NYU Researchers Find “No Evidence” Of Anti-Conservative Bias On Social Media

Donald Trump was a big joke.

In spite of governing as a conventional Republican president, Big Tech colluded to wipe Donald Trump and his supporters off the internet because Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election. They concluded that it was too dangerous to allow them to communicate, organize and fundraise on the internet.

The Verge:

“A new report finds that claims of anti-conservative bias on social media platforms are not only untrue but serve as a form of disinformation. The report from NYU’s Stern Center for Business and Human Rights says not only is there no empirical finding that social media companies systematically suppress conservatives, but even reports of anecdotal instances tend to fall apart under close scrutiny. And in an effort to appear unbiased, platforms actually bend over backward to try to appease conservative critics.

“The contention that social media as an industry censors conservatives is now, as we speak, becoming part of an even broader disinformation campaign from the right, that conservatives are being silenced all across American society,” the report’s lead researcher Paul Barrett said in an interview with The Verge. “This is the obvious post-Trump theme, we’re seeing it on Fox News, hearing it from Trump lieutenants, and I think it will continue indefinitely. Rather than any of this going away with Trump leaving Washington, it’s only getting more intense.” …

The report also recommends Congress and the White House work with tech companies to dial back some of the hostility between Washington and Silicon Valley and work on responsible regulation. He doesn’t recommend repealing Section 230, however. Instead, he’d like to see it amended. …”

Presumably, all of those people who were banned from social media haven’t been banned from voting in elections. This could be a small problem. The PMC has a new “report” out which claims their censorship is “disinformation.” Don’t believe your own eyes. It isn’t really happening.

As experience has shown, populist voters need to find someone a lot tougher than Donald Trump who will utterly smash the oligarchy, crush its technocrats and nationalize, break up or strictly regulate these monopolies far beyond anything seen in the last century. We don’t want another “Free Marketeer” who wants to kiss the ass of the wealthy and suck up to the media and the business community.

About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. The Conservatives left on Facebook are only “allowed” so Facebook, Twitter, and You Tube can say….Look see Conservatives are still on here. We all know it’s nothing but Propaganda. We know the game…..nobody that’s Conservatives, Pro South, or White Nationalist will be allowed on any of these websites in the future. Libertarians are being deleted on Social Media as well. You’ll survive on Facebook if you’re a Communist, Socialist, or a Liberal. Oh and don’t forget the mindless drones who make no political posts….you’ll see them on Social Media forever. We should go on Social Media when we can but expand other places online. Don’t put all our chips in the same bag. Go elsewhere online and chat / network with folks. Deo Vindice !

  2. Of course there;s no “anti-conservative” bias, they all have been banned by Twitter, jewtube, and every other site the ADL deems “racist’

  3. It’s true, conservatives are not censored from social media. Conservatives are the false opposition – lionizing the oligarchs, promoting neoliberalism, promoting wars for Israel, open borders, offshoring, outsourcing, etc.

    All the real conservatives were against Trump because he was supposedly “populist.”

    So it is not “conservatism” they are censoring. It’s something else.

  4. (((Stern Center for…etc., etc.)))


    Drumpf spent 4 years massaging the Jews, and

    it didn’t do him a bit of good.

  5. The claim that there is an anti-conservative bias in social media is itself a form of disinformation and therefore in violation of our Community Standards. As a result your account is permanently suspended.

    • And the Jews started out their existence, by killing Christ God. Why do any of you fools think they are going to pull back from THAT coup, toward a ‘kinder, gentler’ form of Christian genocide?!

      Jews are the reason for the world’s ills. THEY ARE DESERVING of everything Romans 1:32 says.

  6. A lot of people were wiped off youtube and twitter around the time Rittenhouse became a national story.

  7. ‘Donald Trump was a big joke.Big.’

    Donald Trump is a disloyal person,
    He expects support from others, then walks away from them.

  8. I just wasted ~40 minutes reading this drivel from NYU. It is literally the most partisan shit ive ever read. I was expecting a punchline to happen but never did.

    if the claim of censorship is false (which after reading it, it obviously isn’t), then it will be if the report is taken seriously. They advocate “more vigorous, targeted human moderation of influential accounts” that sounds like censorship.

    Basically the shtick is if you spread “fake news” (as defined by the moral arbiters of NGOs & academics) then that’s not a ideological attack on conservatives just removing fake news.

    The most egregious part imo:

    On the right, Twitter doesn’t target conservatives or Republicans as such, but
    people who violate its rules by calling for violence, harassing others, or
    advocating hateful ideologies. Among the right-leaning users who have faced
    enforcement action are white nationalists like Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor,
    and David Duke, as well as white nationalist organizations such as the American
    Nazi Party, the neo-Nazi Traditionalist Worker Party, and American Renaissance

    LITERALLY FUCK YOU!!! Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, David Duke, Matt Parrot have literally never called for violence or harassment. Literally no citation is given for them promoting violence.

    Here are some blatant censorships that they claim aren’t since it’s just “fake news”:

    Much of Twitter’s recent enforcement action has targeted people who promote the
    QAnon conspiracy theory. This year and last, the company has removed some
    77,000 QAnon accounts, saying they “have the potential to lead to offline harm

    in the run-up to the presidential election, Twitter permanently banned former
    Trump adviser Steve Bannon for stating that, “as a warning to federal
    bureaucrats,” he’d put the heads of Dr. Anthony Fauci and FBI Director
    Christopher Wray “on pikes” in front of the White House (semi-agree but that is not on the twitter platform)

    YouTube and other platforms deserve
    skepticism for their role in the spread
    of disinformation, hate speech, and
    other harmful content (so you want cenorship)

    [paraphrasing] Marsha blackburn couldn’t put pro-life ads since their “fake news”, it’s only the falsehood she was removed on not her ideological position.

    Twitter has tried to limit the spread of dangerous misinformation about the
    coronavirus pandemic. In July 2020, it handed Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump,
    Jr., a 12-hour suspension for posting a video that misleadingly suggested that
    the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine prevents users from contracting
    Covid-19.6 A couple months later, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R.,
    Ga.,), then a candidate, was similarly penalized for tweeting that mask-wearing
    harms children (I think they probably wrong medically but that is censorship)

    In the first half of 2020, the most recent period for which Twitter has released
    enforcement statistics, the company suspended approximately 926,700 accounts, a
    6% increase over the preceding six-month reporting period. Much of this growth
    was driven by a 68% increase in suspensions related to child sexual
    exploitation. By contrast, the number of suspensions tied to abuse/harassment
    and hateful conduct fell 34% and 35%, respectively. (maybe if you didn’t allow the MAP / pedo community on your platform you wouldn’t have to ban as many)

    they give you a graph that says partisan left and partisan right are balanced on YouTube (source transparency tube)

    there fucking not, the left graph is bigger. Video views matter more, that’s
    the number that changes on the site, hours watched is more subjective.

    partisan is defined by mike huckabee & Stefan crowder or CNN & trevor noah,
    dissident right is bracketed out so difference might be bigger or smaller. I don’t think this means anything. the white nationalist are obviously banned. the total is 500k
    but james allsup had 500k, you literally cut it half.

    they cite some studies show rightist disproportionally share “fake news” of course the
    arbiter of what that is is leftist. Probably a different result if academia was
    right-biased. Even if that is true that doesn’t mean all rightist share fake
    news, of the right and far right it’s only 11%-21% (of course what is “fake
    news?”). They believe this explains the phenomena. THIS IS CENSORSHIP.

    they cite the ADL which says that Milo is “misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, [and] transphobic.”. Literally a Gay british jew married to a black, who is
    friends with a lot of women & trans. He’s literally the opposite of that claim.

    Literal steaming pile of bullshit. 28 pages long.

  9. A major fallacy the paper commits is that if group R has a 100,000 people and 10,000 banned and group D has 10,000 and 10 are banned. Group R is lying about the anti-group R bias since their the dominating influence, even though group R has a 10% ban rate. It’s fucking retarded.

  10. Can you really say this shit when you just silence the Head of State of your country? Are these people for real?

  11. I’d say that right wing influencers are repeatedly banned on social media. I can tell the difference between a retarded histrionic claims of censorship (Laura Loomer) and seeing it happen to meaningful segments of the political spectrum right in the lead up to elections.

Comments are closed.