YouTube Isn’t A Public Forum: PragerU Loses Conservative Censorship Case

YouTube Isn’t A Public Forum: PragerU Loses Conservative Censorship Case, by Tyler Durden.

Social media platforms accused of politically biased, selective enforcement policies will be allowed to continue discriminating against conservatives, according to a Wednesday court ruling from the Ninth Circuit court of appeals — which has been heavily criticized for anti-Trump rulings on immigration and other matters.

The court rejected an argument by conservative radio talk show host Dennis Prager, who claimed that his conservative PragerU videos were receiving unfair treatment by the Silicon Valley behemoth – determining that YouTube, which is owned by Google, is not a state actor subject to First Amendment constraints. …

The 9th Circuit also tossed PragerU’s claim of false advertising.

“YouTube’s braggadocio about its commitment to free speech constitutes opinions that are not subject to the Lanham Act,” reads the decision. “Lofty but vague statements like ‘everyone deserves to have a voice, and that the world is a better place when we listen, share and build community through our stories’ … are classic, non-actionable opinions or puffery.”

Whereas bakers must provide their services to all, regardless of their messages. Remember the recent cases where bakers were successfully sued out of existence because they refused to make wedding cakes for gay couples with messaging they thought objectionable?

“One law for thee, another for me,” laughed the lizard-brains on the left, because all they care about is power.

But now that the social media “platforms” are officially not platforms, they are therefore publishers — and therefore legally responsible for their content. Again, the left want it both ways.

Reminds me of this, which also involved the notorious 9th circuit judges: