Why Does Google Hate the Blogfather?

 

Wednesday night, explaining the new ads at Instapundit, Professor Glenn Reynolds revealed the censorship he has experienced:

Sorry, the problem is that InstaPundit has been demonetized by Google, for unspecified “dangerous” content. Between the overall trend of ad revenue decline — which hits everyone — and the trend of cutting advertising to right-leaning sites, and now this, ad revenue is down about 90% from its high, I’d estimate, and it may get worse. (The Amazon revenue, which we’ve been phasing out anyway, is similar). At some point I’ll probably have to go to some sort of subscription model — maybe one that lets you buy out of the ads — or a purely donation-supported model.
In the meantime, if you’d like to support the blog you can donate via Stripe or subscribe to my Substack. It’s all much appreciated.

Wow. The weird thing is that back in the day — the first decade of the 21st century, when blogging was invented — the people running Silicon Valley were, if not conservative, certainly libertarian in their general attitude. Companies like Google, Amazon and PayPal were run by people with the plainly capitalist goal of getting rich, and so were inclined to support advocacy of free enterprise, deregulation, lower taxes, etc.

“Demonetizing” is censorship, period, and it didn’t start happening — the orchestrated attempt to shut down independent online publishing — until Obama’s second term. There was a left-wing blogosphere (the “moonbats,” as we called them) and a right-wing blogosphere (the “wingnuts,” as the Left called us), and the existence of two oppositional blogospheres was a fact of life everyone in the game understood.

What happened? It was several factors. Obama’s popularity made leftist politics the “cool kids” thing, and the callow youth had an intolerant attitude toward opposition. Almost as soon as Obama was elected, they began denouncing all criticism as “racist,” and embraced a no-holds-barred approach toward perceived enemies. Well do I remember my experience in 2011 being swarmed by an angry “Occupy” mob that was trying to storm a conference in D.C. where one of the Koch brothers was in attendance. Because the Kochs had supported the Tea Party movement (and free-market advocacy generally), this made them EVIL in the eyes of that brain-dead zombie horde of “Occupy” protesters.

That general idea — exercising the “heckler’s veto” on anyone who disagrees with them — has been used by the Left to organize advertising boycotts of talk radio, Fox News, etc., and so when social media platforms started shutting down conservatives (I was banned from Twitter in 2016), it was merely an extension of the same mob mentality that mobilized the “Occupy” zombies. By the time Twitter (and Facebook and YouTube) began their wholesale “deplatforming” of conservatives during the Trump years, the independent blogosphere was already largely a thing of the past. People decided that venting their spleens on Twitter was sufficient, and so there was no need for the hassles of maintaining a regular blog.

But you could not effectively monetize Twitter. You were giving Twitter your content, and Twitter was monetizing that traffic for themselves. I was happy to use Twitter as a means of promoting the blog, but I was never under any illusion about the transactional nature of Twitter’s business model. When Instapundit and Ace of Spades subsequently stopped using Twitter, it was not so much as a protest against the banning of myself and others as it was an acknowledgement that Twitter was (and is) a parasitical growth that exploits its users.

The vague accusation that Instapundit promotes “dangerous” ideas — well, dangerous to whom? Google doesn’t want to answer that. In fact, when you get banned from their Adsense platform (as I was in 2013), you’ll find it impossible to get any answers at all from them.

Everything we learned from the release of “The Twitter Files,” and everything Republican-led congressional committees have exposed about the relationship between government agencies and Big Tech, tells us that this censorship is not random or coincidental. It is targeted and orchestrated, and the fact that they’ve now targeted Professor Reynolds (known as “the Blogfather,” because he inspired and encouraged so many others bloggers) tells you that no one is safe from this repressive regime.



 

TERROR IN FRANCE – Sixty Dead In Bastille Day Truck Attack

— by Wombat-socho


Per the UK’s Daily Express, at least 76 people are dead after a terrorist rammed his box truck into a crowd out celebrating Bastille Day in Nice, France. Police apparently found guns, grenades, and other explosives in the truck, which was abandoned by the terrorist; he fled to a nearby restaurant where he was shot by police.

Ace’s LauraW has a link to Fox and the NYDN; Ed Driscoll at Instapundit has more links, including one to Legal Insurrection with live updates. Oh, yes – ISIS has claimed responsibility, and no doubt POTUS will be lecturing us that we can’t jump to conclusions about the [OMITTED] causes for this act of [OMITTED] terror.

Stacy will no doubt be updating this post as events develop.


#OccupyResoluteDesk, #OccupySCOTUS?

by Smitty

Shall not eight years of the personal pronoun pumping pipsqueak have been enough? The price of Her Majesty’s election, despite being the least suitable person since Barack Obama, may become apparent:

While at a rally in Decorah, Iowa, on Tuesday, a reporter asked Clinton what she thought about nominating President Obama to the highest court.
“Wow, what a great idea, nobody has ever suggested that to me,” Clinton said.

Ho Lee Focaccia with turkey, avocado and mayonnaise, Batman. If the thought of listening to that anti-Constitutional jackwagon on the SCOTUS bench, getting paid to lift his leg against all we hold dear until he decides he’s bored and retires, isn’t enough to galvanize conservatives into action (and I mean more than mere blog posts) then I daresay we deserve the abuse.
It’s clear that our country is mismanaged by a homo bureaucratus infestation, where the motto is “fail upward”, but enough is enough.

via Instapundit

Romans Had Slavery, So I Guess The Roman Alphabet Requires Replacement

by Smitty

Via Instapundit, it sounds like some people at his university may be smoking mother nature:

University of Tennessee tells staff and students to stop using ‘he’ and ‘she’ – and switch to ‘xe’, ‘zir’ and ‘xyr’ instead

What’s blatantly obvious to even the most casual observer is that a certain “gay rights official at the university” needs to stop being such a conservative reactionary, like the author of this post.
A truly “new language regime” that “will make the university ‘welcoming and inclusive'” should scuttle the archaic alphabet that has “people feeling ‘marginalized'”. Why not replace it with alternating sequences of LOLcats, LOLdogs, and other equal vivacious creatures? Such an alphabet could be rotated weekly, and impossible to compose via traditional scribing instruments, to be more even-handed toward those who are not even handed.
This blog doubles down on its strident call for pushing technology and societal communications right off the cliff, in order to save both from the millennia of testosterone-driven oppression. Let us enable the logic-free future we deserve. Or, to quote Andrew Klavan:

Update: once again, trigger warnings start with the character set.

Troll Of The Year So Far Is @Instapundit

by Smitty

BERNIE SANDERS ON IMMIGRATION: “Open borders? No, that’s a Koch brothers proposal. . . . It would make everybody in America poorer —you’re doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don’t think there’s any country in the world that believes in that.”

It’s not quite a Godwin’s Law violation. Probably just ‘Win’s Law:

So it’s okay to have socialism, but it can’t be international socialism, it has to be socialism in one nation. A sort of national socialism, I guess.

Folks, this is how it’s DONE.

It Seems As Though @KurtSchlichter Doesn’t Hold Her Majesty In High Regard

by Smitty

Great outing from the Colonel at Townhall:

. . .let the liberals solve this problem for us with their bizarre determination to nominate that glass-jawed, email-deleting cuckoldette. Yeah, non-coastal America is dying to elect someone who reminds everybody of their first wife, including women and the never-married.

The main thrust of Schlichter’s piece, though, is a cavalry charge up the Lefty middle.  Tap that glass jaw. Call the Lefty’s bluff via the legal system. It’s not a bad plan, given lots of time and resources.  A few questions for the Colonel, though:

  • Can you offer a breadcrumb or two? Your next couple of books could be How To Go To The Legal Mat With The Lefties, and What To Do About The Gastropodic Slime After You’ve Gone To The Legal Mat With The Lefties.
  • Can we part out the work? Quite a few conservatives view legal interactions like being covered with gastropods. Is supporting the ACLJ a possible option?
  • What about the problem of legalism, itself, as the issue? Many fear that, in wrestling the Lefty gastropods, we risk becoming them. What are your recommendations for skeletal conservation?

via Instapundit

Sarah Palin Is Doing A Far Better Job Of Not Running For President Than Jeb Bush

by Smitty

She seems to be having a much better effect on actual conservatives in office than His Jebness:

Governor Palin endorsed 22 candidates for various offices during the midterm finals, including senators, governors, lieutenant governors, congressmen, and attorneys general. Of those so endorsed, an incredible 20 were elected – contrasted with, for example, Hillary Clinton’s record of 8 wins out 24 endorsed candidates.

Beyond the success of her endorsed candidates lies a much deeper reason for Palin being seen as “Achiever of the Year”: those Palin endorsed in their respective primaries who then went on to win the general election battles. As in the past with, among others, senators Ted Cruz, Kelly Ayotte, and Deb Fischer, and Governor Nikki Haley, who owe their elections in their primary campaigns to Palin’s endorsement at a critical juncture, so too could new senators Ben Sasse and Joni Ernst, and new Alaska governor Bill Walker (and, remarkably, his Democrat lieutenant governor Byron Mallott) be considered to owe all or a substantial part of their nominations to Palin’s endorsement.

For all her detractors’ cries of “irrelevance” and “she’s just a reality show entertainer” (those two being among the nicer epithets), Palin goes on, election cycle after election cycle, populating Congress with her endorsed candidates in a cost-effective manner, and in such numbers that the likes of Karl Rove with his 1% success rate can surely view only with hidden admiration, if not downright envy.

She seems an acknowledged ambassador to the conservative base:

If former Alaska Gov. and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin enters the 2016 presidential election, she will face stiff competition from a wide field of qualified Republican candidates. However, she may face greater challenges from her numerous detractors, especially those in the liberal media whose vitriol towards Palin knows no bounds.

Many believe that Palin is most powerful as a conservative spokesperson who has a remarkable ability to motivate and inspire her base. In fact, she has been confirmed as a speaker at the Iowa Freedom Summit in January 2015. She will be joined by at least nine GOP presidential hopefuls and whether her purpose at the event is to motivate or throw her hat in the election ring is uncertain.

It remains to be seen if the base’s contempt for the Vichy GOP can be overcome by dread of Her Majesty, the way the dread of the Goreacle led to (barely) enough support for a Republican “triumph” in 2000. All I can say is that I’m not voting for another Bush. Should Sarah Palin opt to run (and, in all candor, I’m more of a Scott Walker fan) she could well play the Ross Perot role in a Bush/Clinton ’92 re-run.

And I don’t care, Rove. You and any other Progressive jackwagons on the False Choice Express can tell me that failure to vote for candidate B is really a vote for candidate C. Screw you, to the wall, with a large diameter drill. IF the Vichy GOP foist Jeb on the base, AND we suffer eight years  of Her Majesty, it’s YOUR flipping fault for  nominating the chap.

I don’t actually bear any personal animus toward Jeb. I’m just not playing along with this anti-American dynastic noise. The argument that the Commies are cheerfully doing so via Her Majesty is strangely non-compelling. If Jeb wants to earn some respect, how about calmly announcing that he’s declining a run in a few months, and offering his talents in service of his country a la the Koch brothers, and funding outfits like Heritage and AFP? Such a move would do more to advance the needed  reforms in this country than actually running for the sake of polishing his ego.

I cannot support Jeb at all. I could support Sarah, in the same vein I supported Romney in 2012. I’d sooner support a third attempt at POTUS from Ward Cleaver than I would seeing Jeb on the ticket. No, no, a thousand nos, and again: get lost with the dynastic politics => “CNN/ORC Poll: Bush surges to 2016 GOP frontrunner”

via Hot Air and Instapundit

Update: Memeorandum thread