Google is to be summoned before the government to explain why taxpayers are unwittingly funding extremists through advertising, The Times can reveal.
The Cabinet Office joined some of the world’s largest brands last night in pulling millions of pounds in marketing from YouTube after an investigation showed that rape apologists, anti-Semites and banned hate preachers were receiving payouts from publicly subsidised adverts on the internet company’s video platform.
David Duke, the American white nationalist, Michael Savage, a homophobic “shock-jock”, and Steven Anderson, a pastor who praised the killing of 49 people in a gay nightclub, all have videos variously carrying advertising from the Home Office, the Royal Navy, the Royal Air Force, Transport For London and the BBC.
Mr Anderson, who was banned from entering Britain last year after repeatedly calling homosexuals “sodomites, queers and faggots”, has YouTube videos with adverts for Channel 4, Visit Scotland, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Argos, Honda, Sandals, The Guardian and Sainsbury’s.
A YouTube poster typically earns about $7.60 for every 1,000 times that an advert is seen. More than 40 videos posted by Duke, a former imperial wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, have been viewed in excess of 100,000 times.
Last night the government suspended its YouTube advertising “pending reassurances” from Google.
Commercial brands also removed adverts, with Channel 4 saying that it was not satisfied that the platform was “a safe environment”.
“Google is responsible for ensuring that the high standards applied to government advertising are adhered to and that adverts do not appear alongside inappropriate content,” a government spokeswoman said.
“Google has been summoned for discussions at the Cabinet Office to explain how it will deliver the high quality of service that government demands on behalf of the taxpayer.”
Sainsbury’s and Argos, whose adverts also appeared on videos posted on behalf of the nationalist organisation the Polish Defence League, said that it was “unacceptable that Google is allowing our ads to be placed alongside these videos on YouTube”. Transport for London, the FCA, The Guardian and L’Oréal also pulled commercials.
“It is completely unacceptable that Google allows advertising for brands like The Guardian to appear next to extremist and hate-filled videos,” a spokeswoman for Guardian News & Media said.
“We have stopped all advertising through Google with immediate effect until we receive guarantees that this won’t happen in the future.”
Adverts for the College of Policing and the Department for International Development appear on the official website of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an extremist Islamist organisation that has called for the establishment of a global caliphate.
The Metropolitan Police is promoted on inbaa.com, a website linked to Hezbollah, next to a cartoon depicting Israel as a crocodile.
The Royal Air Force Charitable Trust, whose patron is the Queen, is advertised on YouTube content posted by the far-right organisation the National Rebirth of Poland as well as on videos uploaded by Roosh V, a “pick-up artist” accused of promoting rape.
The BBC appears on the official YouTube page of Wagdi Ghoneim, an Egyptian preacher who was banned from Britain in 2009 because he was considered to “foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence”.
Chuka Umunna, a Labour member of the home affairs select committee, said that it was appalling that publicly-funded adverts should be appearing alongside extreme or grotesque content.
“Multimillion-dollar social media companies with ample funds are simply not investing nearly enough in taking proactive action to stop extremist content from appearing and to stop it being monetised,” he said. “Profit comes first for these people.”
Google was criticised by the select committee this week for failing to search for hate videos, relying instead on its users to report suspect content, despite profits of more than $30 billion last year.
Peter Barron, its vice-president for communications, claimed that a 14-minute video posted by Duke called “Jews admit organising white genocide” did not breach its rules on hate speech despite being “antisemitic, deeply offensive and shocking”.
Brands are increasingly concerned that automated tools used to serve adverts online leave them at risk.
Phil Smith, director-general of ISBA, which represents British advertisers, said: “More needs to be done urgently to safeguard the reputations of responsible advertisers on digital platforms.”
The brands contacted by The Times all said that they had no idea that their adverts were placed next to extremist content. Those that did not immediately pull their advertising implemented an immediate review after expressing serious concern.
A Google spokeswoman said that the company had “strict guidelines” relating to advert placement and that in the vast majority of cases its policies “work as intended”. The company “doesn’t always get it right and sometimes ads appear where they should not,” she said, adding that it would make changes to policies and brand controls.
