I'm not for suppression of speech by anyone. Fresh air is the best disinfectant.
Federal Judge Limits Biden Officials’ Contacts With Social Media Sites
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
Where's your evidence?
The latest release of official US documents DID NOT PROVIDE ANY SUCH EVIDENCE.
Which means any claim it is a lab leak is an "allegation", and is not demonstrably true - and that's the extent of what any "government intervention" would need to be on any social media site.
It would be improper for the government to state "It was not a lab leak".
The correct statement would be something like:
"There is no clear evidence pointing to a lab leak by any US government source, and the majority of scientists who have reviewed the data concur that it was most likely a natural viral mutation which crossed species. This comment will be updated with any new information, regarding evidence supporting either hypothesis"
And, again - THIS IS NOT CENSORSHIP.
Yes it is, and anyone being honest with themselves knows it. If you read a post and there is no government warning and then you read a second post that has a warning, you know you would question the validity of the second post more simply due to the warning. Either every post has a warning (because any post could be false, true or partially true), or no posts has a warning.
Oh FFS, in the interest of getting people to focus, rather than simply engage in "uh-uh, yuh-huh" exchanges, here you go. Make of pages 4-86 and 95-115 what you will - there is quality and there is crap therein, and you are of course free to draw what inferences you please.
www.documentcloud.org
DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
Last edited:
I don’t know why I’m even trying. You refuse to be intellectually honest. Let me try one more time. Posting a warning is not limiting speech. An analogy. Performance art is protected speech. Requiring a warning at the beginning of the performance that the performance contains sexually explicit content is not restriction of speech. There’s no need to post that warning if the the performance is not sexually explicit.
From what I’ve seen, the government did not attempt to have the speech removed, only a warning posted that says the cdc disagreed. That isn’t restriction.
Again, I would not have had a problem if the Trump administration did the same thing. If it can be shown that the Biden administration threatened sanctions or consequences if the posts weren’t removed that would be an issue.
They allege that shortlyafterbeing published, the GBD was censored on social media by Google, Facebook, Twitter, and others. BOh FFS, in the interest of getting people to focus, rather than simply engage in "uh-uh, yuh-huh" exchanges, here you go. Make of pages 4-86 and 95-115 what you will - there is quality and there is crap therein, and you are of course free to draw what inferences you please.
DocumentCloud
I do not see "US Government" listed anywhere there. Do you?
Oh FFS, in the interest of getting people to focus, rather than simply engage in "uh-uh, yuh-huh" exchanges, here you go. Make of pages 4-86 and 95-115 what you will - there is quality and there is crap therein, and you are of course free to draw what inferences you please.
DocumentCloud
On February 8, 2021, Facebook emailed Flaherty, and Humphrey to explain how it had recently expanded its COVID-19 censorship policy to promote authoritative COVID-19 vaccine information and expanded its efforts to remove false claims on Facebook and Instagram about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and vaccines in general. F
Those would seem to be prudent measures, wouldn't they?
Encouraging social media sites to remove "false" information about a pandemic and vaccines?
I mean, RFK can say "vaccines cause autism" all he wants, but when there's no data to back that up, it'd seem prudent for a website to claim "Enough" and dump him.
EDIT: I mean....these anti-vax folks probably killed an extra 250,000 people who would have otherwise survived.
Thankfully, most of them are/were MAGAs, who can no longer vote in elections (in a Supreme irony "Own Goal" sense)
How are governments to contend with false propaganda, when they cannot answer it?Oh FFS, in the interest of getting people to focus, rather than simply engage in "uh-uh, yuh-huh" exchanges, here you go. Make of pages 4-86 and 95-115 what you will - there is quality and there is crap therein, and you are of course free to draw what inferences you please.
DocumentCloud
And cannot inform sites of that propaganda existing on their platforms?
Perhaps we should hold social media sites financially responsible for "misinformation" they allow to be posted on their own sites. So, when someone dies due to vaccine disinfo, they can get 100x damages from that social media site.
Is that a better solution here? Hold both the poster AND the platform financially responsible?
Because anyone harmed by "election fraud" allegations, and harassed by millions of followers on any social media site, could then win damages for that enabling harassment. And Zuckerberg or Musk can pay them, personally, for those posts being allowed to harm them.
If that's what you want, you're gonna see social media policing posts WAY harsher than anything the US government "suggested".
And all someone needs to prove this is that a post was false or misleading, and it misled multiple viewers to take actions they would not have otherwise. Put big dollar amounts on those damages, and do not allow individuals do hide any assets (home, retirement, any trusts, etc) in paying out damages. Any and all of it can be seized immediately by those winning the lawsuits; they can appeal, but only after 90% of the assets are turned over.
1/6 "tweets" would have transferred billions to those impacted if we held social media accountable for those lies.
How are you able to say this? There has never been any gatherings in Washington on certification day ever. The only reason those people were there was due to online platforms and the former presidents reach across them. His posts. MTG tweeting it was going to be 1776 again.
The only reason 1/6 happened was because of online platforms.
I hope Joe is paid to post his views or else he is a braindead fool who takes everything that the MSM says as fact.
Another GQP judge accepting a complaint from two red states. The social media companies didn’t bring this action as I understand it.
Activist judges…
Activist judges…
DeSantis isn't for free speech. Why do you so quickly change your opinion with him? He's against what you believe. Why dismiss that?
Perfectly stated: This judge replaced "imagined censorship by engaging in actual censorship"
And this summary explains how this plays out - pretty much what I'd already posted.
And this summary explains how this plays out - pretty much what I'd already posted.
You are right. The only problem is the government also put out false information. Fauci admitted to intentionally lying to the public at least twice. More and more information is being 'discovered' that shows the trial data for the vaccines was inaccurate. The government needs to stick to being reliable, and publishing facts. That's how they can ensure accurate information is provided.
The government should not be telling private companies what speech is allowed. It's not a slippery slope, because that slope has already been crossed.
FALSE
Information learned over time identified that "early results" were not as robust as expected, and that the virus mutated too fast for vaccines to keep up.
That's not the same as "putting out false information", dipshit.
Lmao..... you think covid was real...... hahaha.....affraid of a made up pandemic...... **** yourself with your spelling bee trophy.
Most people understand Covid "was real".
It killed 1.2M Americans, dipshit.
Like the shot prevents transmission? Those lies? People lost their entire livelihoods over standing up to that lie. The government supressed their speech and targeted individuals that stood up and questioned it or said it was wrong. Some of those people were the rank and file with doubt and others were people with expertise
Covid was a real virus. It was not a pandemic level virus and the data is coming out more and more the numbers were bullshit.
1.2 million Americans died with an average of 3.5 Comorbidities over a 2+ year span. Read that again. A population of 330,000,000 had one variable listed, on average with 3.5 other variables, for 1,200,000 deaths, over a 2 plus year time frame.
5 years ago a epidemiologist would have laughed at those numbers being considered a pandemic. The science community grabbed it heals ans took it up the ass for the democratic party. As soon as it wasn't convient, we changed definitions back and suddenly, no more pandemic.
Holy shit, you are an idiot.
Multiple publications demonstrate vaccines:
- Prevent infection
- Shorted time of infectiousness
- Lower viral shedding levels
EVERY ONE of those elements limits the spread.
you seem to think that either a vaccine has to be "100% effective", and if it's not, it must then be "0% effective". Which is the binary logic of an idiot.
Jesus....what a load of gaslighting shit.
Hospitals were overloaded with patients. PPE supplies ran out in many places.
Yeah, that's what I said.
And the actual number of "excess deaths" in the US during the pandemic is more like 1.3-1.4M
LOTS of people w/o ANY "co-morbidities" died of Covid. Many more ended up with permanent sequelae they are still dealing with.
PPE.
Blow me Joe.
We created the vast majority of the problems associated with covid. Including, but not limited to, the way cases were handled.in hospitals.
