4 ms·
"I heard about Ivermectin for the first time this week" This is what is extremely disturbing. This result of the control of information occurring in our socie
by 13years 5y ago
"I heard about Ivermectin for the first time this week"
This is what is extremely disturbing. This result of the control of information occurring in our society.
What's more, it is not just the literal control, but the social conditioning. Within the group of those who have known for a long time, there is a reluctance to share that with anyone else as society will apply any number of taboo labels to such individuals to make them outcasts.
- manwe150 5y agoI heard the earth was flat only a few months ago too—it does not make either claim any more likely to be true. And FWIW, I have seen many ivermectin articles on HN (check my past comments), and all seem to say roughly the same thing, so they get rather annoying in my feed at this point.
- 13years 5y ago"I heard the earth was flat only a few months ago too—it does not make either claim any more likely to be true." It is not about the validity, it is that you can not even evaluate that which you have not heard. The level of censorship varies greatly by media and platform.
- manwe150 5y agoI would make the claim to be constantly evaluating the validity of statements I have not heard, and may never hear. This may sound like nonsense, but the flip-side of censorship is not excess of information but curation. If my news sources are trustworthy, then they are filtering useless information for me, while hopefully not belying my trust by censoring important information. To the other poster, my argument was supposed to be obvious: it was intended to be a simplified example to elucidate concerns by comparison.
- pbak 5y agoNice "motte-and-bailey" argument. But a little transparent, no ?