If you are referring to the neuro-radiologist Scott Atlas who has no professional qualifications in public health, virology, or infectious disease control, then yes, he is an unreliable source on public health, virology, and infectious disease control.
2 Likes
I don’t need Big Tech to tell me that what comes from the Corona Virus Task force is questionable. Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci were both on the task force. As soon as they started contradicting the President’s wishes for messaging, they were asked not to speak. Dr. Fauci has also publicly criticized the ads put out by the President that use his image with regards to the Corona Virus. Anyone that knows science knows there is no possible way for a vaccine by election day. I say that there might be an approved vaccine either by the end of 2020, or early 2021, but it won’t be widely available for a few months past that. In addition, once its available, it will take at least 6 months for there to be enough distribution for “normal” to return to pre-pandemic standards. Again, I don’t need big tech to tell me this. For me, its just common sense based on my education and up bringing. At this point, I’m also not sure I can trust the CDC as I think they are being biased by the messaging the President wants relayed, not factual truth.
I am not a fan of Dr Fauchi either. He has said some questionable and insane things and contradicted himself a lot.
But should everything he has said be scrubbed from existance? By multiple companies?
So Google can take down videos from doctors… Multiple videos? Many of whom are explaining the pressure to miscategorize the deaths due to covid? Big Tech decides that, uniformally? We do not deserve to know? Wow.
I do not want to live in that world. Sorry. They should not be the gate keepers of knowledge and be able to erase things from the net. In the 21st century, that is akin to book burning…
1 Like
I’m interested in this, what protections? Are these protections offered quid pro quo or are in general thought to be a good idea to provide to all the sites?
As far as I understand there’s no requirement for sites to be equidistant or fair, if that was true what would you do with sites like foxnews.com, breitbart do you remove their protections too? It’s a dangerous game asking to remove protections because you claim somebody is biased.
1 Like
Twitter and Facebook and Youtube and other tech companies have special legal protections that keep them from getting sued.
Essentially, they said that they cannot possibly police everything that gets posted on their sites. They claim that they are not content providers like CBS, Fox, CNN, etc.
The news agencies can get sued. In fact, many of them are settling with that teen who they lied about and tried to ruin his life. An entire video of an entire incident was online… They chose to take short clips and make up a new narrative to make the kid out to be a racist, when they knew what the entire video showed.
Anyway, that is not the issue on this thread… Just an example that lying and deceit have consequences… The fact is that the news channels can be sued.
Google, Facebook, etc. want to shape the news, but only in 1 political direction… Never in the other way…
Even more damning is when execs of some of these companies are caught on video and/or audio admitting their bias and their plans to harm the other side with their company’s recources in the future…
At that point, they are more akin to content creators. Yet, they still think they are entitled to the same legal protections.
Today, the presidential campaign’s Twitter acct is locked because they posted about this Biden story.
That is messed up…
I saw no equivalent action when the media and people in our own government tried to overthrow the president with lies, made up stories and endless anonymous sources… Last week, more information came out finally proving that this whole Russian conspiracy was a hoax started by Hillary. The head of the CIA made notes showing that he informed Obama of her plans years ago… When those stories originally came out, where was Facebook putting a halt on them until they could be fact checked?
I get that most here hate the president. But what is most depressing is that some here defend what is going on, while others see nothing wrong with it.
But, if this happened in reverse… Damn if there would not be some upset people then…
If they can be sued for the content they provide they would have more incentives to remove Trumps lies and “doctors” opinions about Covid. I could see then Twitter sued for distributing misinformation about Covid.
Funny that you should play this game, if Obama suggested he should have 4 mandates or not accept the result of election, or if… insert here the thousands of insane things Trump said.
The videos from those doctors are not Trump. Hell, those 2 ER doctors from California were talking about all sorts of stuff. That was not Trump…
So, you are saying now that Youtube, Facebook, Google, etc get to decide medical policy when it comes to news… Before doctors do?
Just like when Twitter marked a tweet from Trump as false earlier this year (the 1st time they ever did so)… When he claimed voter fraud occurs.
I posted about that on this forum, and even gave examples. In the last month, I have seen numerous stories with even more voter fraud happening…
Twitters first action in fact checking was to mark that tweet as false. They were actually proven wrong immediately by so, so many examples. Did they rescend their mistake? No.
Guess who Twitter put in charge of making those decisions… A guy who has made some horrendous public comments about Republicans publicly in the past. I posted about it here months back, and gave examples of what he said. Yea, he isn’t biased… 
When we see lies from the other side… Where are the fact checkers then?
Anyway, I am not going to say I like everything about Trump. But it is obvious that the sheer hatred of the man by people here blind you to the hipocrisy and the wrongness that is occurring.
I think they have a right to decide what’s on their platform. Don’t they? They can be wrong, people and companies have the right to be wrong, for what I care Facebook could ban any information about Earth being a spheroid. It’s within their rights.
That’s a general cop out of people who support Trump “I don’t really like him, but…”
“Share hatred” – it’s not as much hatred as disgust (at least in my case, I don’t talk for other people) and not wanting vapid and incompetent leaders. But on the other hand, what is wrong with you if you don’t see Trump for what he is and you think such a disgusting and incompetent person can advance your causes. What makes you if not immoral? Don’t talk to me about hypocrisy…
It’s my last reply, I’m tired of walls of texts, I will let you talk alone.
This thread is not to talk about Trump policies or democratic policies… We will NEVER agree… This thread is about the hipocrisy and the unbelievable actions of big tech. Apparently most of you here do not see a problem with this.
Ok, I am done…
1 Like
1 Like
Would be interesting to get a legal view of that!
My gut feel is this is an iCloud or Google hack, and the ‘laptop left at the repair shop’ story is a way of making this public.
@Mistershipwreck the point is that the Post story is full of inaccuracies and misstatements, and refers to dubious material obtained questionably.
In fact, the Ukranian prosecutor was removed because he was corrupt and not investigating anyone, including Burisma. This is common knowledge and easily verified. The Post story is an inept attempt at an “October surprise” planted by Giuliani and aimed at confusing voters.
The only bias here is yours.
3 Likes
With all due respect Leo, what inaccuracies? Because Biden claims them to be?
I actually typed a longer response to talk about this massive problem Biden has. But, I edited it because that is NOT what the thread is about… I’m not here to argue about whether Biden is a crook or honest… It NEVER was… We could debate that all day long and get no where…
It is about the unequalness of these Big Tech platforms who enjoy legal protection but do pick sides during a presidential election. Obvious, willful, unequal sides on a public platform… Yet, still deny it and offer excuses when its out there for all to see…
The people deserve to know about this 3 weeks before an election. That is all I am saying. There have been thousands of made up stories about Trump and Russia… We now know they were all made up… But ,because the mainstream news doesn’t cover anything favorable for the president, a large portion of the population don’t even know this.
Which one of those stories got stopped and fact checked by Big Tech? Any of them? None have.
Sorry, but the excuses don’t cover that this only goes 1 way.
Now that Twitter/Facebook pulled the story, the news agencies are using that as an excuse that the story is fake… It’s a big circle.
And, it’s sad to see the apathy here, or the encouragement that I am the one that is biased.
Big Tech has buried a story and made it impossible for Americans to read the facts and make up their own mind. That is not ok.
2 Likes
I’m leaving this here and then closing the topic. Before buying this bogus Post story hook line and sinker, read this thread. It’s written by a respected expert in disinformation - not a Biden supporter, nor a US voter. Just an expert.
3 Likes