‘Dystopian nightmare’: Journalist complains YouTube blocked video about alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella

Journalist Tim Pool claimed a video he produced about alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella was blocked by YouTube.

Pool posted a screenshot of the notification YouTube gave him revealing that his video titled “Democrats formalize impeachment, but whistleblower identity exposes this as a political hit job” was forced to remain listed as private, meaning no users can access the video.

The video, which was posted on Oct. 31, gathered 281,779 views before being blocked by the platform. YouTube, whose parent company is Google, confirmed the decision to block the video with a manual review that confirmed the algorithm’s decision.

Pool claimed YouTube was following Facebook’s lead and censoring posts with Ciaramella’s name, tweeting, “Welcome to the dystopian nightmare, where big tech is colluding to censor newsworthy and public information.”

Ciaramella was first named in a report from RealClearInvestigations. The 33-year-old career CIA analyst worked under the Obama and Trump administrations. Under President Barack Obama, he was the Ukraine director on the National Security Council.

He was briefly acting senior director for European and Russian affairs before moving to his current position as a deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia on the National Intelligence Council under President Trump’s director of national intelligence, as the Washington Examiner previously reported.

Ciaramella has a close relationship with several members of the Obama administration, including ties to Joe Biden. The Washington Examiner reported on Nov. 7 that Ciaramella joined Biden as a guest for a State Department banquet in 2016.

Pool posted other screenshots showing posts mentioning Ciaramella were removed from Facebook, as well.

Facebook’s position on protecting Ciaramella has been clear. A spokesperson said on Friday, “We are removing any and all mentions of the potential whistleblower’s name and will revisit this decision should their name be widely published in the media or used by public figures in debate.”

Related Content