What might been useful to mention here is how much money was being paid by big pharma in advertising dollars to the platforms and in campaign contributions. It was and still is an enormous amount.
[deleted]
How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
131–140 of 986 posts
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, readers should know that The Free Press is Bari Weiss¹. Vanity Fair described her as "a provocateur", which is the kindest-possible interpretation of her editorial philosophy. ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss
And Vanity Fair is a pillar of concise and objective information? Come on, at least be fair.
Honestly, yeah. Have you read their reporting?
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#133I wonder why people believe that CDC must always be right, and therefore any doubt or challenge to CDC’s messages is misinformation that is worth banning. I thought every school in a modern society teaches student not to blindly trust the authority.
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#134Relevant context - this was written by a member of the team who released the Twitter files, alongside Matt Tabibi.
Also, readers should know that The Free Press is Bari Weiss¹. Vanity Fair described her as "a provocateur", which is the kindest-possible interpretation of her editorial philosophy. ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss
And wikipedia bios of people challenging the narrative are also heavily censored and manipulated by the intelligence apparatus.
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#135I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I think the longest lasting legacy of covid will be the distrust it created for big government, big pharma, and big tech.
That started during Vietnam, we are still recovering.
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#136Relevant context - this was written by a member of the team who released the Twitter files, alongside Matt Tabibi.
Also, readers should know that The Free Press is Bari Weiss¹. Vanity Fair described her as "a provocateur", which is the kindest-possible interpretation of her editorial philosophy. ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss
[deleted]
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Were an individual legitimately trying to make a point, they would come up with an example not already in the set.
We've decided that speech that is harmful is not allowed. Encouraging people to not get a vaccine we decided is harmful speech. Like telling you to kill your self, or the yelling fire in a theater. Are you not OK with that example of speech though? Dangerous speech seems to make you uncomfortable no?
Wouldn't it depend on the demographic? Covid was not equally deadly among all ages and groups. Is it wrong to point out that the risk is significantly lower for the young and healthy? And what if it's experts questioning policies such as keeping lower income students home? Or the effectiveness of masking mandates beyond a certain point or situations of low risk like being outdoors?
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#138As pointed out - this is a hacker first forum.
Go to reddit. Find an emotionally charged subreddit, become a member, and then offer to help moderate.
There are FAR too many people discussing things, people with real experience making things, talking about moderation without doing their homework.
Test your assumptions. See if it can work. Doing this while helping communities is not a bad way to go.
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are very real people who have been harmed by side effects from the vaccine. Whether the virus itself would've been more deadly is a question for another time, but if your loved ones were unlucky enough to get myocarditis from the vaccine, and you were silenced on social media, sometimes invisibly like you're being gaslit, and so were the doctors and researchers, it's easier to understand the strong emotional re…
I’m sure you mean well, but one of the few things we know for sure is that the virus is way, way, way more deadly than vaccine. If you are going to overlook all those RCTs run all throughout the world with different types of vaccines and huge populations of people, then you really should reflect on your own analysis of the data. I'm not saying the vaccine is perfectly safe, as few things are, but it's obviously, prov…
You can prove anything you want with RCTs if you do enough selective reporting. I think the vaccine probably saved more lives than it cost, but I'm a lot less confident because of how much bad-faith covering-up of any counterveilling evidence there's been.
(Were vaccine RCTs pre-registered? If they were, how many pre-registered trials were mysteriously stopped or abandoned?)
Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's a hard tradeoff between false positives and false negatives. it's like being a soccer referee or a judge, you can be almost perfect but the screwups are all anyone remembers. short of putting everyone away for life, some convict is going to get out and do something, and some tabloid is going to question why this person was on the street. You do the best you can subject to the Constitution, the laws, and common s…
If it's such a hard tradeoff then maybe don't make the trade in the first place. Just don't censor speech. Problem solved. Insisting on censoring speech in this case is what's known as a Hegelian dialectic: there is a problem, we need to solve the problem, here's how we solve the problem.
[flagged]