4 ms·
The COVID vaccines have saved many lives. They've also caused some adverse reactions in some folks. Should people be allowed to discuss this? Is this reckless
by msandford 3y ago
The COVID vaccines have saved many lives. They've also caused some adverse reactions in some folks.
Should people be allowed to discuss this? Is this reckless or responsible? Why? What happens if the science changes? Who ensures that the folks in charge stay current?
- betaby 3y agoPoint is that some Canadian provinces had a literal curfew and any discussion of it was absolutely shut down.
- jpalawaga 3y agoIt depends what you mean by "discuss." Do you mean, go on live TV news program and tell a bunch of half-truths such that people walk away with with the wrong impression? Do you mean, two people chatting in a forum? Similarly, should Facebook be able to promote blatantly false information? Not pen it mind you, but "simply link?" -- at what point are Facebook's (and YouTube's, etc) algorithms responsible for curating and disseminating information, and why would I think that free speech laws should apply in that scenario? So yeah, I can throw up a smoke screen of questions to ask, but I still think overall the vector is positive, not negative.
- msandford 3y agoYeah I understand the sentiment there. Now fast forward a few years to when a new government is elected that perhaps doesn't reflect your sensibilities. Now they can use this apparatus to promote their version of the truth (might actually be false) and to suppress yours (which might actually be true). What do you do now? How do you even mount a criticism of this entity? They'll likely work very hard to suppress your criticism and label you a misinformer.