issue of Net Neutrality being rolled back first came up, all of the news outlets and opinion podcasts had to explain what it was before they could throw their particular bias at the story. I actually had to go and look it up for myself, and I still couldn't find a story that isn't full of bias. What I've been able to sort out of the bias is that Net Neutrality is an Obama era regulation that forces every internet service provider to handle all web traffic equally. This is any easy regulation for the big companies to abide by, but smaller startups struggle to handle it.
What interested me the most is that every conservative commentator out there is completely opposed to Net Neutrality (myself included). It's a pretty obvious party line to follow. Net Neutrality is a government regulation that is not very friendly to small business, and modern conservatives tell everyone that they are against government regulation. But Prager is insisting that their followers sign a petition in order to form a regulation. I know that I've suggested a regulation in this very blog before. The difference is that when I did suggest regulating the Credit Industry, I came up with a way to sell it so it could benefit the industry as well. Prager's Google petition is a request to use the government strong arm to force an unwilling private company to bend. For once, I have to side with the left on the Google issue. It sucks, but it is their right.
Where do you land on Net Neutrality? Did you sign Prager's petition? I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading
No comments:
Post a Comment