|Hate group leader Tony Perkins – Family Research Council|
Apparently being a hate group leader is an ongoing challenge for the monstrous ego of Tony Perkins. His Family Research Council requires an endless quantity of lily-livered-Commie-pinko-elitist-liberal-Democrat-Obama-community organized-godless-SPLC conspiracies to keep its constituency fed with anger and fear. That is what keeps the cash register ringing. Ka-CHING. The latest manufactured affront is Youtube:
Censorship can be a full time business — just ask Google. The parent company of YouTube has a virtual army whose sole job is to flag content that they think is inappropriate. Back when this “flagging” program was announced in 2014, YouTube explained that it has a “zero-tolerance policy” on any videos that “incite violence.” There’s just one problem: who decides what’s doing the inciting?
Allow me to answer Mr. Perkins’ question. Youtube decides. It operates on space and servers that the company owns. It administers the service with people who are on the company’s payroll. Capitalism at work. To post a video to Youtube one agrees with the Acceptable Use Policy. If you don’t like that policy then do not post videos there. Unless, of course, Mr. Perkins thinks that I should be able to post a video to GodTube. I would start with one explaining the homeless children problem created by Christians who kick out their LGBT kids when they come out.
Ah but there is more:
This week, the Daily Caller identified one of [the organizations flagging videos] that might surprise you — the Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC, who’s fallen out of favor with almost any organization that cares about its reputation, has apparently found a home at YouTube, filtering out (shutting down) conversations it considers “hateful,” which, based on its prior, reckless labeling, could include anything from House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson. Now, I don’t know about you, but an organization that’s inspired at least two gunman to shoot conservatives, isn’t exactly who I’d trust to define violent speech.
Mr. Perkins is confused — again. SPLC might flag videos but it is ultimately up to Youtube to determine what is, or is not, acceptable. SPLC is quite capable of identifying videos that incite violence.
What exactly is Perkins’ objection? Does he think that violence inspiring videos should be available on Youtube or does he think that anything that SPLC might flag is in error because they designate FRC a hate group? Perkins has the resources to acquire the internet space and servers to offer HateTube or whatever he wants to call it. FRC has an email list to drive plenty of traffic to the new site.
Of course the real intent is to try to diminish the reputation of SPLC in order to reduce the impact of designating FRC as a hate group. It cuts against his own narrative. Perkins claims that SPLC has fallen out of favor. Were that true then the hate group designation would be irrelevant.
Perkins trots out the usual boilerplate that incurious people accept as “gospel.” Much of the spew, including the notion that SPLC is responsible for a deranged gunman, is absurd. Furthermore, criticism of Carson and Scalise has nothing to do with flagging violence inciting videos. Over the years when I have objected to the speech of others I have quoted them and then responded (as I have done here). Perkins never identifies exactly what SPLC has said in their criticisms that he disagrees with and why he disagrees. Most of the time SPLC quotes someone’s own words. Why doesn’t Mr. Perkins quote SPLC’s words regarding Carson and Scalise?
That is, of course, a rhetorical question. Perhaps Mr. Perkins lacks a persuasive argument to support his claims.
Ultimately, we should compare reputations: Family Research Council, a hate group vs. SPLC which has a near half-century record of fighting hate and intolerance.