Vox’s Carlos Maza has a beef with conservative YouTube sensation Steven Crowder, and now these two are locked in a bitter Hatfields and McCoys feud. Well, maybe not quite that bad. But it could have ramifications for other conservative content creators on social media. Maza, who typically reports on the media for the far-left news site, has called on YouTube to ban the right-leaning comedian for videos he made targeting the journalist.
Steven Crowder (left) and Carlos Maza (right)
Maza claims that Crowder, who is no stranger to being singled out by YouTube, incited a harassment campaign against his videos and used inflammatory language in his criticism of Maza’s work. YouTube told The Hill that it is investigating the matter and will reach a decision shortly.
So is Crowder a rabid bigot who urges his followers to harass those with whom he disagrees? Or might Maza be a bit guilty of stretching the truth in order to silence a conservative voice on social media?
Maza’s Side
Recently, Maza posted a series of tweets complaining about Crowder’s videos debunking Maza’s work on the web series Strikethrough. A homosexual, Maza pointed out that Crowder used homophobic slurs and made fun of his lisp.
“I’ve been called an anchor baby, a lispy queer, a Mexican, etc,” he wrote. “These videos get millions of views on YouTube. Every time one gets posted, I wake up to a wall of homophobic/racist abuse on Instagram and Twitter.”
Maza also claimed that Crowder’s followers began a harassment campaign, leaving homophobic messages on his videos and attacking him on social media. Finally, Maza ended his Twitter thread by asking his followers to flag Crowder’s videos in an attempt to get them removed:
“Anyway, if you want to help, I guess you can go to this dude’s videos and flag them? But @YouTube isn’t going to do anything, because YouTube does not give a f*** about queer creators. It cares about ‘engagement,’ and homophobic/racist harassment is VERY ‘engaging.’”
Sounds pretty bad, right? Well, let’s see what Crowder says about the matter.
Crowder’s Side
A conservative comedian, Crowder hosts an online television show and podcast called Louder With Crowder on BlazeTV. The show presents racy content that could easily be seen as controversial. Crowder and many of his guests typically do not adhere to the precepts of political correctness.
Steven Crowder (left) and Courtney Kirchoff (right)
On Crowder’s website, writer Courtney Kirchoff addressed the dispute, pointing out that his videos are designed to debunk the misinformation given in Strikethrough’s content. “We’ve rebutted Vox several times,” she wrote. “Always debunking their ideas, peppering in fun insults because they’re fun. Steven calls out Vox for failing to cite sources, how terrible they are at arguing a point, and even how Vox undercuts their own points.”
Crowder released a video outlining his position, explaining that he has “always condemned, and continues to condemn [and] discourage any and all forms of doxxing or targeted harassment of anyone online.” In addressing Maza’s complaints about his use of slurs, Crowder stated that his verbal attacks were “friendly ribbing.”
The YouTube host continued to claim that Maza was attempting to silence a conservative voice on social media. He argued that by playing the victim, Maza hopes to persuade YouTube to deplatform Crowder, thereby removing his voice from the site. “This is corporate censorship, and this is yet another giant company trying to lean on this channel, your channel, and the content that you’ve created,” he said. “And this is a war … we will fight to the absolute bitter end both legally and publicly.”
The Verdict?
So who’s in the wrong here? Is Crowder a bigot who uses hate speech and harassment campaigns against lefties on social media? Or is Maza simply using this as an excuse to remove Crowder from the interwebs?
Maza’s contention that Crowder used homophobic slurs in his videos is accurate; the YouTuber often uses strong language when he pokes fun at a variety of individuals. But he uses the same type of language against anyone in his crosshairs, regardless of identity. Some of his content certainly could be seen as distasteful, but the notion that he is harassing Maza by making videos debunking Maza’s claims is absurd.
It is also highly unlikely that Crowder exhorted his followers to harass and doxx Maza. The host has repeatedly spoken out against the practice, even before this flare-up with Vox. Having been the victim of social media mobs, he urges his followers not to engage in this behavior. Ultimately, he is not responsible for the conduct of followers, especially if he speaks firmly against it.
Maza has every right to be offended by Crowder’s words — if he chooses to be. After all, he is known for blocking those who dare to utter an unkind word about him or his content. Indeed, Maza even blocked me when I wrote this piece satirizing a video in which he makes the ridiculous claim that the media are not sufficiently biased against President Trump. Believe me, I was crushed.
But his efforts to get Crowder banned from YouTube lends credibility to the host’s claims that this is not about being offended; it is about removing a powerful right-wing voice with three million followers. Anyone who listens to Crowder is aware of his constant struggle with the video-sharing platform, which has specifically targeted his videos for demonetization.
But did Crowder violate YouTube’s terms of service (TOS)? That’s a trickier question. Its TOS states that “content that makes hurtful and negative personal comments/videos about another person” will not be allowed on the site. Crowder’s comments about Maza are certainly negative, but hurtful? That’s a subjective term, and this ambiguity is what allows other social media companies to pick and choose who gets banned or demonetized without having to worry about being called out for hypocrisy.
The sensible can debate the propriety of Crowder’s comments without pushing for his removal from social media. Maza has been producing content for Vox for years and has likely received a slew of personal insults and criticisms far worse than Crowder’s. When you enter the media world, it is par for the course and no excuse to threaten another’s livelihood because of hurt feelings. In light of this, it is difficult to see this situation for what it is: a cynical attempt to deplatform someone for his political views.
~
At Liberty Nation, we love to hear from our readers. Comment and join the conversation!
Readers: Feel free to comment below. And remember to check out the web’s best conservative news aggregator Whatfinger.com
Use our New Improved Login to post a comment
Or Register by clicking here.
3 Comments
Diogenes
AH, always fall back upon the old TOC rules. Remember, kids, in the Nanny State it is Nanny who polices the playground. And it is nanny’s bosses who own the playground. (Capitalism reigns supreme. If you don’t like the playground, go start your own playground. Good luck in trying to compete with our monopoly.)
Also remember this, kids. No homophobic slurs are allowed here in the playground. If your feelings get hurt, you only need to go crying to nanny, and she will intervene. “(A)nchor baby, lispy queer, and Mexican” are deplorable slurs! You can toss around the F- Bomb as much as you want, just as dirty old Joe Biden-my-time did, and it was aired in all the media with him saying the F word as being a “big F—ing Deal” in describing the initial implementation of Obamacare. You can use the F-bomb often in speeches, as NY senator Gimmeabrand has done. You can even F as much as you want to in the playground. But ‘Big Sis’ Nanny rules the speech code in this playground – and don’t you ever forget it!
Nanny isn’t really a dictator. Nah, she’s just trying to influence the masses and ultimately she’s only “just following orders”… Now where have we heard THAT phrase before?
EchoLimaEcho
I love Steven Crowder, and agree with alot of his content. As a subscriber, I have never seen anything that comes even remotely close to being accurately labeled as Racist, Bigoted, or Homophobic coming from Crowder. He is very matter of fact and points out alot of fallacies with facts and stats. It obviously rubbs the individuals on the receiving end a little raw, so they childishly react to him, in typical child-like fashion, by making baseless accusations. However, baseless as they might be, we have to keep in mind that Youtube (google) is run by some very liberal folks and the likelihood that Crowder gets certain videos taken down is very high. Just look at Prager University videos and how they are being censored!? In this day and age, when you have no valid argument, simply resort to silencing the opposition…a very facist way of doing business I might add…
Andrew Moran
It is amazing how PragerU videos are targeted. They’re five minutes long, consist of someone talking to the camera, and graphics in the background. How that violates anything is beyond belief!