- The Washington Times
Tuesday, June 11, 2019

The pro-life organization Live Action is no longer permitted on Pinterest.

Social media users on the platform can still see Planned Parenthood’s content, but Live Action founder and president Lila Rose’s fare has been deemed a threat to “health or public” safety on Tuesday.


“@Pinterest has now permanently suspended @LiveAction’s account (my account remains suspended), claiming our pro-life content is ‘medically inaccurate information’ & ‘conspiracies’ that lead to ‘violence.’ #LifeCensored,” Ms. Rose said in a series of tweets. “Pinterest Logic: You can freely pin if you’re Planned Parenthood, an abortion provider. But if you’re a pro-life group & pin about the beauty & humanity of a baby in the womb, you’re banned bc you’re a threat to ‘Pinner’s health or safety.’”

Live Action, which launched in 2003, covers late-term abortion, as well as various other abortion procedures, and posts undercover sexual abuse videos taken at Planned Parenthood.

Pinterest sent the group a statement saying Live Action’s posts “went against our policies on misinformation. We don’t allow harmful misinformation on Pinterest. That includes medical information and conspiracies that turn individuals and facilities into targets for harassment or violence. … We don’t allow advice on Pinterest that may have immediate and detrimental effects on a Pinner’s health or on public safety.”

The social media platform said its rulings were formulated in part by consulting information from “internationally recognized institutions, including the CDC and WHO.”

Live Action’s ban echoes similar decisions in recent months regarding pro-life messaging.

The Dublin-based Iona Institute for Religion and Society had one of its pro-life promotional ads — Still One of Us — hidden by Facebook in May. The social media giant placed the picture under a “graphic” or “violent” content designation.

Similarly, the pro-life movie ‘Unplanned’ faced a de facto ban in Canada after two of the nation’s distribution gatekeepers balked on the project.

Representatives for Landmark and Cineplextold writer, producer, and director Chuck Konzelman that “content” prompted the decision.

“In Canada, Cineplex basically has monopolistic power,” Mr. Konzelman told Life Site. “The National Post mentions them as controlling nearly 80 percent of all movie screens, and from our limited experience, they seem to have many of the most desirable locations, in and near the major metropolitan areas. So rejection by Cineplex basically means we’re not playing in Canada.”

The film grossed over $18 million domestically on a budget of $6 million.


Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC.