YouTube, the Google-owned video streaming platform, rebuffed pressure from The New York Times and The Washington Post to silence some prominent right-leaning and free-speech voices just days before the 2024 presidential election. On Thursday, The Times and The Post published separate reports accusing several podcast hosts, news anchors and legal scholars of spreading so-called election-related misinformation on platforms such as YouTube. But, to the detriment of the left, a YouTube spokesperson affirmed that the platform would not censor the videos, claiming it values a range of opinions. “The ability to openly debate political ideas, even those that are controversial, is an important value — especially in the midst of election season,” YouTube told both The Times and The Post, shocking many as the platform has had a reputation for censoring speech that the left disagrees with. Not deserving of being called a free speech bastion by any means, the platform still removed three of the videos targeted and temporarily slapped an informational banner on 21 of them, most of which were later removed, according to The Times.  While YouTube's refusal to fully cave to censorship pressure from The Times and The Post is a welcome sign, it doesn't excuse the platform's ongoing censorship. Data from MRC Free Speech America’s exclusive CensorTrack shows that YouTube has censored speech no fewer than 534 times, and that’s just scratching the surface. YouTube’s response came after the targeted individuals blasted The Times for reaching out to them for comments to be featured on the infamous report, which exclusively relied on data from a discredited, radical leftist group. The Post did not use the discredited leftist group for its report. The information that The Times and The Post relied upon singled out 286 videos across 30 channels, featuring some of the biggest and most influential hosts like Tucker Carlson, Benny Johnson, Tim Pool and Donald Trump Jr., Fox News hosts Greg Gutfeld, Jesse Watters and Mark Levin and The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles. YouTube said it reviewed eight of the 286 videos and that they did not run afoul of the company’s community guidelines. Legal voices were also targeted, including Tom Fitton, Stephen Miller, Mike Davis, Harmeet Dhillon, Kash Patel and Kimberly Guilfoyle, among others. Many of these figures rebuked The Times for blindly echoing the radical anti-free speech talking points it was fed, with Shapiro taking the lead. Shapiro accused The Times of relying on a “radical Left-wing organization whose sole purpose is destroying conservative media … in order to pressure YouTube to demonetize and penalize any and all conservatives ONE WEEK FROM THE ELECTION.” In a separate report, The Post accused Shapiro, Johnson, and podcasters Dan Bongino and Charlie Kirk of “preemptively casting doubt on the integrity of the 2024 election.” Similar to The Times, The Post also contacted YouTube and other podcast platforms, requesting comments about the videos it deemed misinformation. However, YouTube similarly dismissed their request, reiterating to The Post the same statement it had provided to The Times. YouTube’s subdued approach to censorship came after the Media Research Center and members of the MRC-led Free Speech Alliance warned Big Tech giants against interfering in the presidential election by censoring online speech. “We know that governments across the world are pressuring tech firms to interfere in the 2024 elections just as so many of you did in 2020,” FSA members wrote in August 2024. “Now is the time for you to affirm that you will not bow to this coercion and to reaffirm your commitment to providing fair and even-handed service to your customers.” Several prominent free speech leaders signed the letter, including MRC Founder and President Brent Bozell and Article III Project President Mike Davis, the latter of whom was also targeted in The Times’s one-sided report. Other members of the Free Speech Alliance that were targeted were The Claremont Institute, through its senior fellow Jeremy Carl; The Heritage Foundation, through its senior legal fellow Hans von Spakovsky; and Human Events, through its senior editor Jack Posobiec. Former President Donald Trump has also weighed in, warning Google that any interference in the upcoming November election would come with dire consequences if he is elected president. His admonishment came after MRC released several bombshell studies showing that Google Search users had to wade through a bevy of leftist media outlet content before finding the Trump campaign’s website. "It has been determined that Google has illegally used a system of only revealing and displaying bad stories about Donald J. Trump, some made up for this purpose while, at the same time, only revealing good stories about Comrade Kamala Harris,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in September. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Shocker! The ideology that claims to support women doesn’t actually support women.  In an interview with “The View,” Leftist billionaire Mark Cuban admitted his feminism cuts off for women who refuse to vote his way.     “Donald Trump…you never see him around strong, intelligent women,” he mansplained to former Trump spokeswoman Alyssa Farah Griffin. Of course, ever since she threw her former boss under the bus to score a cozy talk show position, Griffin passes Cuban’s litmus test. In a desperate attempt to put toothpaste back in the tube, Cuban “clarified” in an X post that he was merely bashing Trump for finding smart women, “intimidating.” It sounds like he’s projecting. “I know many strong, intelligent women voting for Trump. Including in my extended family. I’m certainly not saying female voters are not smart, strong and intelligent,” Cuban insisted. Except that’s exactly what he suggested. His comments section isn’t forgiving him anytime soon for saying the quiet part out loud. Everyone knows he only believes women deserve a voice, as long as they voice opinions they’re told to.  

Pennsylvania Judge Angelo Foglietta handed Elon Musk and his America PAC a legal victory on Thursday.Foglietta decided not to immediately move forward with Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner's lawsuit against Musk and his PAC's $1 million sweepstakes.'Mr. Musk was named as a defendant as a publicity stunt. ... We all know that he is a very busy man who cannot just materialize anywhere he wants to with 12 hours' notice.'Instead, the judge placed the case on hold while a federal court considers whether it will move forward with the lawsuit or send it back to the state. Musk's legal team filed a "motion of removal" on Wednesday to move the case to federal court, arguing that the issues mentioned in Krasner's lawsuit "raise significant questions of federal law that are within the exclusive province" of the federal court."The Complaint, in truth, has little to do with state-law claims of nuisance and consumer protection," Musk's attorneys wrote. "Rather, although disguised as state law claims, the Complaint's focus is to prevent Defendants' purported 'interference' with the forthcoming Federal Presidential Election by any means."The decision allows Musk to continue the giveaway, which provides $1 million per day to random registered swing state voters who signed the America PAC's petition supporting the First and Second Amendments. The daily giveaway will continue through Election Day.To be eligible, voters must be from a battleground state: Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, or Wisconsin.Krasner accused Musk of "brazenly" continuing the daily lottery, claiming it is an "illegal lottery scheme to influence voters."Musk was ordered to attend the hearing on Wednesday but did not. As a result, Krasner is now pushing for sanctions against Musk for his failure to attend.Outside the courtroom, prosecutor John Summers stated that he is seeking to have the case returned to state court, claiming it "involves state law issues."He called Musk's failure to attend the recent hearing "both cowardly as well as irresponsible."Krasner's lawsuit also accused Musk and his PAC of failing to include clear rules for the sweepstakes and details on how they plan to use applicants' information. He also claimed that the winners are not chosen at random.Defense lawyer Matthew Haverstick accused the prosecution of naming Musk in the lawsuit to create a "circus atmosphere," stating that the PAC should have been the only defendant in the case."Mr. Musk was named as a defendant as a publicity stunt," Haverstick said. "We all know that he is a very busy man who cannot just materialize anywhere he wants to with 12 hours' notice."The Department of Justice previously warned the PAC that the lottery may violate federal laws but has taken no action against it.In response to the judge's decision to halt the case, Musk wrote on X, "American Justice FTW [for the win]."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

No American truly cares who a large historically leftist newspaper endorses, because for the most part, America is already well aware what their own and the media's beliefs are. However, there is a small subset of people who do care: namely, the employees at the Washington Post and the L.A. Times, who are furious that the outlets did not endorse Kamala Harris. “The only people who were waiting for this were the editorial writers who are so obsessed with their own point of view and so convinced that the world just hangs on their every word,” Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford tells Jill Savage and Matthew Peterson of “Blaze News Tonight.” Now those employees are “quitting en masse.” “Which is really a wonderful thing to see, because the world definitely needs plenty of unemployed Washington Post and L.A. Times editorial writers who attack their bosses,” Bedford says. Bedford believes this “is a little foreshadowing” if Kamala Harris loses the election — despite all of the insane measures taken against Trump, including two assassination attempts, to keep him out. “If she loses this election,” he says, “this kind of turning on the publishers, turning on Bezos, turning on the owner of L.A. Times, turning on each other, is kind of a foreshadowing of the Democrat civil war that you’re going to see.” “These folks aren’t going to take it lying down,” he continues. “Their power has been decreasing every single day. The more they attack Donald Trump, the higher his popularity goes, but as opposed to looking outward or even inward and saying, ‘Where is his popularity coming from’ and ‘Where have we gone wrong,’ they’re kind of circling around a firing squad to turn on each other.” “I think that’s good news for everyone except them,” he adds. Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

It comes as no surprise to learn that Warhammer 40k Space Marine 2 is a success. For a while it seemed everyone and their chapter serfs was playing it, and it’s still holding its own in Steam in terms of player numbers over a month after launch. What is a surprise is just how incredibly popular this Ultramarine adventure is, with its developer now looking to the future as it celebrates a colossal milestone. Continue reading Warhammer 40k Space Marine 2 celebrates huge milestone, looks to the future MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Space Marine 2 review, Space Marine 2 system requirements , Best Warhammer 40k games

Nobody likes cheaters in their games. EA and Respawn are even less fond of them. Cheating in Apex Legends has been a problem before - you may recall a major incident during a regional tournament that made waves online through sheer absurdity.

BREAKING: Trump Sues CBS News for Gigantic Sum Over '60 Minutes' Fiasco

Renowned Liberal Author Naomi Wolf Endorses 'More Inclusive' Trump

The 'Warning Sign' in North Carolina That Is Giving Kamala Harris Nightmares

A 4,400-year-old settlement found by archaeologists in the Khaybar Oasis of northwestern Saudi Arabia has revealed some eye-opening truths about the pace of urbanization on the Arabian Peninsula during the Bronze Age. In comparison to developments taking place at the same time in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Levant, a new study shows that the progress of urbanization in this part of the world was slow, although far from completely non-existent. In an article just published in the journal PLOS One, an international team of researchers led by archaeologist Guillaume Charloux from the French research institute CNRS detail the results of their study of a small, fortified Bronze Age town known as al-Natah, which was discovered near the city of  Al-'Ula in Saudi Arabia’s Hejaz region. This is the first settlement of its type found in this area, and for the time it existed its small size can be considered somewhat unexpected. Arabian Peninsula Was a Hotbed of Hominin Cultures 400,000 Years Ago Mapping Mustatils, Saudi Arabia’s 7000-Year-Old Stone Monuments This settlement covered about 3.7 acres (1.5 hectares) of land, and featured a central public district and an adjacent residential district that were encircled by a system of protective ramparts. The peak population of al-Natah never surpassed 500, and it was apparently occupied between the years 2,400 and 1,500 BC. Read moreSection: NewsHistory & ArchaeologyAncient PlacesAsiaRead Later