The data are in on Facebook's war on "conservative" news sites, thanks to an impressive report published by WesternJournal.com.

The king of social media has been making algorithm changes seemingly intended to marginalize the traffic of right-of-center online news operations, and they have been effective, the report shows.

Most left-wing outlets are growing as a result, while most right-of-center sites are losing traffic.

There is not a doubt in my mind this was Facebook senior executives' intent, which represents a form of censorship or worse. In effect, it appears Facebook's objective is to change what was a level-playing field at the birth of the internet to one that is rapidly giving something greater than home-field advantage to the politically correct.

TRENDING: Support for Black Lives Matter sees massive plunge, polls say

I can say all this, by the way, with total objectivity – since the data show WND actually gaining traffic from social media, along with Fox News.

Overall, so-called "liberal" publishers have gained about 2 percent more Web traffic from Facebook than they were getting prior to the algorithm changes implemented in early February. On the other hand, so-called "conservative" publishers have lost an average of nearly 14 percent of their traffic from Facebook.

"This algorithm change, intentional or not, has in effect censored conservative viewpoints on the largest social media platform in the world," the article found. "This change has ramifications that, in the short-term, are causing conservative publishers to downsize or fold up completely, and in the long-term could swing elections in the United States and around the world toward liberal politicians and policies."

It is an excellent diagnosis of the politically motivated gatekeeper Facebook.

It is true that what I call "independent media" are facing monumental obstacles intentionally placed in their way by companies like Facebook. But Facebook is hardly alone in this regard.

Another big player in the war on independent media is Google. This one has had a more dramatically negative impact on WND. You might not know it, but back in the day when Google gave preference to the most viewed breaking news stories on the internet, WND fared very well. But Google changed its algorithms, too. Today, the Google News page, which regularly featured WND content years ago, is devoid of any. In fact, WND is not even viewed as a legitimate news content provider.

Why? It might have something to do with the gatekeepers Google has partnered with to define news. One of them is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far left-wing money machine that is not southern, doesn't fight poverty but increases it, scarcely practices law and doesn't respect it, and an outfit about which the word "center" should never be associated in any way.

The SPLC considers me a racist and a hate-monger in its annual reports and regards WND, my creation, no more charitably.

When I launched WND, then known as WorldNetDaily, more than 20 years ago, the idea was to use this new level playing field with a low barrier to entry to reinvigorate the American press by returning it to what it was intended to be – an important check on government power and overreach, waste, fraud, abuse and corruption in high places.

It worked initially.

WND was propelled by audiences to become one of the very top-ranked news sites in the world. That was before Google took over pre-eminence among search engines. Since then, Google has made it a mission to ensure any search traffic that goes our way is an accident. I'm not exaggerating. Google news alerts typically don't even recognize WND stories until 24 hours after they break.

The point here is simple. Is the world better off with more diversity of opinion, more reporting from different viewpoints? Facebook doesn't think so. Google doesn't think so. And this Digital Cartel has made part of its mission the stamping out of all meaningful ideological diversity in online media.

Related story: "Confirmed: Facebook's alogrithm hurting conservatives"