YouTube restored a Christian pastor’s channel containing Bible videos only hours after WND reported the Internet giant had pulled the plug over the holiday weekend, without warning or explanation.
Carl Gallups, a popular pastor and author, reported his YouTube channel suddenly reappeared, along with a terse note from YouTube.
A noted signed “The YouTube Team” explained that a “review” had determined the account was not “in violation of our Terms of Service.”
“This means your account is once again active and operational.”
Gallups told WND he’s grateful to YouTube for the reinstatement.
Are the religious powers-that-be not giving you the whole truth about the contents of the Holy Bible? Find out what they don’t want you to know in the best-selling sequel “Shocked by the Bible 2” — autographed only at WND!
“The channel has only been up for five years, but we are averaging about 1,200 new subs a year and about 640,000 views a year. So, while it is not a huge site, relatively speaking, it is an extremely important part of our overall global ministry endeavor with a lot of people who are using it and sharing it every single day,” he said.
He suspects there was a “flagging” campaign against his videos, which resulted in the artificial-intelligence algorithms used by YouTube shutting down the channel.
He received no information through the standard appeal process, and “that’s when WND wrote the story” about the suspension of the Bible videos, he said.
Gallups said he’s glad the “‘Monday morning’ crew at YouTube got involved and conducted an actual and deep review of our channel.”
“Our channel is fully monetized (you have to jump through all kinds of approval hoops for that to happen) and it had no official YouTube flags against us. We were running a perfectly ‘clean’ site by YouTube’s own standards when we were shut down – with no explanation, no warning, and no recourse after our first appeal,” he continued.
He said his policy from the beginning has been to abide by YouTube requirements.
“We fully respect that the channel that YouTube provides us is ultimately their property. All we ask is that YouTube plays by its own rules as well, and also that they give a ‘clean’ and ‘rule-playing’ customer an honest chance to have a deep review when an otherwise ‘channel in good standing’ is summarily shutdown,” he said.
WND’s report of the shutdown of his channel noted YouTube has hosted videos promoting ISIS and violent jihad as well as the KKK, communists and antifa.
And it wasn’t the first time a faith-focused or conservative-oriented channel has been censored by YouTube. At least three other major cases developed this year, against columnists Michelle Malkin, Michael Brown and Dennis Prager, all of whom have conservative views.
Nor is it the only time there’s been a hint that the company is not fond of conservative thought. An undercover video by Project Veritas captured Earnest Pettie, the brand and diversity curation lead at YouTube, admitting he helped “push to the top” the videos of an editor for the left-leaning New York Times.
“In very rare cases, we will try to make up for the fact that something isn’t in the trending tab,” Pettie said. “We will, like, use some type of intervention … to encourage the thing to be there.”
He said “algorithms do control everything but sometimes you need humans to provide a check.”
YouTube declined to respond to a WND request for comment.
WND reported last month a lawsuit was filed on behalf of WND columnist Dennis Prager in his fight with YouTube.
The complaint expressed outrage over how the online giants “use their restricted mode filtering not to protect younger or sensitive viewers from ‘inappropriate’ video content, but as a political gag mechanism to silence PragerU.”
Prager University, founded by Prager, is “a conservative nonprofit digital media organization that is associated with and presents the views of leading conservative experts on current and historical events.”
Liberty Counsel, which is defending Prager, explained the organization produces short videos viewed by millions that are “broadly based on Judeo-Christian values and conservative thought.”
WND columnist Michael Brown said in August that 900 of his videos were demonetized.
“Debates I had with rabbis were flagged; powerful stories, like a Muslim woman being healed by Jesus, were flagged; videos where I answered questions like, ‘Should Christians Homeschool Their Children?’ or ‘Did Jesus Claim to Be God?’ were flagged, along with videos of spiritual encouragement (like the one encouraging believers to look to the Lord in the midst of chaos),” he said. “Teaching videos were flagged (like the one explaining that the preface to the King James Version of the Bible refutes King James Onlyism), along with motivational videos (like the one where I talked about how I lost 95 lbs.). All these were flagged, along with the many videos that focused on LGBT issues or radical Islam or politics. Seriously?”
And Michelle Malkin said: “If you post videos on YouTube radicalizing Muslim viewers to kill innocent people, YouTube will leave you alone. But if you post a video on YouTube honoring innocent people murdered by barbaric jihadists, your video will get banned.”
In January, the YouTube account of the blog Legal Insurrection, by Cornell Law professor William Jacobson, was ended.
Several years ago, a video on a channel to which Gallups contributed had been targeted, resulting in termination of the channel.
However, after a review, it was reinstated.
At that time, a source inside Google who asked not to be identified told Gallups a “coordinated flagging” campaign had occurred, which triggered the termination of the channel.
The targeted video was titled “A Call To Prayer.”
Videos posted on YouTube can be rated by viewers. An individual can click the “like” button (a “thumbs up” icon) or the dislike button (a “thumbs down” icon). A viewer also can click a “flag” icon to tell YouTube a video a certain video is “inappropriate.”