4 ms·

> China’s cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19. Beijing, however, continues to hinder the global

> China’s cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19. Beijing, however, continues to hinder the global investigation, resist sharing information and blame other countries, including the United States. These actions reflect, in part, China’s government’s own uncertainty about where an investigation could lead Crazy how, just a few months ago this would have resulted in a ban on several social media platforms. Nothing changed in the meantime, other than the presidential administration...

mc32 5y ago
This! It's a travesty that this occurred. Speech was severely censored on real, serious topics, to drive a narrative to hurt a presidential candidate and this was deemed acceptable by great amounts of people. If this had happened the other way around, it would have been a scandal as big as Watergate. It's truly sad that happened. But it highlights how untrustworthy the "4th estate" is. They are vested interests and should not be trusted any longer and should have their stake revoked. No one should take them seriously for anything.
- momdad420 5y ago
  "it would have been a scandal as big as Watergate." Wow, absolutely no hyperbole here. What a stupid take. There was no hit job. Trump's a moron. Anything he did at all in response to the virus was reactionary and too little too late. Ban travel from China. Ok. Oh look, the virus is coming over from Italy. "narrative to hurt a political candidate" give me a fucking break. I would've loved someone to go hard on China. We didn't get it. We got lazy inaction, straight up denial and racist diatribes upon baseless claims without any precautions Also journalists aren't a monolith. What in the fuck are you smoking.
  - yeahrightokpal 5y ago
    Good job refuting the central point effectively without resulting in mudslinging, champ!
- myko 5y ago
  > to drive a narrative to hurt a presidential candidate He did that on his own by being completely ineffective against COVID-19 and making the situation much worse. There is a reason his supporters tend to be antivax and propose hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin over the vaccines. If trump had focused less on the racism and more on effective measures to combat the virus journalists would not have dumped on him.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
Cite a source for that claim. That does not match my experience.
- fuckcensorship 5y ago
  From a quick Google search: > “In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps,” spokeswoman Dani Lever said. “We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/05/27/facebook-covid-man-made/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/05/27/faceboo...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - zug_zug 5y ago
    I searched and saw that too. However banning the article isn't the same as banning users who post the article, so I was curious if there was a source for that.
  - Jordrok 5y ago
    Literally nothing in the quote posted by the OP, or the report in question claims "that COVID-19 is man made". In fact, it's doing the exact opposite. It's saying that it is impossible to know for certain how the initial human infection occurred without further information, but that most agencies agreed that the virus was not genetically engineered or developed as a weapon. Details matter.
- bananabiscuit 5y ago
  While saying that they might know where the virus came from seems to be allowed, saying for example “I think China created the virus via gain of function research” would still get you banned from Facebook today according to these rules: https://m.facebook.com/help/230764881494641 https://m.facebook.com/help/230764881494641
erdos4d 5y ago
Where? Can you cite any source for this?
PretzelPirate 5y ago
Clearly the difference is that people stating this a few months ago we’re just making accusations without any real data. This is a government assessment of experts who have attempted to get the data and can then make a reasonable conclusion based on China’s behavior. If you had posted the US Intelligence Community’s Assessment on social media, I doubt you’d have the problem of getting banned.

mc32 5y ago

This! It's a travesty that this occurred. Speech was severely censored on real, serious topics, to drive a narrative to hurt a presidential candidate and this was deemed acceptable by great amounts of people. If this had happened the other way around, it would have been a scandal as big as Watergate. It's truly sad that happened. But it highlights how untrustworthy the "4th estate" is. They are vested interests and should not be trusted any longer and should have their stake revoked. No one should take them seriously for anything.

momdad420 5y ago
"it would have been a scandal as big as Watergate." Wow, absolutely no hyperbole here. What a stupid take. There was no hit job. Trump's a moron. Anything he did at all in response to the virus was reactionary and too little too late. Ban travel from China. Ok. Oh look, the virus is coming over from Italy. "narrative to hurt a political candidate" give me a fucking break. I would've loved someone to go hard on China. We didn't get it. We got lazy inaction, straight up denial and racist diatribes upon baseless claims without any precautions Also journalists aren't a monolith. What in the fuck are you smoking.
- yeahrightokpal 5y ago
  Good job refuting the central point effectively without resulting in mudslinging, champ!
myko 5y ago
> to drive a narrative to hurt a presidential candidate He did that on his own by being completely ineffective against COVID-19 and making the situation much worse. There is a reason his supporters tend to be antivax and propose hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin over the vaccines. If trump had focused less on the racism and more on effective measures to combat the virus journalists would not have dumped on him.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

Cite a source for that claim. That does not match my experience.

fuckcensorship 5y ago
From a quick Google search: > “In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps,” spokeswoman Dani Lever said. “We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/05/27/facebook-covid-man-made/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/05/27/faceboo...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- zug_zug 5y ago
  I searched and saw that too. However banning the article isn't the same as banning users who post the article, so I was curious if there was a source for that.
- Jordrok 5y ago
  Literally nothing in the quote posted by the OP, or the report in question claims "that COVID-19 is man made". In fact, it's doing the exact opposite. It's saying that it is impossible to know for certain how the initial human infection occurred without further information, but that most agencies agreed that the virus was not genetically engineered or developed as a weapon. Details matter.
bananabiscuit 5y ago
While saying that they might know where the virus came from seems to be allowed, saying for example “I think China created the virus via gain of function research” would still get you banned from Facebook today according to these rules: https://m.facebook.com/help/230764881494641 https://m.facebook.com/help/230764881494641

erdos4d 5y ago

Where? Can you cite any source for this?

PretzelPirate 5y ago

Clearly the difference is that people stating this a few months ago we’re just making accusations without any real data. This is a government assessment of experts who have attempted to get the data and can then make a reasonable conclusion based on China’s behavior. If you had posted the US Intelligence Community’s Assessment on social media, I doubt you’d have the problem of getting banned.