3 ms·

If you look at the twitter files released by Matt Taibi it indeed confirms there is collusion among former twitter and numerous government entities. It’s no con

If you look at the twitter files released by Matt Taibi it indeed confirms there is collusion among former twitter and numerous government entities. It’s no conspiracy, there’s straight emails of the government asking for XYZ list of accounts to be suppressed. https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/dec/14/editorial-twitter-files-expose-incestuous-collusio/ https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/dec/14/editorial-t... You further had the suppression of the Hunter biden laptop in DMs and tweets, because government entities stated it was Russian disinformation, while after the convenient time of election cycle, they admit it’s real. What’s the consequence of the intelligence community signing a document stating that it was truly some subversion campaign by Russia, when it was actually a lie to get social media companies to remove politically damning evidence? https://nypost.com/2022/11/21/cbs-confirms-hunter-biden-laptop-is-real-769-days-after-post-broke-story/amp/ https://nypost.com/2022/11/21/cbs-confirms-hunter-biden-lapt... I fully hear the balanced argument you’re proposing, and to some extent agree, but both sides currently have different sets of blinders on as to what’s reality, and that to me is a scary scenario

autoexec 4y ago
The fact that governments do actually engage in censorship doesn't mean that everyone who posts about the real or possible risks of the covid vaccines get their posts censored or that people whose posts about the risks of covid vaccines were removed, were removed because of goverment censorship. Even in the case of twitter. Here: https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1536697529454272512 https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1536697529454272512 There's a tweet about the risks of covid vaccinations. If the government, twitter, or both were censoring discussion of the risks of covid vaccinations how does that exist? How do the countless other uncensored and easily searchable posts that do the same thing exist? Isn't it more likely that if a post about the risks of covid vaccinations does get removed that it's for a reason other than because of an attempt to hide information about, and prevent discussion of, the risks of covid vaccinations? Who do you think is telling people they can't talk about the risks? We're doing it. It's talked about all the time everywhere. It's researched every day. The media reports on it to the public. Nobody thinks that there aren't any risks. Whatever oppression exists in the world, "preventing people from talking about or learning about the risks of covid vaccines" is not an example of it.
- Baloo 4y ago
  Particularly at the time of the vaccine rollout, there absolutely was a huge effort across many platforms to mock, silence and ultimately censor individuals. Whether or not there was government collusion, I obviously can't say, but I'd hardly be surprised given the close relationships between media outlets and government officials. Clearly everyone wasn't being banned, some things were being allowed, but personally I think the conversation was being steered/herded in a way that made one particular point of view more prominent and minimised exposure to alternatives. For example, I was banned from Reddit world news for simply sharing a science.org article about some of the potential vaccination side effects: https://www.science.org/content/article/rare-cases-coronavirus-vaccines-may-cause-long-covid-symptoms https://www.science.org/content/article/rare-cases-coronavir... You have been banned for posting content that downplays or mocks necessary public health measures to combat the coronavirus pandemic, such as taking vaccines or wearing masks in the comments section. Such comments violate this subreddit's rule against offensive content and reddit's guideline against harmful content: Note that health misinformation, namely falsifiable health information that encourages or poses a significant risk of physical harm to the reader, also violates the Rule. I can't contest this ban and it's permanent.
- soundnote 4y ago
  > There's a tweet about the risks of covid vaccinations. If the government, twitter, or both were censoring discussion of the risks of covid vaccinations how does that exist? How do the countless other uncensored and easily searchable posts that do the same thing exist? Censorship doesn't have to be perfect to be real and to have real effects.
vgt 4y ago
Still waiting for Giuliani to release that hunter Biden laptop evidence he's been claiming in his possession
xcrunner529 4y ago
[dead]

autoexec 4y ago

The fact that governments do actually engage in censorship doesn't mean that everyone who posts about the real or possible risks of the covid vaccines get their posts censored or that people whose posts about the risks of covid vaccines were removed, were removed because of goverment censorship. Even in the case of twitter. Here: https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1536697529454272512 https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1536697529454272512 There's a tweet about the risks of covid vaccinations. If the government, twitter, or both were censoring discussion of the risks of covid vaccinations how does that exist? How do the countless other uncensored and easily searchable posts that do the same thing exist? Isn't it more likely that if a post about the risks of covid vaccinations does get removed that it's for a reason other than because of an attempt to hide information about, and prevent discussion of, the risks of covid vaccinations? Who do you think is telling people they can't talk about the risks? We're doing it. It's talked about all the time everywhere. It's researched every day. The media reports on it to the public. Nobody thinks that there aren't any risks. Whatever oppression exists in the world, "preventing people from talking about or learning about the risks of covid vaccines" is not an example of it.

Baloo 4y ago
Particularly at the time of the vaccine rollout, there absolutely was a huge effort across many platforms to mock, silence and ultimately censor individuals. Whether or not there was government collusion, I obviously can't say, but I'd hardly be surprised given the close relationships between media outlets and government officials. Clearly everyone wasn't being banned, some things were being allowed, but personally I think the conversation was being steered/herded in a way that made one particular point of view more prominent and minimised exposure to alternatives. For example, I was banned from Reddit world news for simply sharing a science.org article about some of the potential vaccination side effects: https://www.science.org/content/article/rare-cases-coronavirus-vaccines-may-cause-long-covid-symptoms https://www.science.org/content/article/rare-cases-coronavir... You have been banned for posting content that downplays or mocks necessary public health measures to combat the coronavirus pandemic, such as taking vaccines or wearing masks in the comments section. Such comments violate this subreddit's rule against offensive content and reddit's guideline against harmful content: Note that health misinformation, namely falsifiable health information that encourages or poses a significant risk of physical harm to the reader, also violates the Rule. I can't contest this ban and it's permanent.
soundnote 4y ago
> There's a tweet about the risks of covid vaccinations. If the government, twitter, or both were censoring discussion of the risks of covid vaccinations how does that exist? How do the countless other uncensored and easily searchable posts that do the same thing exist? Censorship doesn't have to be perfect to be real and to have real effects.

vgt 4y ago

Still waiting for Giuliani to release that hunter Biden laptop evidence he's been claiming in his possession

xcrunner529 4y ago

[dead]