YouTube Restricts Video That Claims Police Are Not Racist, Says It's 'Inappropriate' For Children

Nonprofit sues YouTube for restricting its video that makes the case police are not racists

A video by a non-profit that cites data and reports to show that police are not racist has been restricted by YouTube (video below.)

YouTube is now being sued for blocking the video.

The nonprofit PragerU filed a discrimination lawsuit Oct. 23 against YouTube and its parent company Google for placing dozens of its educational videos on “restricted mode,” The College Fix reported.

PragerU accused the video-sharing company of purposely blocking the message because it is conservative and abusing the “restricted” tool that is meant to shield young people from sexual or graphic content.

The police video is one of about 36 PragerU videos that YouTube has blocked. The videos have not been taken down but are restricted.

The College Fix stated it has an email from a YouTube/Google media affairs employee who told PragerU the videos are restricted becaue they “aren’t appropriate for younger audiences.”

The police video had 1.67 million YouTube views since it was published Aug. 22, 2016.

The PragerU video is 5:35 long and makes its case citing studies and statistics that police are not racist. The other videos include topics on Christianity, Muslims, gun rights, and abortion.

“Watch any one of our videos and you’ll immediately realize that Google/YouTube censorship is entirely ideologically driven. For the record, our videos are presented by some of the finest minds in the Western world, including four Pulitzer Prize winners, former prime ministers, and professors from the most prestigious universities in America,” PragerU founder Dennis Prager said in a press release, according to The College Fix.

According to YouTube, restricted mode is an optional setting that has been available since 2010. YouTube states that it is used by a small subset of users, such as libraries, schools, and public institutions. Restricted Mode is turned off for viewers by default.

@kojak really?!? but its not racist to say "white", I see you don't mind double you must refer to everyone as Swedish American, Irish American, Mexican American, Chile American, Spainard American, Russian American, Japan American, etc, etc, etc...I think not, so quit really saying something so dumb...just because someone says "black" and not "African American" does not make them racists, open your vocabulary and standards a little more

You can't just assume someone is from Africa because of their skin color. That would be racist. Assuming someone's skin color as "black" because you can see it seems more reasonable.

Also, a lot of black Africans are very proud of their heritage and don't like to be lumped in with blacks from the USA.

But it's appropriate to show BLM videos chanting about killing cops! This is so hypocritical.

Well, Kojak, you certainly picked the wrong name. Could be because not all of them are from Africa. Could also be that when the WOWM was younger, that was the current popular term and it's what she's used to. Could be because you're a horse's ass. Pick one.

Kojak, also because many Black Americans have never been, or want to go, to Africa. The pendulum of terminology has swung back to "Black" being the preferred term by many.

Can’t say “colored” because then blacks complain the the NAACP... National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

cant say negro but you can give to the United Negro College Fund.

"African-American" implies dual-citizenship. "Wrinkly old white woman" is ok, but "black" is not. Guess I see who the racist is, now.

Kojak...what country in Africa do you have citizenship in again? Or even set foot in for that matter? You referred to a "wrinkled old white woman". So every other race can be called by the color of their skin...except yours? And it's everyone else with the issue? LOLOLOL

What a crock of shit! I can't let my kids watch youtube because childrens videos always lead down a path to completely inappropriate videos that border on sympathetic pedophile material, suggested violence, bad behavior and profanity. It's like there is an algorithm to set children up to be this type of material. Ask any parent that has experienced this first hand (who actually pay attention to what their children watch).