Getty Images

Twitter is making it clear that conservative opinions meet their criteria for “inflamatory speech.”

The social media giant’s bias showed when they decided to censor a campaign ad from Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, who recently announced that she’s be running for the Senate seat being vacated by Bob Corker of Tennessee. They somehow managed to find that the ad violated their terms of conduct. Why? Because she released a campaign ad in which she made a statement about the sale of fetal tissue for medical research. “I’m 100% pro-life. I fought Planned Parenthood, and we stopped the sale of baby body parts — thank God.”

That was all the “inflammatory” language needed to get the video removed. You’d think the geniuses over at Twitter would be aware of the “Streisand Effect” (trying to remove a piece of information makes people more likely to seek it out), because the ad is now getting more attention than Blackburn could’ve ever imagined. She quickly re-posted the ad, and Twitter hasn’t yet dared to take it down a second time, thanks to all the outrage generated.

.@Twitter shut down our video ad, claiming it's "inflammatory" & "negative." Join me in standing up to Silicon Valley → RETWEET our message! pic.twitter.com/K3w4AMgW6i

— Marsha Blackburn (@VoteMarsha) October 9, 2017

There weren’t many people out there who could understand why in the world the ad would be worth censoring, unless it’s the opinion that Twitter is uncomfortable with.

Unbelievable https://t.co/tCJ76EQpJp

— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) October 9, 2017

.@Twitter should not have censored @MarshaBlackburn. Protecting the unborn is not controversial or inflammatory.

— Bill Lee (@BillLeeTN) October 9, 2017

Hey @Twitter, are you going to censor @WSJ for reporting the same thing @VoteMarsha said in her campaign ad? https://t.co/5QDgUBZbsA

— Susan B Anthony List (@SBAList) October 9, 2017

Blackburn's ad was accurate: https://t.co/7B94Ee4Ee9 pic.twitter.com/DgqwhVjAjz

— John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) October 9, 2017

Heck, she wasn’t even being inflammatory, but rather reported the facts.

Whatever Twitter was thinking in censoring the ad, more people have seen it now than ever would have had they not tried to censor it in the first place.

[Note: This post was written by Matt Palumbo. He is a co-author of the new book A Paradoxical Alliance: Islam and the Left, and can be found on Twitter @MattPalumbo12]