[okreallywtf]

I think that we often get hung up on the what-ifs of censorship while misinformation is doing damage right this second.

The problem is that people don't evaluate 2 narratives equally based on the information in them. If that was the case, you would just have to make sure that for every bogus report there is a reliable report, but once misinformation takes hold it takes a lot more than that to dislodge. The analogy I think of is that when presented with a table full of junk food, its hard to get people to pay attention to the veggie platter.

This study[1] indicates more success could be had with a new narrative that doesn't just refute the misinformation, but crafts a new narrative with additional information that can dislodge the other one, like a flank attack instead a head on one. Anecdotally I've seen that work and I've also been guilty of the lazy head on approach and seen it fail.

[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170912134904.h...

[macinjosh]

IMHO, this is an incredibly authoritarian point of view. It makes the assumption that the content being censored or banned is both wrong and damaging. I am not only referring to this specific case, but the interviewee here is ostensibly someone of expertise being a professor of medicine. That doesn't mean what they say is correct but at the very least they have direct knowledge of the topic.

In the grand scheme of things, there isn't much that is universally agreed upon even in professional/academic circles.

I would submit that limiting discussion because it doesn't fit the most wideley accepted or palatable narrative is a magnitude more dangerous than instead relying on people to take in all sides and decide for themselves.

Recall how Galileo Galilei was treated. History can and does repeat itself.

[kiba]

IMHO, this is an incredibly authoritarian point of view.

Is it authoritarian if misinformation are being spread?

[CyanBird]

It is always authoritarian, yes. People do have the right to be wrong and make mistakes, that's part of an indivials personal sovereignty

That said, having tens of thousands die bringing innocent people with them to the grave is a matter of public policy and the very reason why governments are not direct democracies but republics instead

I am happy that this video was removed, not because I trust YouTube, but because I don't want to see people continue to die needlessly. Governments have other tools to provide economic sustenance to those that require it. And no, I won't go to the cinema, a mall or a restaurant simply "because they are open" as I don't have the brain of a child to risk myself and my family for it

[michaelborromeo]

To get people to eat veggies, sure you can ban the production and sale of junk food.

I prefer to live in a world where both are available and the preferred solution is education about the effects of junk food.

[unethical_ban]

There are many actors that want to convince you something bad, is good. Historically, cigarettes, sugar, even cocaine were advertised as healthy, or as better substitutes to things. Hell, even grain is still pushed by industry and government, when low-carb has a lot of evidence backing it.

Guess what happened when we decided "telling people sugar is great for kids" was bad? The government now regulates the information people are provided regarding nutritional content in food.

Speech isn't so easy, which is why the analogy still doesn't work.

[CyanBird]

I do agree, I wish we could live in such a world, but we indeed do not. That's why economics professionals receive nobel prices for their investigations into nudge economics and imperfect trade systems

Cows are not perfect spheres, and people are not perfect rational agents and that won't change for the foreseeable future so policy makers need to handle things with their avaliable policy tools, not the tools they wish they had

[tlear]

Should probably ban NHK to be broadcast in US while we are at it, maybe compel ISPs to do it, Great American Firewall we can call it. Japan not implementing any sort of western style lockdown at all. Ids going to school, people moving around shops open..

[zupreme]

And THAT is exactly the issue. "Misinformation" uses the prefix "Mis", which is "...a prefix applied to various parts of speech, meaning “ill,” “mistaken,” “wrong,” “wrongly,” “incorrectly,” or simply negating: mistrial; misprint; mistrust."

As the Covid-19 situation, prognoses, diagnoses, testing procedures, and far more are PUBLICLY ADMITTED to be flawed, it is RIDICULOUS to silence ANYONE, let alone legitimate experts, even if they are engaging in WILD speculation.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH ONLY MATTERS WHEN THE SPEECH IS DISLIKED.

Think over that...deeply...speculation and experimentation may save your life....or not.

wa inna Allahu Al Alim

[CyanBird]

Oh that's very much true

But as stated this is not a freedom of speech issue as YouTube is not the government and nobody is entitled to their private platform