| I have not responded without listening to what he said, I followed him for quite some time to see what exactly he had to say. I do not like censoring by big tech as well, but when they take down outright lies which actually get viral and change people's opinions, I am no longer sure. Nuanced facts, data does not go viral. Tweets with controversial information do. Serious side-effects, risk-benefit calculations, are very nuanced and take much more effort to bring up and share [1]. He presents a very one-sides story, every single day. That is not helpful. He took very selective parts of news which aligns with his opinions and tweeted just that. Thanks to twitter's censoring, I can't even share those :facepalm: but you can look up archived data [2]. It is not even a single person, they have a pretty good group doing it every single day (Peter McCullough, I am sure you heard of him) [3] [4]. Also look at how viral this stuff gets [5]. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29749381 2. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/mrna-technology-... 3. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pilot-vaccinefalse... 4. https://twitter.com/P_McCulloughMD/status/148679283709416244... 5. https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1486792837094162442 |
I am fairly biased though -- I would rather 100 dangerous falsehoods get shared (even if it results in a lot of people believing wrong things) than a even 1 true fact get censored and that puts me in the weird position of often defending people and takes I disagree with and dislike.