Opinion
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here. 

(LifeSiteNews) — Last week, social media giant YouTube declared it was taking action against so-called “misinformation” regarding abortion, promising to crack down on content that “promotes false claims about abortion safety” and add “context” labels from “authoritative sources.”

The move seems to suggest that the Big Tech company is angling to use the same sort of spurious “context” and “fact-checking” labels and censorship tactics employed during the COVID-19 pandemic to begin directing the political discourse on abortion.

READ: YouTube announces crackdown on so-called abortion ‘misinformation’ likely to affect pro-life efforts

“Starting today and ramping up over the next few weeks, we will remove content that provides instructions for unsafe abortion methods or promotes false claims about abortion safety under our medical misinformation policies,” YouTube said in a July 21 statement.

While the first part of the statement could help shut down content advising dangerous at-home abortions, the second has immediately raised concerns that YouTube could target pro-life content the same way it targeted videos opposing government-directed COVID-19 measures like masking, social distancing, and experimental injections.

According to YouTube’s “misinformation” policy, medical content “that contradicts local health authorities’ or [World Health Organization] guidance on certain safe medical practices” will not be allowed on the site.

That’s bad news for pro-life content creators, since the WHO claims that “Induced abortion is a simple and common health-care procedure” that “is safe when carried out using a method recommended by WHO, appropriate to the pregnancy duration and by someone with the necessary skills.”

Likewise, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) blandly defines a “legal induced abortion” as “an intervention performed by a licensed clinician (e.g., a physician, nurse-midwife, nurse practitioner, physician assistant) within the limits of state regulations, that is intended to terminate a suspected or known ongoing intrauterine pregnancy and that does not result in a live birth.”

All that to say: The WHO and CDC clearly don’t think a baby is a baby. What will become of pro-life YouTube content that contradicts them?

YouTube explained in the Thursday announcement that they “rely on published guidance from health authorities,” and will “prioritize connecting people to content from authoritative sources on health topics.”

To do this, YouTube said they are “launching an information panel that provides viewers with context and information from local and global health authorities under abortion-related videos and above relevant search results.”

But what counts as an “authoritative source?” The government, of course.

Just as with COVID, YouTube users who look up content related to abortion will be immediately presented with definitions and resources from unaccountable bureaucratic government agencies, which present information from a decidedly pro-abortion slant.

Look up any abortion-related content on YouTube and you will now see a new “context” label pop up regarding “abortion health information.”

“An abortion is a procedure to end a pregnancy,” the context label states, quoting a cold, clinical definition of abortion provided by the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

“[Abortion] uses medicine or surgery to remove the embryo or fetus and placenta from the uterus,” the statement continues. “The procedure is done by a licensed healthcare professional.”

The provided definition, in keeping with standard pro-abortion clap-trap, appears to casually assume that an “embryo” or “fetus” is a non- or subhuman life-form unworthy of a second thought. Likewise, the word “remove” is a carefully chosen replacement for more descriptive terms like “kill,” “dismember,” or “poison.” Meanwhile, calmly calling abortion a “procedure,” neatly ensures that the brutal act is regarded as a mere medical intervention, just like the removal of an appendix.

These “authoritative” definitions and labels aren’t new for YouTube, though they haven’t popped up on abortion-related content before.

— Article continues below Petition —
DEFEND Mothers and Babies Against Powerful CEOs Paying Female Employees to Abort!
  Show Petition Text
5492 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 6000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

30+ powerful big-box, Big Tech, and mainstream media companies are targeting their young female employees by offering abortion travel “benefits” to new mothers — to kill their children for the sake of corporate profit and productivity! 

THIS PRO-DEATH CORPORATE CULTURE WILL DESTROY LIVES AND VILLIFY BIG FAMILIES AND PRO-LIFE VALUES IF WE DON’T ACT NOW!  

***WE CANNOT LOSE THE PRO-LIFE VICTORY AFTER ROE V. WADE TO ANTI-FAMILY COMPANIES! SEND A MESSAGE TO POWERFUL CEOs TODAY THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR CHILDREN’S RIGHTS OF LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS!*** 

SIGN THE PETITION NOW TO WIN THE CORPORATE PRO-LIFE BATTLE! 

The pro-life movement has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to send a pro-family message to millions of citizens for generations to come — but we cannot LOSE OUT on this moment by caving to corporations and their cheap and disgusting “abortion” benefits! 

CONSUMERS MUST SEND A RESOUNDING MESSAGE TO ALL CORPORATE LEADERS THAT WE WILL NOT TOLERATE EMPLOYEE ABORTION PRESSURE! 

SIGN TODAY and demand the following company CEOs SUPPORT WOMEN AND CHILDREN NOW! 

***WE ARE DELIVERING THIS LETTER TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM!*** 

Jeff Bezos – Amazon 

 

Brian Moynihan – Bank of America 

 

Whitney Wolfe Herd – Bumble 

 

BuzzFeed – Jonah Peretti 

 

Cigna Health Insurance – David Cordani 

 

 

Citigroup – Jane Fraser 

 

CNN – Chris Licht 

 

Comcast – Brian Roberts 

 

Condé Nast – Roger Lynch 

 

CVS Health – Karen Lynch 

Dick’s Sporting Goods – Lauren Hobart 

 

Goldman Sachs – David Solomon 

 

Hewlett-Packard – Enrique Lores 

 

JPMorgan Chase – Jamie Dimon 

 

Kroger – Rodney McMullen 

 

New York Times – Meredith Kopit Levien 

 

Lyft – Logan Green 

 

MasterCard – Michael Miebach 

 

Meta/Facebook - Mark Zuckerberg 

 

Microsoft – Satya Nadella 

 

Paramount – Brian Robbins 

 

Patagonia – Jenna Johnson 

 

PayPal – Dan Schulman 

 

Procter & Gamble – Jon Moeller 

 

Salesforce – Marc Benioff 

 

Starbucks – Kevin Johnson 

 

Target – Brian Cornell 

 

Tesla, Inc. – Elon Musk 

 

Uber – Dara Khosrowshahi  

 

Vox Media – Jim Bankoff 

 

Disney – Bob Chapek 

 

Yelp – Jeremy Stoppelman 

 

Zillow – Rich Barton 

 

*** SIGN NOW AND MAKE YOUR PRO-LIFE AND PRO-FAMILY VOICE HEARD AT THE WORLD'S LARGEST CORPORATIONS! TELL THESE CEOs TO STOP SUPPORTING ABORTION TODAY! *** 

_____ 

Image Logos: Wikipedia 

  Hide Petition Text

Previously, YouTube had put “context” labels on videos that contradicted the established narrative on COVID-19, subtly suggesting that whatever Dr. Scott Atlas, Dr. Robert Malone, or Dr. Vladimir Zalenko might say, the CDC has the ultimate answer.

“COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and free,” the CDC declares on the resource page to which YouTube links its users. The government agency urges readers to “Get answers to frequently asked questions and bust myths about vaccines.”

Thus, although the CDC has pushed misleading data, under-reported adverse events related to the COVID shots, and even redefined the word “vaccine” to comport with the mRNA shots’ failing efficacy, YouTube continues to hold the agency up as the ultimate source of information on all things COVID.

RELATED: YouTube launches ‘fact-check information panels’ in US to combat ‘misinformation’

Now, just like they did with the coronavirus, YouTube is attempting to consolidate opinion and shut down debate regarding abortion, claiming to provide an authoritative, unbiased definition of a highly controversial practice by simply citing morally-evasive word salads whipped up by government agencies.

By placing itself in the middle of the issue, YouTube seems intent on chilling debate, acting as though a deeply controversial issue has already been settled by “authoritative sources” that define the killing of an unborn child as a “simple and common health-care procedure.”

Help pro-life heroes expose the truth about abortion: LifeFunder

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

1 Comments

    Loading...