Shadow Ban: PragerU Reveals Immediate 99.9999% Drop in Facebook Reach


Shadow Ban: PragerU Reveals Immediate 99.9999% Drop in Facebook Reach

Lucas Nolan 17 Aug 2018 Breitbart News

Conservative non-profit group PragerU appears to be facing Facebook censorship, as many recent posts from group are suffering from a 99.9999 percent drop in engagement based on Facebook’s own dashboard. The Social Media Masters of the Universe also pulled down two PragerU videos, which it labeled “hate speech.”

Echoing the apparent page limitation of conservative commentating duo Diamond and Silk, the conservative non-profit group PragerU — which produces educational videos on conservative issues — appears to have found its Facebook page’s reach drastically limited. The group’s Facebook page boasts three million followers, but its most recent posts have been seen by almost none of its followers, according to the Facebook dashboard.

PragerU social media influencer Will Witt posted a screenshot of the Facebook page’s dashboard which shows a number of statistics relating to posts from the page, including the reach posts have and how many users have clicked on links in the posts. According to the photos posted by Witt, PragerU’s last nine posts have reached between one and three of their followers. Previous posts have reached between 50,000 and 95,000 of PragerU’s followers. . . .


My guess according to what I have seen a rash of recently is . . . Facebook will claim this is an “error”.

The other thing that might occur as it gets closer to the election is a re-defining of the term “shadow-ban” and they will deny it.

Maybe something else. We’ll likely know soon.

Behind the Google-Southern Poverty Law Center relationship

If this was not hate speech, then you have a complaint. If it was, you do not.


This is the first I’ve heard of this group since a judge dismissed their “Free Speech” case against YouTube since it didnt involve an issue in Constitutional free speech.


How are other somewhat conservative organizations faring?

Such as Dave Ramsey?


Oddly enough, even though I found the views on PRagerU to consistently mirror mine, I’m not in agreement with you here. Facebook is not a government entity, and therefore they are incapable of censoring. They can pick and choose whomever they want on their platform. People can, in response, just as easily choose not to participate on Facebook.
People can also post and share PragerU videos on Facebook until Facebook closes their accounts.

Where PragerU might have a case is the use of the term “hate speech”, which could be found as defamation.


Youtube and Facebook are following a trend in the digital world to try and control what people see and hear. This is not unlike what the major networks and cable news did for decades until Fox News and conservative talk radio came along. And if you recall, progressives tried to shut down conservative talk radio with the paradoxically named “Fairness Doctrine”.

This is why the furor over Cambridge Analytica is so hilarious since Facebook provided the 2012 Obama campaign with almost unlimited data.


It was just another innocent mistake :mask:


LeafByNiggle . . .

If this was not hate speech, then you have a complaint.


Theo520 . . .


I was not “hate speech” by PragerU.
But it WAS a PR debacle by Facebook.


Here’s one of the banned videos, a provocative title

Aboubakr points to a Pew Research poll that shows the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Nigeria believe “any Muslim who chooses to leave Islam should be put to death,” women should be stoned for committing adultery, and people should be punished for criticizing Muhammad or Islam.

At end of the video, Aboubakr pleads for moderate Muslims to reform the religion around the world.


Thanks for posting Theo520.

I probably would not have bothered to watch it.

But now I will (perhaps right now even).


Here is the second video

The video, presented by conservative YouTube personality Allie Stuckey, presents an argument that making men feminine is both wrong and dangerous.


Regarding Islam, although I did not know the sociologic aspects that the speaker discussed, I already knew all the RELIGIOUS teachings of Islam (that were mentioned in the video).

I knew it just from studying Catholic Answers material and corroborating it with direct readings of the Koran.

(And seeing it lived out in the news)

The heck of it is, if the people who are making these “thought-policing” decisions had their way universally, it would be the end of Catholic Answers too!

(Remember. It is from their sources [and others too by the way] that I learned many of these Islamic religious teachings. And have seen Islamic debaters defend them!)

In other words, this frequent attacking of free speech by the tech giants, has virtual UNIVERSAL implications.

At least if the silencing effects of these standards were carried out universally (if the country continues to relegate such speech gate-keeping authority to the tech giants, this will occur in my opinion.)

Especially as their political speech prohibitions grow (as they seem to grow daily already).

Here are some excellent materials . . .


What are the “uncharitable” comments in the video?


She’s referencing cultural norms from not so long ago.

Seems a bit harsh of you to just call it ‘foolishness’. Also, I still don’t see you supporting your point that it’s ‘uncharitable’.


You are still not supporting that it’s ‘uncharitable’ and in any way deserved a ban.

I never said it was a great video, just shared it for interest.


I’m expecting some genius pre-teen to figure out a better alternative to Facebook.


And it will happen. And then it will be presented with the same issues, and some groups will end up getting kicked off.


I think when they do, just as will happen with YouTube, there will be a rush to the exit doors by many conservatives until they find a platform not policed by political correctness.


And then they’ll police it for their version of political correctness.


The tech isn’t that hard, it’s mostly a marketing problem to get people to join in droves, to get a critical mass.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit