The different online platforms, whether search engines, social media, or other technologies, each have unique problems when it comes to the presence of conversion therapy materials.  As a result, each sector needs to tackle the problem accordingly. These recommendations reflect the need to specifically address different aspects of the online ecosystem to ensure that users have access to authoritative material and information. 

Many social media companies claim to ban conversion therapy materials, but, as this report shows, a plethora of disinformation is slipping through their inadequate filters, especially in non-English languages. Tech companies must fulfill their promises to adequately moderate and assure the safety of users in other languages. 

All online systems must keep up with the constant rebranding and use of new terms, in all languages, that the conversion therapy industry uses. For example, “reintegrative therapy” and “same-sex attraction” are terms that return blatantly unauthoritative results and lead people to harmful resources.

Search Companies

Between them, the search companies Bing and Google cover nearly 95 percent of all search traffic worldwide. Both companies must immediately put in place filters that will direct those who search for conversion therapy material to authoritative sources. This is happening to some extent with Google, and to a lesser extent with Bing, but it is clear these companies are not up to date on the various euphemisms and terms that are used for conversion therapy. Because Amazon’s Alexa uses Bing, and Bing produces less authoritative results in all situations, voice search is a major source of disinformation on conversion therapy. Both companies must avail themselves of experts to keep their systems current.  They also need to invest in foreign language expertise and cultural competency as their results are far less authoritative in languages other than English. In some cases, they even direct their users to sites that are filled with dangerous disinformation. Even in English, outside the U.S., results are generally less authoritative.

Additionally, almost all searches returned unauthoritative material for “reintegrative therapy” and “unwanted same-sex attraction.” Search companies should address this problem in their determinations of authoritative material. Bing should analyze its knowledge boxes and automated additional search options, such as “conversion therapy near me,” which lead to additional pro-conversion therapy providers and resources.

Many tech companies add rainbows to their logos during pride month. True support of the LGBTQ+ community would be to deplatform conversion therapy and other anti-LGBTQ+ material.

Amazon

Amazon’s voice assistant, Alexa, uses Bing as its search engine. As a result, any problems discovered on Bing also apply to Alexa. Amazon should also take care that nonprofit conversion therapy providers are not included in its matching gift program, Amazon Smile. To its credit, Amazon has banned some books by Joseph Nicolosi, Sr., who used a technique, “reparative therapy,” that he created to help men overcome same-sex desires.

A preliminary search on Amazon’s Silk browser, which is the default browser on Amazon products apart from Alexa, returns a mixed bag of results for terms like “conversion therapy” and “reparative therapy,” which are largely authoritative on other browsers. For terms like “same-sex attraction” and “ex-gay cure”, the results are wildly unauthoritative and potentially damaging for users. It seems clear that Amazon has not invested resources in this area, but more research should be done.

Social Media

The big four–Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube–all say they ban ads for and promotion of conversion therapy. GPAHE’s research has found that these bans are largely inadequate, and that conversion therapy is thriving on these networks. But there are differences by platform. For example, although Facebook continues to host several conversion therapy providers even after their ban (see Conversion Therapy Online: The Players) its search mechanism generally provides authoritative material on the dangers of conversion therapy. That does not hold true for YouTube, where search terms return non-authoritative material, some conversion therapy videos are monetized, and many providers have their own channels. On YouTube, non-English languages are highly problematic. Twitter is more of a mixed bag. Its search mechanism turns up a jumble of authoritative material and conversion therapy providers and promoters, regardless of language. 

Because so many conversion therapy providers are still present on the platforms, it is unclear if these social media bans were ever thoroughly applied. Overall, social media companies need to improve their content moderation practices, enforce their bans, fix their search systems where applicable, and invest in content moderation in non-English languages and increase their cultural competency.  YouTube needs to stop running ads on conversion therapy providers’ videos. And if they insist on flagging material rather than taking it down, despite their own rules, they need to do it systematically and reliably, in all languages. Also, every single provider profiled in Conversion Therapy Online: The Players that had a YouTube channel should be labelled appropriately and have some videos, if not all, removed from the platform. All social media platforms need to engage experts to make sure they are handling conversion therapy material according to their community guidelines and terms of service.

PayPal

It is unclear if PayPal has an official position on conversion therapy. In GPAHE’s report, Conversion Therapy Online: The Players, conversion therapy providers who have PayPal accounts are documented. In some cases, these organizations are listed on PayPal’s Giving Fund, which helps users fund their favorite charities. PayPal should drop all conversion therapy providers from its system.

Wikipedia

Search results routinely link to Wikipedia as an authoritative source for information about conversion therapy. In English and other major languages, that tends to be generally fine as items are heavily edited and vetted by the Wikipedia community. But GPAHE’s research has found horrific material on the site in Swahili, which search companies simply link to without considering what is published there. That needs to be addressed, and Wikipedia should take a hard look at its material on conversion therapy and the LGBTQ+ community in all languages.

In 2020, the Independent Forensics Expert Group (IFEG), established by the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCTL) in partnership with Copenhagen University’s Department of Forensic Medicine, issued a “Statement of the Independent Forensic Expert Group on Conversion Therapy.” The statement reads in part, “Conversion therapy is a set of practices that aim to change or alter an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. It is premised on a belief that an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity can be changed and that doing so is a desirable outcome for the individual, family, or community. Other terms used to describe this practice include sexual orientation change effort (SOCE), reparative therapy, reintegrative therapy, reorientation therapy, ex-gay therapy, and gay cure.” The IFEG found evidence of conversion therapy in 60 countries. The goal of such techniques is “to change, suppress, or divert an individual’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression,” and IFEG determined that there is a “lack of medical and scientific validity of conversion therapy” and significant harms because of the practice.  Other research has documented harms from these practices, including a higher rate of attempted suicide. The highly negative effects of this practice led the UN’s Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity to call for a “global ban on conversion therapy.” 

Conversion therapy has also been deemed fraudulent. The IFEG declared that offering “conversion therapy” is a form of deception, false advertising, and fraud. A New Jersey court case also determined that a particular conversion therapy provider had engaged in consumer fraud and the provider was ordered permanently closed.

The IFEG’s statement describes different techniques used by conversion therapists: “In those countries where it is performed, a wide and variable range of practices are believed to create change in an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Some examples of these include: talk therapy or psychotherapy (e.g., exploring life events to identify the cause); group therapy; medication (including anti-psychotics, anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, and psychoactive drugs, and hormone injections); Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (where an individual focuses on a traumatic memory while simultaneously experiencing bilateral stimulation); electroshock or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) (where electrodes are attached to the head and electric current is passed between them to induce seizure); aversive treatments (including electric shock to the hands and/or genitals or nausea-inducing medication administered with presentation of homoerotic stimuli); exorcism or ritual cleansing (e.g., beating the individual with a broomstick while reading holy verses or burning the individual’s head, back, and palms); force-feeding or food deprivation; forced nudity; behavioral conditioning (e.g., being forced to dress or walk in a particular way); isolation (sometimes for long periods of time, which may include solitary confinement or being kept from interacting with the outside world); verbal abuse; humiliation; hypnosis; hospital confinement; beatings; and ‘corrective’ rape.”

For the purposes of this report, GPAHE relied broadly on the terms identified by the IFEG as associated with conversion therapy. See appendix for the exact list of terms used in GPAHE’s research into the nature of conversion therapy online.

Additionally, almost all searches returned unauthoritative material for “reintegrative therapy” and “unwanted same-sex attraction.” Search companies should address this problem in their determinations of authoritative material. Bing should analyze its knowledge boxes and automated additional search options, such as “conversion therapy near me,” which lead to additional pro-conversion therapy providers and resources.

This is a story that shows how the internet should work. A 17-year-old immigrant named Huong (a pseudonym to protect his identity) living in Australia was almost forced into a horrific conversion therapy program by his family. Huong, whose story is included in the 2018 report Preventing Harm, Promoting Justice: Responding to LGBT conversion therapy in Australia, had moved to Australia at the age of 11 with two family members. He was assigned female at birth, but always felt “different” in terms of gender. As a young teen, he assumed a more masculine look, cutting his hair short and doing “everything to make people see me as not female.” This upset his family, who assumed Huong was a lesbian. When he told his mother, who remained in their home country, about this gender dysphoria during one of her visits to Australia, her response was: “… like basically trying to talk me into conversion therapy … mom was like, ‘if you love me and if you love yourself, then you should go [home] during mid-year break … your uncle-in-law has been praying for you a lot, every night for a year or so. He has cured someone like you before. So, you should go because he could help you.’” 

Huong initially agreed to go home, but then began online research on conversion therapy in his home country and became “really scared.” Huong describes what he read, “I looked up online and there were a lot of really shit stories. So, for example, things like parents could force [their queer children] to stay in a mental health hospital or asylum, even when they have no mental health condition that they need to be in there. They were parents who locked their children in … until they agreed to not be queer anymore … or … beat them up … And then there was one case that really struck me, where the father of a person … [that] either told their family that she was a lesbian, or their family found out somehow … [the family] got them drunk … and then when they were unconscious … let a guy who liked this young person [in] to … basically to rape them.”

Story Bridge in Kangaroo Point, Australia, lit up in celebration of a Parliamentary “yes” vote on marriage equality.

Armed with this terrifying information, Huong courageously decided not to return home and be subjected to possible abuse. He was eventually able to find help to remain in Australia and enroll in university there. Because he found this information about conversion practices online, he was able to avoid terrifying techniques that might have been used to “correct” him. Authoritative resources from a search provider saved Huong from that.

If only Huong’s experience was the typical one. More typical is Omar’s, whose story was told in a 2021 series about conversion therapy by the Thompson Reuters Foundation.

Growing up in a small town outside of Cairo, Omar, whose last name is omitted because his family is unaware he is gay, began to feel sexually attracted to other men. Terrified to tell those around him, something common for those who may be gay and live in conservative societies, he turned to Facebook for information. Searching in his native Arabic, Omar didn’t find authoritative information: rather he was led to conversion therapy by what he found on Facebook.

“Facebook led me to conversion therapy, and I’m not alone,” said Omar, now 24. As a teenager, he came upon the Facebook page of Awsam Wasfy, who has nearly 150,000 followers and says his therapy sessions can “treat” homosexuality. Omar read Wasfy, connected with his followers, and began sessions with another therapist he found through Facebook. “I didn’t start out looking for treatment, I wanted to understand, is it normal?” Omar told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. But after feeling threatened by the way the therapist interrogated him, Omar stopped the sessions – describing it as a narrow escape. “I am lucky the so-called doctor wasn’t violent towards me. He definitely had the potential to be,” said Omar, now an activist who has moderated several Arabic Facebook groups created by LGBTQ+ activists.

Wasfy, who has over 150,000 followers on a page where he advertises his abilities to “cure” homosexuality, remained active on Facebook after the Thomson Reuters Foundation report. So, too, Heba Kotb, who has over two million followers and says she has successfully “treated” over 3,000 gay people from all over the Arab world, including by performing anal exams as part of a “sexual assessment.” Facebook told Reuters that neither page had any “active” violations.

GPAHE’s extensive research into online conversion therapy indicates that Omar’s story is likely more typical than that of Huong. The problems are multi-fold and touch on every aspect of accessing information online. What follows is a deep dive into how conversion therapy presents online in different countries and languages. 

Among thousands of Facebook users who were members of multiple extremist Facebook groups, Squire found that 61 percent of “multi-issue” users who were in anti-immigrant groups had also joined anti-Muslim groups; the same was true for 44 percent of anti-government groups, 37 percent of white nationalist groups, and 35 percent of neo-Confederate groups. “Anti-Muslim groups are way worse, in every way, than what I would have guessed coming in,” Squire said at the time, “Some of the anti-Muslim groups are central players in the hate network as a whole. And the anti-Muslim groups show more membership crossover with other ideologies than I expected.”

Civil rights organizations have repeatedly warned Facebook that anti-Muslim posts, ads, private groups, and other content are rampant on a global scale. As early as 2015, Muslim Advocates informed Facebook that its event pages were being used to organize activities by anti-Muslim militias and hate groups, including armed anti-Muslim protests in the U.S. The Southern Poverty Law Center also reached out to Facebook privately starting in 2014 to warn the company about hate groups on its platform, including dozens of anti-Muslim hate groups.

Methodology

GPAHE employed researchers to conduct online investigations in six countries: Australia, Colombia, Ireland, Germany, Kenya, and the United States. In the U.S., research was conducted in both English and Spanish. Each researcher was given a list of terms to use in their searches of Google, Bing, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube. They conducted these searches on laptops, mobile devices, and on Alexa and Siri. Researchers collected screen shots of search outcomes and documented any autogenerated items such as Google’s knowledge panels or the suggested search terms that surfaced. Conversion therapy providers found on social media were documented on every platform and any monetization, for example a PayPal account, was also documented. Search functions on social media were used to determine if the systems linked conversion therapy providers together and suggested accounts were captured to see if they favored additional conversion therapy outfits. It should be noted that because of the way the technology, search, and social media companies retain data about all users and use that data to influence what we see as users, it’s possible that an individual may not be able to replicate the described GPAHE report results exactly, but they will be very close.

The terms used in these searches are found in appendix. 

The online ecosystem of conversion therapy providers discovered through this process, as well as their social media or monetization of accounts can be found in Conversion Therapy Online: The Players. That report is intended to profile current conversion therapy promoters and provide authoritative resources on their activities. Thanks to excellent reports by openDemocracy, OutRight International, The Trevor Project, Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, and many others, a corpus of research on the conversion therapy universe does exist, especially on organizations in the U.S. and Europe. GPAHE’s report is expected to serve as an authoritative resource along with existing material for the tech platforms to use as a screening mechanism and as an additional resource for those who search for these organizations or conversion therapy in general. 

The search results on Google in Ireland pertaining to “ex-gay therapy” and “gay cure therapy” are predominantly authoritative. They return medical journals, reports documenting the harm of conversion therapy, and authoritative newspaper articles about providers. Phrases such as “is my gay child my fault” and “I don’t want to be gay” led mostly to authoritative sources as well, although links to quora.com, a discussion site, sometimes led to anti-LGBTQ+ material. Only occasionally did these searches lead to actual providers in Ireland and the UK, including the Core Issues Trust and the True Freedom Trust (see Conversion Therapy Online: The Players).

A Google search for “unwanted same-sex attraction” returned “related searches” that led directly to a conversion therapy provider and additional searches for “conversion therapy.”

A Google search for “reparative therapy” returned authoritative results and only one link to a provider, Joseph Nicolosi, Sr. But a search for “reintegrative therapy” leads largely to providers of the practice, a problem found in other countries and languages as well. The same is true with a search for “unwanted same-sex attraction.”

As is the case in many other locations, Bing’s results are less authoritative. For “conversion therapy,” the results are highly authoritative not just in terms of links but also autogenerated boxes. “Reparative therapy” leads to links to Joseph Nicolosi, Sr.’s material. Nothing authoritative comes up for “I don’t want to be gay.” For “ex-gay therapy,” the results are mostly authoritative, but an autogenerated question, “Are there any reparative therapy programs for gays?” answers with a pro-conversion therapy sentence from an article in Christianity Today. Searching for “unwanted same-sex attraction” leads to conversion therapy providers, and autogenerated questions use Christianity Today and the anti-LGBTQ+ Focus on the Family as sources. Searching for “reintegrative therapy” leads directly to several sites or social media accounts of Joseph Nicolosi, Jr. The automated questions simply repeat Nicolosi’s own words. The related search results all lead to conversion therapy sites or therapists.

The Irish experience in terms of social media parallels that of the American experience in English. The algorithms of the social media companies can lead users down a conversion therapy rabbit hole once they land on a provider, as conversion therapists are linked together on these sites. Facebook’s search mechanism is largely authoritative and Twitter’s less so, but YouTube’s search mechanism returns pro-conversion therapy material quite frequently.

Kenya has two official languages, English and Swahili. But when it comes to conversion therapy online, it’s as though the two languages are from two different universes. In the English universe, internet users receive relatively authoritative material, though not as much as English speakers in other regions. In the Swahili universe, the LGBTQ+ population is disparaged and mocked, blatant anti-LGBTQ+ propaganda flourishes, and conversion therapy is treated as legitimate. 

Disastrous Search Results in Swahili

GPAHE’s research conducted from Kenya on conversion therapy in Swahili, which is spoken in several East African countries and is the first language of about 16 million people, although spoken by about 80 million people, are particularly troubling. Whereas Google search results in English in multiple countries have problems, the searches appear to be moderated with authoritative material, but the results in Swahili are shameful. In searches for phrases connected to conversion therapy, about half of the results on the first page are problematic and many of the results that surface are disparaging to the LGBTQ+ community. 

The Russian, viciously anti-LGBTQ+ and pro-conversion therapy site, pro-LGBT.ru, came up repeatedly in Bing searches.

A Google search for “gay cure therapy” finds four authoritative sources, three of which are at the bottom of the first search page. While the first link is to an authoritative source by Human Rights Watch, other results include a highly troubling Wikipedia page, and YouTube videos, “homosexual medicine,” and “the gay medicine,” both of which were monetized with ads. Another video depicted a grotesque stereotype of an LGBTQ+ person. The second page of results was worse, with links to a Russian website, pro-lgbt.ru filled with disinformation and supportive of conversion therapy. 

Bing’s results for “gay cure therapy” were dismal. The first page returned results linked to pro-lgbt.ru, disparaging YouTube videos, and a semi-supportive page that directs members of the LGBTQ+ community to medical resources for STDs but speaks of the community in a disparaging tone. One link does point out that conversion therapy is a fraud. 

A search on Google for “reintegrative therapy,” sends searchers more than once to pro-LGBT.ru, and to other sites pushing conversion therapy. A Google search for “treatment of unwanted same-sex attraction” mimics that of “reintegrative therapy.” 

Searching on Google for “is homosexuality a sin,” the results are mostly problematic on the first page. There are links to pages that declare yes, it is a sin, that homosexuality is a “life of debauchery,” a speech by Rev. Innocente Kamote called “How to Overcome the Sin of Homosexuality!” and a link to bibleinfo.com, which sends readers to an ex-gay site. 

Bing has similar problems. Its first page of results links to “God again promises power over sin, as well as homosexuality, for all who will believe in Jesus Christ,” What does the Holy Bible say about homosexuality? Is homosexuality a sin?” and a piece on maxshimbaministries.com titled, “God did not create humans to live a life of debauchery. The Bible tells us that a person becomes homosexual because of sin.” Not one piece supportive of LGBTQ+ rights appears on the first page.

Many of the searches led to a particularly disturbing website filled with disinformation, the Russian site pro-lgbt.ru, a massive anti-LGBTQ+ website filled with disparaging material on the community and translated into dozens of languages, notably many that are relatively rare. The site describes itself as existing “to disseminate facts that are deliberately kept silent by the leaders of the LGBT movement, which leads to the involvement of unsuspecting citizens in a destructive lifestyle fraught with the most serious consequences for their health and well-being.” 

An anti-LGBTQ+ YouTube video in Swahili was monetized with a VRBO ad.

The site features articles such as “secrets of gay propaganda,” “The LGBT sect recruits your children,” and “Demographic Consequence of non-traditional sexual behavior.” Promoting conversion therapy, it says, “The assertions that conversion therapy is not only ineffective, but in all cases causes great harm to the body are false. The corresponding argumentation can be found in our articles. Moreover, a number of our works have presented the effective use of conversion therapy.”

Interestingly, the website also seems to block the translation of some of its most inflammatory material into English. For example, an article in Swahili titled, “Can I Change my Sexual Orientation?” that asserts “There is strong clinical evidence that unwanted homosexual attraction can be effectively eliminated,” will not translate into English. More research is needed to learn how much false “information” the site may be disseminating in the many languages it hosts.

Another interesting aspect of search in Swahili is that, as is common in English, one of the first results is often a Wikipedia entry. But in Swahili, the entry that is linked as a top search result is filled with disinformation. On the Wikipedia page, “Ushoga,” translated as “Homosexuality,” the amount of disinformation and disparagement of the LBGTQ+ community is shocking. Filled with information including, “But sometimes it is that the person has been affected by an incident that occurred especially in childhood or has allowed himself to try to do it until he is so used to it that he is unable to recover” and “Advocates of homosexuality, however, want the youths to be given anti-retroviral drugs so that they can later undergo surgery for genital mutilation.” The page suggests that human beings should not follow their “tendencies” such as having sex with a child or eating too much, and they must first consider the “moral good.” After stating that in Africa, coming out can be dangerous and subject individuals to violence, it warns that one’s family will likely reject you, which is an encouragement to seek conversion therapy. It describes “homosexuals” as having “unhealthy desires” that “destroy the very foundation of social life.” After noting that some religious traditions no longer accept discrimination against the LGBTQ+ population, the entry asks, “Yet the question of morality remains: is it lawful to follow any pattern that we feel or have practiced by repeating evil deeds? If we allow people to do whatever they want, what will society be like?”

Conversion Therapy in English in Kenya

In English, Kenya’s internet users experience a similar environment to those in other English- speaking countries. In fact, there is so much similarity across countries in English searches that GPAHE’s research confirms other work revealing that tech companies put most of their resources for protecting users from harm into English, leaving speakers of other languages to experience a much less authoritative and more dangerous online experience. They also, at least when it comes to conversion therapy, appear to prioritize American sources over those of other countries that predominantly speak English.

A Google search for “ex-gay therapy” turns up several articles on the first page from legitimate sources including America’s National Public Radio, an authoritative Wikipedia entry on the “ex-gay movement” along with a knowledge panel based off the entry, and material from mainstream American newspapers and NGOs. There are also a series of links to the recent documentary, “Pray Away,” that explored the horrors of conversion therapy. It isn’t until page three that users are directed to specific conversion therapy organizations. Similar results are found on Bing, but the first link to come up is a pro-conversion therapy site, ex-gay.com. Interestingly, although the other results are also authoritative, they come from completely different sources than Google, including Huffington Post, The Advocate, and The American Prospect. Bing has a knowledge panel that sources from Wikipedia, and on page two, it features at the top of the page an article from The Cut, along with a photograph, called “What it’s like to experience gay conversion therapy.”

As has been found in other contexts, searches on YouTube lead to very concerning results. The top result is about right-wing firebrand Milo Yiannopoulos, who recently claimed to be cured of homosexuality and now has made it his mission to rehabilitate conversion therapy as a practice. Only one of the next five search results was authoritative, with the others supporting the notion that one can become ex-gay. 

Google search returned largely authoritative results for several terms, including “ex-gay therapy,” where only authoritative results returned, though ads for “gay conversion therapist near you” did appear. Similar authoritative results returned for “conversion therapy,” though there was one ad by the National Catholic Register for “Reparative theory is under attack.” “Gay cure” returned only authoritative results. “Reparative therapy” only returned one problematic result, a link to josephnicolosi.com. 

“Reintegrative therapy” was a different story. In the search box, Google suggested a companion search to Tim Long, who is a provider. The first five results led directly to providers, including reintegrativetherapy.com and images for the website were prominently displayed. Related searches also drove traffic to Reintegrative Therapy founder, Joseph Nicolosi, Jr., both his reintegrative website and his Breakthrough Clinic. “Unwanted same-sex attraction” led to providers and supporters, including Family Watch International, the Nebraska Family Alliance and Desert Stream Living Waters (see NAME report). 

On Bing, “ex-gay therapy” led mostly to authoritative material, but a Family Policy Alliance YouTube video was prominently featured. For “conversion therapy,” only one troubling source surfaced from Christian Life Magazine. “Gay cure” was similarly authoritative. “Reparative therapy” was largely authoritative for the first five results, including knowledge boxes autogenerated by Bing, but there were also links to josephnicolosi.com, and links to Nicolosi Sr.’s videos and providers, including David Pickup. For “reintegrative therapy,” nearly half the page was taken up by links to reintegrativetherapy.com. There were also links to its Facebook page and other providers, including David Pickup. “Unwanted same-sex attraction” was similarly nonauthoritative. It returned links to conversion therapy providers and the anti-LGBTQ+ Focus on the Family, which also served as a reference page for automated questions including “do you have to act on same-sex attraction?” and another, “Are there any therapists that treat same-sex attraction,” which directed users to conversion therapy proponent the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, or NARTH, now called the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity. (see Conversion Therapy Online: The Players).

In the U.S. in English, a Bing search for “reintegrative therapy” returned more than a half-page of results from the Reintegrative Therapy Association’s website.

For YouTube in the U.S., searches for “ex-gay therapy,” “conversion therapy,” and “gay cure” are authoritative. “Reparative therapy” is also authoritative except for one link to a video by the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, which also has a YouTube channel. The results for “reparative therapy” are predominantly authoritative and have a label from The Trevor Project. The results for “reintegrative therapy” are mostly links to providers, including the top result sending users directly to the Reintegrative Therapy YouTube channel as well as its videos, IFTCC, and New Hampshire Cornerstone, which also has a channel.

The United States Spanish-Speaking Experience

Google searches for conversion therapy terms in Spanish from the United States are in some cases even more disturbing than they were in Colombia. The search results for “conversion therapy” are highly authoritative and link to several expert reports as well as advertisements by groups like the Arcus Foundation and Human Rights Campaign. Searches for “ex-gay therapy” and “gay cure” return medical results and legitimate news articles as well as authoritative Wikipedia entries. “Reintegrative therapy” also returns authoritative results as well as results related to therapies that have nothing to do with conversion, but rather relate to different therapies, sometimes court-ordered having to do with the “reintegration of families.”

The situation is different with “reparative therapy.” In this case, the first two links are to catholic.net and provide ill-informed defenses that assert changing sexuality is possible and cite disinformation regarding health issues in gay men. There is also a link to Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (P-FOX), and to a site hosting an excerpt of a book by Joseph Nicolosi Sr. There are three more links to Nicolosi material on the first page, and a link to the conversion therapy group, Exodus Latino America. A search for “Unwanted same-sex attraction” returns links to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), now the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, the anti-LGBTQ+ Spanish group CitizenGO, Voice of the Voiceless, and a link to the Church of Latter-Day Saints that advocates celibacy. Page two links to additional conversion therapy providers Joel 2:25 and Exodus Latino America. A search for “I don’t want to be gay,” led to more Nicolosi material, but also legitimate results from the American Psychological Association and PFLAG. 

On Bing, a search for “conversion therapy,” “ex-gay,” and “gay cure” therapy turned up predominantly authoritative results. Just as in Colombia, a search for “reintegrative therapy” brought up an autogenerated top of the page box that sampled material from the viciously anti-LGBTQ+ Russian website, pro-lgbt.ru, and the second link was to the site as well. The other results were unrelated. The second page had a link to reintegrativetherapy.com. A search for “reparative therapy” did bring up an authoritative autogenerated box at the top of the page, but then there were links to disinformation on catholic.net, YouTube videos on the practices, and links to anti-LGBTQ+ sites such as P-FOX. The first page results for “overcoming same-sex attraction” were riddled with pro-conversion therapy sites, including NorthstarLDS, a story on the founder of the conversion therapy organization Courage, and Mormon Church pages. Page two results were even less authoritative. 

A YouTube search for “conversion therapy” surfaced videos produced by anti-LGBTQ+ groups.

YouTube results for Spanish in the U.S. are quite different than in Colombia. Results for “ex-gay therapy,” “conversion therapy,” “reintegrative therapy,” and “gay cure therapy” are all authoritative. A search for “reparative therapy” returns a handful of links to Joseph Nicolosi, Sr., videos, though they are farther down on the page. The results for “same-sex attraction” are the least authoritative, with several links to videos pushing conversion therapy. “Unwanted same-sex attraction” comes up with multiple providers and almost no authoritative material. Videos from pro-conversion therapy outfits including Family Watch International, Core Issues Trust, and International Federation for Therapeutic and Counseling Choice, among others, are displayed.

Besides generalized searches on Google and Bing for phrases and concepts related to conversion therapy, the other way in which searchers may come upon this material is by looking up a particular provider. It is the responsibility of Alphabet and Microsoft to provide authoritative material in those situations, and yet it is not happening in any systematic fashion. 

In the United States, a Google search for the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity, a long-time conversion therapy provider, returned a half-page of results from the group’s website and knowledge box that gave a map to their location, links to their website, and driving directions and described the group as “Non-profit organization in Murray, Utah.” There were two other supportive links but also authoritative sources from GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

On Bing, a search for the group also gave a half-page of results directly linking to the Alliance. Of the rest, only a Wikipedia entry was authoritative and the others either linked to more Alliance material or other conversion therapy providers. Bing’s knowledge box was more authoritative than Google’s, describing the group’s work as “conversion therapy.” Related suggested searches included “conversion therapy camps near me” and “conversion therapy sign up.”

A Google search for Desert Stream Living Waters, a long-time conversion therapy provider, returned seven links to the group itself at the top and then its Facebook page. Two videos from the group on YouTube also surfaced, as well as a link to its app on the Apple App Store. The only authoritative link was to a Wikipedia page on the group’s founder. 

On Bing, the first result was an autogenerated box to a site that rates the group’s activities. It does not mention their work on conversion therapy but rather describes them as “an outpatient program for adults who are 18 and over seeking help for a number of issues including substance abuse or addiction.” There is another box, on the right side of the search results, that features an image from the group’s website and says, “Andrew Comiskey founded Desert Stream/Living Waters Ministries in 1980, when he and his wife, Annette, responded to their pastor’s call to start a healing/support group.” The information box, oddly enough, says it is derived from Google. It also links to a flattering profile of the group on another conversion therapy site, couragerc.org and its videos on YouTube. There are no authoritative results.

A Google search for Restored Hope Network, another long-time conversion therapy provider, returned seven links on the first page to the group’s site, its Instagram account, and a GuideStar profile. The page also included a knowledge box with prominent pictures of its principals and website, a link to its website, and related links to other conversion therapy proponents and providers. The description of Restored Hope Network was authoritative, having been pulled from Wikipedia. The only authoritative source was the group’s Wikipedia entry.

On Bing, Restored Hope Network’s first six results were from its website. That was followed by four autogenerated click options, labeled as “other content from restoredhopenetwork.org,” that lead searchers to its mission page, its donation page, a page of “resources” on “transgenderism,” and an article by the group’s leader on why conversion therapy is not harmful. On the right side of the results is an autogenerated box that describes the group as an “organization” and then provides a description from Wikipedia, “Restored Hope Network is an ex-gay network of interdenominational Christian ministries and individuals. The network holds an annual conference in a different location in the United States each year that offers counseling and conversion therapy and has speakers that offer advice for families with LGBT relatives and outreach to churches.” The box links to the group’s website and other conversion therapy providers. The only authoritative site in the search results is Wikipedia, and there is one Facebook page devoted to shutting down one of the group’s conferences in 2019. In an autogenerated ad half-way down the page labeled “People Also Ask,” there are questions such as “Why do we need Restored Hope Network?” which then leads to the group’s website. There are also links to the group’s videos on YouTube.

These examples reveal the problems with these searches. The same issues arose in research on other providers and in other languages. 

Again and again in GPAHE’s research, the term “reintegrative therapy” did not trigger search results connected to authoritative sources. Created by Joseph Nicolosi, Jr., around 2016, reintegrative therapy is a rebranding of previous forms of conversion therapy, though Nicolosi rejects any connection between the two. In Kenya, an English Google search for this therapy returned only two results that explained that this is a renamed form of conversion therapy. The rest of the results took searchers directly to the provider and others pointed in that direction. The second page of search returns a host of reintegrative therapy providers and a link to a lawsuit the Reintegrative Therapy Association is bringing against the authors of a medical journal article about the practice.

For the same search in Kenya on Bing, every single result on the first page either directed individuals directly to reintegrative therapy providers or to material that was completely irrelevant. In its associated knowledge box, Bing provided links to videos created by reintegrative therapy providers. The second page was just as bad. 

In Ireland, where much of the search results are authoritative, that is not true for “reintegrative therapy.” That search leads to several links on the first page to this therapy’s providers and to other conversion therapy organizations such as Desert Stream Living Waters. In Colombia, results for the terms were somewhat obscured because “reintegracion” is a term used for decommissioning of guerillas in the years after that country’s conflicts. Even so, on Bing, a search for “reintegrative therapy” brought up an autogenerated box that sampled material from a viciously anti-LGBTQ+ Russian website, pro-lgbt.ru. The same result returned for Spanish searches from the U.S., though in Germany, searches on both Google and Bing generally returned authoritative results. Searches for “reintegrative therapy” on Bing favored Joseph Nicolosi, Jr. and his organization and led to the same viciously anti-LGBTQ+ Russian site. The site pushes anti-LGBTQ+ ideas and features material from both Nicolosi Sr. and Jr. in multiple languages, and an IFTCC conference in London. In the U.S. and Australia, “reintegrative therapy” returns far too many direct links to its providers. In the U.S. on Bing “reintegrative therapy” led to a search result where nearly half the page was taken up by links to reintegrativetherapy.com. There were also links to its Facebook page and other providers, including David Pickup. 

The same problems are found on social media platforms. The first ten results of an English search in Kenya on YouTube returned only pro-reintegrative therapy videos, including a Joseph Nicolosi, Jr. interview and live counseling session. A Facebook search led to Nicolosi’s organizational page on the site. And a search on Twitter led to a rabbit hole of pro-reintegrative therapy posts and providers. 

The other term that consistently leads to non-authoritative results is “unwanted same-sex attraction (SSA),” which is increasingly used by conversion therapy providers as a euphemism for their work. As the country summaries show, unwanted SSA rarely returns authoritative results from search providers. Like “reintegrative therapy,” Google and Bing should address how the terms work in their algorithms.

For more on these issues in other languages, see the country sections of this report.