3 ms·
What exactly constituted a violation of a COVID policy?
by whycome 1y ago
What exactly constituted a violation of a COVID policy?
- jimt1234 1y ago[flagged]
- perihelions 1y agoAccording to Google's censorship algorithm, Michael Osterholm's podcast (famous epidemiologist and, at the time, a member of President Biden's own gold-star covid-19 advisory panel). https://x.com/cidrap/status/1420482621696618496 https://x.com/cidrap/status/1420482621696618496 ("Our Osterholm Update podcast episode (Jul 22) was removed for “medical misinformation.”" (2021)) Most ironic thing I've ever seen. I still recall it perfectly, though it's been four years. Never, ever trust censorship algorithms or the people who control them: they are just dumb parrots that suppress all discussion of an unwanted topic, without thought or reason.
- delichon 1y agoMy wake up moment was when they not only took down a Covid debate with a very well qualified virologist, but also removed references to it in the Google search index, not just for the YouTube link.
- miltonlost 1y ago[flagged]
- delichon 1y agoI am not comfortable letting Google make that decision for me. You are?
- theossuary 1y agoWe lost that choice when google became a monopoly. What I'm not comfortable with is preventing a private company from moderating their product.
- janalsncm 1y agoYour line of reasoning is mixing “is” and “aught”. The whole thread is about what aught to be. I doubt most people want Google to be a monopoly.
- barbacoa 1y agoGoogle went so far as to scan people's private google drives for copies of the documentary 'plandemic' and delete them.
- potsandpans 1y agoCan you please provide evidence? I'm not saying I don't believe you. It's just... extraordinary claims etc
- barbacoa 1y agohttps://reclaimthenet.org/google-drive-takes-down-user-file-plandemic https://reclaimthenet.org/google-drive-takes-down-user-file-...
- tbrownaw 1y agoThe sounds like the particular file in question was set to public and being widely shared around. Which is rather different than scanning actual private files.
- carlosjobim 1y agoEvery opinion different from the opinion of "authorities". They documented it here: https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/managing-harmful-vaccine-content-youtube/ https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/managing-harmful-vaccin... From the two links in the post, Google fleshes it out in great detail, with many examples of forbidden thought.
- miltonlost 1y ago[flagged]
- mapontosevenths 1y ago[flagged]
- immibis 1y agoShouting "fire" in a crowded theater being illegal was used to make it illegal to oppose the draft (Schenck v. United States). So actually, since opposing the draft is legal, shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is legal too.
- mapontosevenths 1y agoYou would be charged with inciting a riot, reckless homicide, etc regardless of the actual words you shouted to cause the deaths, but I see your point.
- jjk166 1y agoThat's quite the legal theory.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- trollbridge 1y agoYep, and that's what Brandenburg v. Ohio enshrined.
- zobzu 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- PaulKeeble 1y agoA lot of channels had to avoid even saying the word Covid. I only saw it return recently to use at the end of last year. There were a variety of channels banned that shouldn't have been such as some talking about Long Covid.
- doom2 1y agoNow you see channels avoiding saying "Gaza" or "genocide". I haven't seen any proof platforms are censoring at least some content related to Israel but I wouldn't be surprised.
- potsandpans 1y agoSaying lab leak was true