Google to Restore YouTube Accounts Banned Over Political Speech

Google vowed on Tuesday to offer YouTube accounts that were permanently banned for political speech the ability to be reinstated, and the big tech giant admitted that it once faced pressure from the Biden administration to remove content about COVID-19.

Google detailed its remarkable shift in a document, first obtained by Fox News Digital, that a lawyer for the company provided to the House Judiciary Committee.

The new policy from Google, also known by its parent company Alphabet, could affect both average users and well-known figures like FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, White House counterterrorism chief Sebastian Gorka and "War Room" podcast host Steve Bannon, all of whom were permanently banned in recent years for COVID-19 or election-related content.

"Reflecting the Company’s commitment to free expression, YouTube will provide an opportunity for all creators to rejoin the platform if the company terminated their channels for repeated violations of COVID-19 and elections integrity policies that are no longer in effect," the lawyer representing Google wrote.

Bongino ended his conservative radio show, which livestreamed on Rumble, when he joined the administration this year. He has attributed his popularity on that platform to permanently losing his YouTube account in 2022. YouTube permanently banned Bongino, who had one of the most followed accounts on the platform, for spreading what it said was COVID-19 misinformation about masks.

The document from Google also noted that YouTube "values conservative voices on its platform" and acknowledged that the creators "have extensive reach and play an important role in civic discourse."

The document included a section about the Biden administration and said White House officials at the time pushed Google behind the scenes to remove perceived misinformation related to COVID-19. The lawyer for Google also noted that the big tech platform censored content independently of the Biden administration based on its internal policies but that the company has since rolled back those policies.

"Senior Biden Administration officials, including White House officials, conducted repeated and sustained outreach to Alphabet and pressed the Company regarding certain user-generated content related to the COVID-19 pandemic that did not violate its policies," the lawyer wrote.

Read the document.

The administration "created a political atmosphere that sought to influence the actions of platforms based on their concerns regarding misinformation," the lawyer added.

Google's revelations came in response to a yearslong Republican-led investigation by the committee into big tech companies, including Google, that censored and suppressed content on their platforms related to COVID-19, the 2020 election and Hunter Biden.

YouTube’s posture follows Meta similarly shifting last year toward denouncing the Biden administration’s pressure tactics, which were well-documented in emails provided to the committee.

Meta revealed at the time that it was doing away with third-party fact-checkers, a move then-President Joe Biden called "really shameful." YouTube has not used outside fact-checkers and vowed that it "will not empower fact-checkers to take action on or label content" on the platform.

Parallel to the congressional investigations was a lawsuit brought by two Republican attorneys general over social media censorship. Discovery in that case largely mirrored what the committee uncovered. The Supreme Court ultimately did not decide on the merits of the case, Murthy v. Missouri, and instead found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring it. But the lower courts had largely sided with the plaintiffs, including a judge who found the federal government seemed to have "assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.'"

The high court’s decision disappointed Republicans, who had hoped for a landmark ruling that social media companies’ censorship practices violate the First Amendment. The case also explored jawboning, which involves the government pressuring private companies to censor their speech.

The term jawboning has resurfaced in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s death, after ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel suggested on his show that the suspect Tyler Robinson was a member of the "MAGA gang." Authorities have said Robinson felt Kirk spread hate and that he engraved his bullet casings with gamer-inspired antifascist messaging.

Kimmel also repeatedly expressed sympathies for Kirk’s family and condemned the shooting. Still, ABC and owners of its affiliate stations suspended Kimmel’s show. ABC lifted its suspension beginning Tuesday, but one of the affiliate owners, Sinclair Broadcast Group, said it will continue to replace Kimmel with other programming.

Concerns with jawboning arose because Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr made a veiled threat about Kimmel’s remarks ahead of ABC pulling him off air. The FCC has regulatory authority over broadcasting networks, including ABC, but still must abide by the First Amendment.

"Frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, we can do this the easy way, or the hard way," Carr told conservative podcaster Benny Johnson. "These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

In addition to the censorship concessions, Google also criticized the European Union’s Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act and told the House Judiciary Committee it will remain "vigilant" in the face of legal obligations from other countries.

The EU laws have drawn bipartisan scrutiny in Congress over concerns the foreign laws will force big tech companies to follow more expansive regulations and to ramp up content moderation in a way that could affect American users. Google agreed on Tuesday that the EU laws "place a disproportionate regulatory burden on American companies."