White House Goes Too Far In Asking Google To Pull Controversial Video

from the there's-this-first-amendment-thing dept

Last week, we reported on Google's decision to block access in Egypt and Libya to the controversial, hate-mongering video that's been cited as leading to the violent reactions in the Middle East. We wondered if this was the right move, noting the seriousness of the violence and the ridiculousness of the video. However, Paul Levy's thoughts on this make sense. While we may worry about what line Google may draw, it is a private company and it's not doing this due to government pressure, but as part of it's own decision:
Its removal is not the same as deferring to government censorship, and as much as I hate to give mob violence the satisfaction of an effective heckler’s veto, we cannot expect that online service providers will never remove material simply because it is deemed offensive by wide swaths of the population. Moreover, I can’t help but wondering if the violent response isn’t just what the film-makers were hoping for. So by leaving the image on its site so that we can understand the controversy, while taking it down where broad access to the material is likely to cause the greatest harm, Google has made a comprehensible judgment.
As such, even if we disagree with the choice, it's a defensible choice.

However, things may have crossed the line late last week. There were reports that the White House strongly suggested that YouTube pull the video entirely. Of course, they didn't come out and say that exactly, but rather suggested that YouTube "review the video to see if it was in compliance with their terms of use."

But when it's the White House suggesting that, it's a pretty clear situation in which the President is applying pressure on a private company to censor speech. Of course, we've seen this before, though not with the White House directly. Four years ago, we saw Senator Joe Lieberman similarly pressure YouTube to start blocking "terrorist" videos on YouTube. Lieberman, of course, loves to pressure private companies into blocking speech. He did similar things to try to censor Wikileaks and even pushed some bad legislation to try to increase censorship powers of the federal government.

Either way, the White House putting pressure on Google has troubling implications, even if we agree that the video in question is a hate-mongering disgrace. As various free speech activists told Politico (link above) there are some troubling implications here:
"There's no indication that the government is questioning the right of these idiots to make that repellent film. On the other hand, it does make us nervous when the government throws its weight behind any requests for censorship," the American Civil Liberties Union's Ben Wizner said in an interview Friday.

"I am actually kind of distressed by this," said Eva Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Even though there are all these great quotes from inside the White House saying they support free speech....by calling YouTube from the White House, they were sending a message no matter how much they say we don't want them to take it down, when the White House calls and asks you to review it, it sends a message and has a certain chilling effect."
Google, for its part, has actually stood up to the White House on this one, and said that it won't pull the clip, though it had begun blocking the video in India and Indonesia, where they determined the video itself was illegal, and the company needed to comply with local laws.

Of course, all of this is unlikely to have much, if any, impact on the violence and anger. And that's part of the problem and the ridiculousness with arguing for censorship. It seems quite likely that a very large percentage of those involved in the mob violence to this haven't even seen the video themselves. Caving in to censorship "hints" from government doesn't actually hide the content or calm much anger. In fact, it's likely to just draw more attention to it. The video is despicable and the reaction to it is horrifying on a number of levels. The loss of life is massively upsetting, especially over something so stupid. So I can certainly understand the instinct to try to "do something," and to reach for the easiest target: censoring the video. But not only would it be completely ineffectual, it opens up a whole host of other problems. Dealing with hate speech by seeking to censor it almost always just encourages more hate speech (and even more idiotic violent reactions). It may be an "easy" thing to do, but it's no solution to deep-seeded problems. It just creates new problems.

Filed Under: censorship, free speech, pressure, video, white house, youtube
Companies: google

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 17 Sep 2012 @ 4:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Terrible and shameful message

    You feel... so you have no proof and haven't bothered for a minute to consider that I am appalled by the murders and appalled by the people who are lumping everyone protesting into the same pile with the killers.

    With the billions we spend on spying on our own citizens it is amazing we were unaware of the video beforehand. While they did try to distance themselves from the video that could have been a smart move trying to avoid the misunderstanding we have every time one of these videos designed to incite people incites people.

    Again they asked them to look, not to take it down. Sometimes a token gesture is a token gesture. Sometimes you do something to try and stop things from getting completely out of control.

    And yet savages are what everyone in the middle east has been called multiple times in this thread. I have a problem with people trying to indict everyone in the middle east for the crimes a few committed.

    Funny we never arrested those found giving care and aid to abortion bombers/snipers hiding in the mountains. Because pissing off the Christian powerbase in this country is dangerous. We have to be careful not to offend them.

    I'm sorry did you miss the comment about turning the middle east into a sheet of glass?

    So because people present who were unarmed ran instead of confronting the murderers and being shot themselves, they are bad people? Because talking to the authorities will get them murdered as well.

    I'm not religious and I get offended when religious people decide their view of the world needs to be imposed on me. I'm offended that we can't have medical care for women who have been raped because some religious types don't want them to. I'm offended that women having to make a tough decision are screamed at by religious types making the day that much more fun for them. I'm offended that their screams of no tax dollars for this or that take precedence over other peoples demands their tax dollars not be spent a certain way too. And yes it does look like you can't make the crazy people happy because they demand more rights and laws to enshrine their religious beliefs into law for everyone.

    A video was made, they were within their rights to do it.
    The video pissed off many people who went out and protested, they were within their rights to do it.
    A group who obviously organized an attack, used this as cover for murder.
    Given our "amazing" history in the Middle East I do not think it is kowtowing to them to make gestures and try to explain to people that things are different in America than they are in the Middle East. Trying to calm emotions rather than letting rhetoric rule the day.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.