The New Big Three Revived the News Monopoly We Busted
Jul 29, 2020
RUSH: There’s a congressional hearing going on today. The same House committee, the Judiciary Committee. This is a hearing into antitrust monopolistic practices of big tech. You have Tim Cook from Apple there. You got Zuckerberg from Facebook there. You’ve got Bezos from Amazon there. You got the Google CEO, Sundar Pichai, Pichai, whatever his name is. They’re all there, and they’re being hit hard by Jim Jordan and others.
The purpose of the hearing is multifaceted, as you will hear in a sound bite we have of Jim Jordan. He’s choosing to go after them for their anti-conservative bias, particularly Google and Facebook: Their search results — in case of Google — and Facebook for their shadow banning and Twitter. Jack Dorsey’s there as well.
And then there are others who are going after them on monopolistic grounds like Apple and its App Store and the fact that basically these people have no competitors. And when a competitor pops up, they buy them and shut them down and silence them. So there’s… It’s, as I say, a multifaceted attack on Big Tech.
RUSH: Now to the audio sound bites. Here is Alex Marlow. Alex Marlow was on with Tucker Carlson last night. Alex Marlow is the editor-in-chief at Breitbart, and this is an example of how Google is essentially trying to erase Breitbart from existing via its search engine. So Tucker Carlson’s question: “Give us an example of what you’ve learned that Google is doing to your site.”
MARLOW: Gradually since the 2016 election, Google’s been diminishing our search results — and then all of a sudden, in May of this year, we virtually lost all Google traffic, all search traffic altogether. Let me give you some specific pieces of data: A Google track, something called a visibility index. This is sort of like their Nielsen score.
That’s when your content shows up on one of their pages. Breitbart’s is down 99.77%. Overall, our Google traffic is down nearly two-thirds. If you want to search for Joe Biden or Biden, the chance of you getting a Breitbart article are virtually zero, virtually no opportunity for you to get it — unless, of course, you add the word “Breitbart.”
RUSH: All right. Now, I know there’s a number of different reactions that you can have to this. A, it’s obvious what Google is doing here. They are practicing censorship, and they’re doing everything they can, via their search engine and results, to eliminate conservative websites. They are also using — the fact that they control internet advertising, to deprive conservative websites of any Google-related advertising.
And most of the advertising on the internet sadly is run through Google. They own it. It is their primary source of income. And they are defunding conservative websites and blogs. And they’re also eliminating conservative websites and backlogs from any search results. Now, you can argue, “It’s unfair, they shouldn’t be.” But look. They’re Google. They can do what they want to do. The idea that we should expect a bunch of leftists to treat us fairly is kind of naive.
I don’t want to be cruel here, but Google is what it is. I mean, if you’re gonna end up somehow becoming dependent on them, then you ought to realize that at some point they’re gonna turn on you. It’s like the story of the scorpion and the frog, or pick your animal. Scorpion hitches a ride across a lake on the back of a turtle. And the turtle says, “I don’t want to take you because you’re gonna kill me.”
“No, no, no, I won’t, I won’t, you’re gonna save my life, you’re gonna get me across the lake.” So the turtle takes the scorpion across the lake. And as sure as you can count it, they get to the other side, the scorpion stings the turtle and kills it. And the turtle, “I thought you said that you weren’t gonna sting me.”
And the scorpion said, “What did you think I was gonna do? I’m a scorpion. It’s what I do. I sting you.” Google is the scorpion. Now, maybe when this all started Google was fair or more fair than they are now. But to expect a bunch of leftists — this would be like expecting the Democrat Party to give us access and to have the Democrat Party promote our point of view for 40 or 50% of the day. We would never expect that to happen.
And yet there is this expectation that Google should. “Well, but it’s the only search engine.” No, it’s not the only search engine. There’s all kinds of search engines out there. There’s DuckDuckGo. There’s Bing, which is Microsoft. Look, I don’t want to appear to be insensitive. Because I understand. I understand the problem. Google is the search engine of search engines. And they ought to be playing fair since they have so much power.
And that’s what this hearing is about today. The monopolistic power that these tech companies have — and there’s always the threat of antitrust legislation unless they straighten up. But the Democrats are not gonna do anything to harm Google. The Democrats are not gonna do anything to harm Facebook. The Democrats aren’t gonna do anything to harm Twitter.
And the Democrats run the House. So the idea that the Democrats are going to do anything to damage their political partners? That’s kind of the wrong expectation. I want you to hear nevertheless Jim Jordan during his — I guess this is his opening statement today. This is how he kicked off what he thinks this is all about.
JORDAN: I’ll just cut to the chase. Big tech’s out to get conservatives. That’s not a suspicion. That’s not a hunch. That’s a fact. July 20 of 2020 Google removed the home pages of Breitbart and The Daily Caller. Just last night we learned Google has censored Breitbart so much, traffic has declined 99%. June 16th, 2020, Google threatened to demonetize and ban The Federalist. June 29th, 2020, Amazon bans President Trump’s account on Twitch after he raises concerns about defunding the police. June 4th, 2020, Amazon bans a book critical of the coronavirus lockdown written by a conservative commentator.
May 27th, 2020, Amazon Smile won’t let you give to the Family Research Council and the Alliance Defense Fund, but you can give to Planned Parenthood. Facebook, June 19th, 2020, takes down posts from President Trump’s reelection campaign. November 1st, 2018, Facebook silences a pro-life organization’s advertisement. May 19th, 2016, former Facebook employees admit Facebook routinely suppresses conservative views. And I haven’t even mentioned Twitter.
RUSH: Why would we expect them to behave any differently than this? Do we not know who liberals are? Do we not know what they do? Do we not know how they operate? Now, I know, look. Again. They’re all promising to be fair. Google’s denying that there’s any bias. And Facebook, Zuckerberg, they deny there’s any bias. And the same with Twitter. Jack, no, we don’t have any. They’re out there lying through their teeth about it. But in terms of their behavior, they are who they are. There’s not a single thing about what Google’s doing that is a surprise.
Now, they definitely have a monopoly on searches. There is no question that. And so it’s a legitimate question. Why should they be allowed to be a monopoly when IBM wasn’t allowed to be one? Microsoft was not allowed to be one. Standard Oil was not allowed to be one. AT&T, Ma Bell, not allowed to be one. So why is Google allowed to be one? The answer is because they are partners with the Democrat Party. It’s that simple.
RUSH: So I’ve got this sound bite from Zuckerberg. I don’t think I’m gonna have time to get it in because the question is longer than the bite. But you gotta hear this. Here is what he was asked by James Sensenbrenner, Republican, Wisconsin. He said, “It was reported that Donald Trump Jr, got taken down (from Twitter) for a period of time, because he put something up of the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. There still is a debate on whether it is effective. Wouldn’t that be up to somebody else to say, okay, what somebody posted on this really isn’t true?”
In other words, he’s asking the question of Zuckerberg that I asked yesterday. Who on Twitter is the medical expert that can immediately proclaim that this Nigerian doctor doesn’t know what she’s talking about? Who is the medical expert at Twitter, at Facebook? Who is it that has the authority to claim that a doctor doesn’t know what she’s talking about and can pull down any reference to that doctor’s comments? Zuckerberg’s answer coming up.
RUSH: I just watched this loco weed, this guy Jamie Raskin, this Democrat from Maryland, ask an epic question of Zuckerberg. These guys have got Cambridge Analytica on the brain. This question was all about (doing impression), “So you allowed the Russians to tamper in the election. You allowed Cambridge Analytica to turn America into a bunch of anti-Semites and a bunch of racists. There’s millions of people in Cambridge Analytica, and Cambridge -”
Cambridge Analytica is just one conservative outfit that used Facebook like the Democrat Party and thousands of organizations use Facebook. But because there was one conservative group that found a way to turn Facebook to its advantage, we gotta single ’em out and we gotta destroy ’em, and Zuckerberg, you gotta explain, how did you let this conservative outfit use your company so effectively?
Now, Zuckerberg started to answer as soon as the break ended, so I haven’t heard his answer. I think, you know, all these guys, Zuckerberg and Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai, when these things are over, they probably get together, “Can you believe these idiots that the American people have elected?” They sit perfunctorily through these hearings and they tell these people what they think they want to hear and then they end it and go home and nothing ever changes.
Google is gonna remain a monopoly on search. Google, Facebook, whatever, is gonna remain a monopoly on whatever it is. Twitter is gonna remain the sewer that it is. And they’re all going to remain tied to the hip of the Democrat Party. Now, here’s Zuckerberg’s answer. Question he was asked by Sensenbrenner, “It was reported that Donald Trump Jr, got taken down (from Twitter) for a period of time, because he put something up of the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. There still is a debate on whether it is effective. Wouldn’t that be up to somebody else to say, okay, what somebody posted on this really isn’t true, here’s what the facts are, rather than having a Twitter or Facebook take it down?”
It’s a great question. It’s what I raised yesterday. Who is the medical expert at Twitter or Facebook that can, on the fly and within minutes, claim that the Nigerian doctor doesn’t know what she’s talking about? Nor does anybody in her doctor’s group know what they’re talking about. Who is it at Facebook that knows these things? Who is it at Twitter? Here’s Zuckerberg’s answer.
ZUCKERBERG: We do not want to become the arbiters of — of truth. I think that that would be a bad position for us to be in and not — not what we should be doing. But on specific claims, if someone is gonna go out and say that hydroxychloroquine is proven to cure COVID, when in fact it has not been proven to cure COVID and that that statement could lead people to take a drug that in some cases some of the data suggests that it might be harmful to people, we think that we should take that down. That could cause imminent risk of harm.
RUSH: Yeah, but we don’t want to be arbiters of truth. See, we don’t want to be arbiters of truth except on hydroxychloroquine, and then we will be arbiters of truth. This business of research that suggests it might be harmful to people is bogus. It’s a Lancet survey and story and a research bunch and still up there. Lancet’s a magazine. It’s bogus. There have been so many bogus studies and reports of the dangers of hydroxychloroquine, and they’ve all been debunked.
And that’s why hydroxychloroquine’s making a comeback because there are doctors around the world who are using it, who swear by it, who’ve never lost a patient. And they don’t understand why in the world, in the medical community, it’s not being advocated. It’s cheap. There’s your answer. It’s plentiful. It has 50 years of market testing. It’s an anti-malarial drug, that’s it’s primary usage, but you talk about clinical trials and all that, hydroxychloroquine has had 50 years. They don’t need to have massive testing here with COVID-19. They have, and doctors with using it because in their experience it works.
But I just think, folks, that the real question is: so Donald Trump Jr. retweets the Nigerian doctor, and others do, and they get immediately taken down, their accounts suspended. Which means that somebody at Twitter and somebody at Facebook is claiming to be a medical authority, and we don’t know who they are. Now, Dr. Simone Gold is the leader of the group that Dr. Immanuel is part of, Stella Immanuel is a Nigerian doctor. She’s the one that led the group on the steps of the Supreme Court. And it was her video that went viral, 20 million views before they were able to take it down.
By the way, my tech blog buddies, they are angry as hell at that. They can’t believe that 20 million people saw it before it was taken down. It’s irresponsible. Somebody at Facebook and somebody at Twitter must pay. So it got out there. But Dr. Simone Gold says: Our website host, which is Squarespace, has just completely and arbitrarily shut down our website, claiming a violation of their terms of service. This is crazy. We are a group of doctors advocating for a better understanding of COVID-19 and its available treatment options. This is outrageous. We’re not subverting anything. We’re not purposely countering medical ethics. We’re not making anybody sick. We’re advocating for a better understanding of COVID-19. They take us down.
Their website host has canceled them, not just Twitter and Facebook. But here we go. Michigan hospital study says: “Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients — Treatment with hydroxychloroquine cut the death rate significantly in sick patients hospitalized with COVID-19 – and without heart-related side-effects, according to a new study published by Henry Ford Health System.
“‘Our analysis shows that using hydroxychloroquine helped saves lives,’ said neurosurgeon Dr. Steven Kalkanis, CEO, Henry Ford Medical Group and Senior Vice President and Chief Academic Officer of Henry Ford Health System. ‘As doctors and scientists, we look to the data for insight. And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.'”
From the Desert Review: “Local Doctor Pushing Proven Treatment Of COVID Into National Debate — A front-line local doctor treating COVID-19 patients claims to have figured out what works to keep his patients alive. He claims to have answers on better controlling, and curbing, a pandemic that knows no boundaries. Dr. George Fareed is a physician who can be spotted during football season as local high school’s field doctor working with athletes from Holtville, El Centro, Imperial, and lately, with Brawley Union High School.”
It’s really tragic, in a way, because the use of hydroxychloroquine — I mean, there’s doctors all over the country, some who know each other, some who don’t, they’re all singing the praises of this drug. This would be a massive, massive conspiracy here. At any rate, if this is all true, then the hydroxychloroquine cocktail, azithromycin, Z-Pak, zinc, whatever, would solve some of the very basic problems that we’re now facing. It’s a preventative. It would prevent hospitalizations. It would keep the hospitals and ICUs from being overrun with COVID-19 patients. It apparently can be used early on in hospitalization to prevent patients from requiring ventilators, can reduce the length of a hospital stay.
Does it strike any of you as strange that there’s literally no desire and no interest on the part of so many in the medical community to even consider it? Hydroxychloroquine, all you have to do is mention it, and it is immediately impugned and ripped to shreds. There is no curiosity whatsoever from the people we’ll call the nonbelievers.
RUSH: Folks, I got a theory here about what’s going on. And the theory might irritate some people, but let me share it with. Okay, 24 and 8, Mike. Have them standing by. Go back to 1988. In 1988, there were the big three — ABC, CBS, NBC — and then you had the New York Times, the Washington Post. That was the media. They owned it.
There were only three TV networks and the two big papers, and that was a monopoly. They owned it. They owned what to report, what not to report. They owned commentary. Then this show kicked off in August of ’88, and we busted their monopoly. For the first time, for the first time in generations — maybe first time ever — there was an alternative to the liberal dominance in news and information controlled by CBS, NBC, ABC, and the newspapers.
So this show begins, then Rush Limbaugh the TV Show, then a number of other conservative radio talk shows, nationally and locally, then Fox News. And pretty soon the blogosphere and websites. And pretty soon there is this massive, right-wing, alternative media that busts up the mainstream media’s monopoly — and they still haven’t gotten over it!
They are still trying to recapture the days of glory when they were able to get rid of anybody they wanted to with one of two stories. They’d get rid of Nixon, get rid of any Republican they wanted to because they had. That all ended in August of 1988. I think that even though it’s taken them 30 years, they have now begun to reestablish their control of the flow of news and information and there’s a new big three now.
It’s not ABC, CBS, NBC anymore. It’s Google, Facebook, and Twitter. I think the Democrat Party and Big Media have gone ahead and conceded that if they’re to get their dominance and their monopoly in news back, it’s gonna have to be with Google and Twitter and Facebook. I think those are the new big three replacing ABC, CBS, NBC from all the way back in 1988 and years before.
Now, it took them 30 years to recover from what started in 1988. But that’s what we’re facing. Now, ABC, CBS, NBC are still powerful. Don’t misunderstand. CNN, all that. But the real monopoly in news now is Facebook and Twitter and Google with their search engine, because it is those three who can eliminate conservatism on the Web. They can eliminate by denying advertising revenue.
They can deny them presence in search engines. They have tried to take me and this program out I can’t tell you how many times, and they’ve failed. Do you know why? We have never been dependent on them. I have never been dependent on social media for a dollar of revenue generated by this program. We do it independently. We don’t depend on some foreign sales outfit, some conglomerate that sells advertising for everybody.
We do it ourselves.
So it’s the same thing. Where the media didn’t make me, they can’t break me. The media is not responsible for any of my revenue. They can’t take it away. They can try. They can institute these boycotts. They can try to destroy me, my reputation, all that — and they’ve tried numerous times. They’ve failed. So they can be beat, or they can be stopped. But not if you depend on ’em for either revenue or search engine results or what have you.