Select Page

Google: Agree With our Political Opinion on Ukraine – Or Lose your Livelihood

Google: Agree With our Political Opinion on Ukraine – Or Lose your Livelihood

Once again, I am fuming over big tech censorship. I’m not sure why I bother, there is nothing I can do.

Oh, wait! I’m a journalist I can write about it.

Google has in its policies (paraphrasing), “if you do not agree with OUR stance on the Russia Ukraine war, we will demonetize you.”

That means if you are a professional with a decent enough following to make money at it. Then Google will judge your own content against the opinions of its far left censors. You are not allowed to express an opinion that disagrees with them or else Google will attack your livelihood.

Have a look at the policy below. Focus on the words “exploits”, “dismisses”  or “condones”

I’m not sure about the word “exploits.” It seems to me to mean that any writer who makes money writing about the war is subject to attacks.  Legal contracts often have verbiage like this, weasel words that allow the lawyers to do anything they like.

“Dismisses” is a direct attack on free speech and free opinion in America. We are allowed to “dismiss” issues as unimportant, much like the Biden Administration “dismisses” the crisis at the border or “dismisses” the millions of unborn babies killed every year. But apparently, we are required to acknowledge the suffering and feelings of the Ukraine people at every turn and emphasize how the cause is just and we must win at all costs – because that is how the Google censors feel. 

This restriction is intolerable in the world of commentary where we explore all sides of an issue, take on various opinions and generally inform the public of the nuance and complexity of every conflict.

“Condones” is the worst of all. Google is saying that if you are not squarely in favor of Ukraine and against Russia then you will be de-monetized. 

Never mind the history of the situation, that NATO has absorbed a great many countries that they promised they would not, that Crimea is Russia’s sole warm water navy base, that parts of Ukraine are 90% Russian speakers, that Ukraine has threatened Russia’s interests militarily and economically over the past couple of decades. 

To me, you can disagree with the reasons that Russia has attacked Ukraine.


Google’s censor are attempting to prevent the American public from seeing the whole truth about a situation that affects us and the rest of the world.

This is as bad as China cracking down on NBA players who inadvertently call Taiwan a country, or attacking independent newspapers in Hong Kong.

This is as bad as Russia arresting journalists who criticize Putin.

This is as bad as Saudi Arabia assassinating a journalist for criticizing MBS.

And this is even more sinister because it is practically invisible to the public.

Can I be a dramatic, patriotic America for a moment? One who believes the U.S. Constitution is the most perfect illustration of free principles ever written?

Google is committing a criminal act, an act of treason against America.

About The Author


  1. NJLamer

    Google shares every piece of Data they have with CHINA>.. Even Corporate data that is sworn secret is shared with CHINA… And Several people well as I can prove it.

  2. Major Kong

    Go Russia….

  3. Frank stetson

    I will be first to say that I’m not sure I understand the business model on this one, but I do understand that Joe loves free-speech and I look forward to getting my byline on punching bag post so I can join others and exhibiting free speech. I find the common section to be quite limited and feel I deserve the freedom to exhibit my free speech with articles. I look forward to Joe reaching out so that I can get my byline tomorrow. Like Larry, I will have a tagline. Mine will be: for use of conservative knowledge.

    If I do understand the Google model, basically Google pays people by running ads on their sites. These ads are produced by other people for their products and they pay Google for the algorithm service that targets ad placements.

    Google is not limited any free speech, they are only opting not to advertise. The site owners may still write anything they want.

    So what does Google not like:

    Any site that either dismisses or condones the war in Ukraine. That would be messages that say the war does not exist or that it’s OK for Russia to do this.

    The third tenet is any site that would exploit the war for profit.

    Personally, I support Ukraine’s efforts in the war, and feel that Russia is a bunch of war, criminals to be arrested, indicted, and convicted and punished. As criminals, I have no issue with not exploiting the war, condoning it, or dismissing it. It is war. I am on Ukraine side. if that’s bias, and I am biased the same way I was biased in Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, and Japan, on behalf of my parents.

    More importantly, google, has not curtailed any free-speech. They just have said they will not pay for certain messages. The advertisers that pay google for their ad placement algorithm are free to pursue other avenues of expression.

    It’s funny, I remember when conservatives were considered Hawks and general, he would do anything to win any war. On this one, most of us are on the Ukrainian side. I’m not sure where Joe resides. Especially after this article, written in this way.

    One last note. Personally, I do not understand Internet advertising. I have yet to click on more than three ads in my lifetime and I am an early PC and Internet adopter. The most any ad has done is get me to research something as I choose a product or service as one of a potential alternative. But that would’ve happened without the ad anyway. I guess someone’s making money out there doing the stuff… certainly I would not click on any ads on this site, they seem to be all pretty tawdry dirty little products, or outright scams. I have researched a few companies offered and yes, they turned out to be of ill repute with noted bad reputations and reviews. .

    And for Joe, the journalist:


    I am betting that he doesn’t even know what that means…

    • Joe Gilbertson

      So once again you exhibit a complete lack of understanding of the issue. Publishers depend on advertising to survive, the are no exceptions but the odd group that is supported by grant money, which are never serious outlets. No one on the internet who has a reasonable audience has done it without advertising. Google is the most efficient advertiser, they have the technology and the client base to provide more advertising revenues for a website than any other advertiser. If this is the majority of your revenue and Google tells you that if you write certain things they will cut off your advertising, then your ability to speak is curtailed.

      We are not talking about enforcing community standards, we are talking about complex political issues that our founding fathers wanted us to be able to debate, when they wrote the 1st amendment.

      And I have no idea what “30” means…

      • Frank stetson

        Didn’t I say I really didn’t understand the business model? Now that you haven’t explained it, I still don’t understand.

        But I do understand that advertisers, and their handlers as Google would be, certainly have the freedom to choose whether or not to advertise on any given site. Am I wrong there?

        As far as your beliefs on Ukraine, I apologize. I must’ve missed read it as you actually believe what you said.

        Nonetheless, I guess you didn’t realize that the Supreme Court via Gonzalez versus Google, is deciding much of this issue, right as we speak. Oral arguments have never been heard and we’re waiting for the final decision.

        Also, based on your comment, it sounds like this is more of an issue of monopoly than it is free speech. your real lament is that Google has our monopoly on this advertising market. Would that not be true? The effect of that may be to stay for free speech, but it sounds like the problem is the fact that they are monopoly. Or so you say.

        Nonetheless, I’m sorry if you think I’m fighting with you. From my very first sentence, I tried to make it clear. That was definitely not the point. You seem a tad defensive on this one.

  4. AbsurdlyCritical

    How much taxpayer money are we sending to Ukraine with 0 accountability that it is going where they say it is going? Ukraine has a history of corruption and sadly US leaders on both sides of the aisle gained wealth for themselves and their families by participating. There are US bioweapons labs in Ukraine where gain-of-function research had been carried out. One does not have to be pro-Russia to be against the war in Ukraine. One can just be a US patriot that doesn’t want to risk WW3 over stupid reasons and would like US tax dollars going to fix problems at home like the Southern Border before we help the rest of the world. Seeiously why must Ukraine’s borders be defended to the point of potential nuclear Armageddon while our own are as porous as Swiss cheese and nothing is done about it except letting more folks in?

    • papa sierra kilo

      Accountability comes from all the YT videos showing Russian tanks, aircraft, ships getting blown up with our support. That is good enough for me. Better than charities that has 90 percent going to admin.

      • frank stetson

        +1 Papa.

        Absurdly: War is hell, there will be waste, morel likely Americans illegally profiting than Ukraine. Ukraine’s history of corruption seems to have ended as Paul Manafort’s, you remember Trump’s Manafort pardon, right, Russian-backed President was tossed back to Russia. Manafort made tens of millions, Hunter was jealous.

        The Ukrainian GOF labs is a Russian misinformation campaign. Where do you hail from?

  5. larry Horist

    Frank Stetson …. AGAIN, You suggest something you have no clue about. I bet Joe knows the “30” journalistic version of “the end.” I have an advantage over you ignorance, I know, for a fact, that Joe knows. And now you are begging for a byline as a journalist. LMAO The problem is … you are NOT a journalist. You are a partisan propagandist who spins only in one direction and worse … makes stuff up. You misinform and lie. You should be happy that you are allowed to spew your looooong biased opinions as a responder. If you really want to pretend to be a journalist, you should put your request in at MSNBC where one-sided pseudo journalism — like yours — is the rule.

    • Frank stetson

      Well, according to Joe, you know diddly.


      As to the rest, prove it or stfu . Prove a lie. Any time you’re ready. Again. As usual.

      Partisan hack; pot/kettle my friend.

      When you want to discuss, I am your huckleberry. If all you got is at ad hominem, stfu

      As far as journalism, I have a BS in journalism, PR specialty, and all you have is your bs in partisan rags like this. And before you say, what a lousy journalist I am, I never practiced professionally except in Trade Rags as an industry expert in high tech. Like you, I cannot spell and, unlike you, I have no editor. Back then, I did.

      I think it’s funny, that the more heartfelt and honest, I make my post, the greater your personal attack. and you never attack the argument, he just keep attacking me. I can’t see what’s in it for you. It was really nothing in this post to attack, at least based on the facts. Instead, you chose to avoid the facts and attack the person. Keep it up, I’m warming up to a very personal and fearthekt response.

      Do you know why “30” matters?

  6. Frank stetson

    Just for fun, and to be the devils advocate, let’s look at Joe’s arguments I would gather for his condoning of the war by Russia upon Ukraine. Let’s remember who attacked too.

    One argument is that they speak Russian. I guess that by extension leave a lot of places open that speak English.

    The second is that land that Russia has stolen gives them access to water. I guess that means it’s open attack season for Slovakia.

    And the third is that Ukraine has threatened Russia over the last two decades. Oh, my, he says in his George Takei voice.

    Lastly he’s got some sort of weird Ukrainian connection to NATO, which appears to be a total red herring given that Ukraine is not part of NATO.

    So basically, Ukraine has been mean, they talk like us, and they want what we stole back. Therefore, it’s all their fault. I get it.

    Good job rationalizing your Russian support comrade.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      I never said that I condoned the Russia Ukraine war. I said that there are other sides to this, historically there are arguments to be made and that this it is complex. Clearly you know none of this, which is why it is fortunate that I’ve done the research and can share it with you. Your paraphrasing is exactly the kind of crap that Google has done, and exactly what is wrong with their policy. Nuance is not your strong point but you need to pay attention. And yes, if Trump had become president again, that war would not have happened.

      • Frank stetson

        I am so sorry Joe. I did not see that you did not condone this, and you were just speaking hypothetically. In all honesty, I would think a good engineering journalist as yourself would’ve been a little more clear.

        If you had said you were just playing devils advocate, as I did, I would’ve never acted as if you meant the words that you did not mean. Even if you did attack me for my words when I announced I was acting as the devils advocate.

        But thanks for the clarification and I do apologize if I was acting as if your words were actually yours.

        My bad. I am sorry for my mistake.


    A perfect setup by a ruling class to stand & serve together in taking over a government! Maybe the Republicans can stand & service together & do the same thing. Only this time with uncanny & complete sabotage! DESTROY & WIPE OUT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, IT’S THUGS & FOLLOWERS!

    • Frank stetson

      Don, how inciting. Good luck. .

  8. Rich Fischer

    You had an article on cheating in three different dem states Pa, Tex, and Mn . Why did you take them away before we had a chance to read them. Everybody knows there is cheating in our elections, it’s nothing new since Obama ran. Show the articles…

    • Joe Gilbertson

      I remember something about that, but we didn’t take anything down. If it was there before it is still there.