I don't think it's silliness; I actually find it quite concerning. In recent times, there has been lots of evidence about how the government and social media c

I don't think it's silliness; I actually find it quite concerning. In recent times, there has been lots of evidence about how the government and social media companies have been colluding together to "prevent the spread of misinformation" [0]. They have been very transparent about this, and discuss it openly [1]. However, it must not be up to the government to determine what is or is not misinformation - this transposes to government censorship in the worst case, and prevents a healthy marketplace of ideas in the best case. In the case of the "Hunter Biden Laptop" story (which was misrepresented often), it wasn't Facebook deciding on its own to censor it - it was at the behest of the government. You don't know what you don't know. What knowledge are you missing because it could never be shown, because it wasn't shown to you? In the last few years, I've seriously worried about this. I've had to diversify my media intake as an attempt to mitigate this, even when the reporting itself was of worse quality in non-standard media channels. (In many cases, I found it to be of higher quality, which was surprising). I would recommend the same to you, because, especially in this case, you won't know what you're missing unless you look for it. [0]https://reclaimthenet.org/fb-cdc-misinfo-collusion/ https://reclaimthenet.org/fb-cdc-misinfo-collusion/ [1]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/07/15/psaki_were_flagging_problematic_posts_for_facebook_that_spread_disinformation.html# https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/07/15/psaki_wer...!