YouTube has banned Sky News Australia for a week due to Covid misinformation.

[dj230]

9 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Wrong yet again.  I suggest you read up on things:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230

https://itif.org/publications/2021/02/22/how-other-countries-have-dealt-intermediary-liability

https://genevasolutions.news/science-tech/a-section-230-for-eu-tech-companies

Once you have read those - then this summarises the issues fairly well.

https://socialmediahq.com/if-social-media-companies-are-publishers-and-not-platforms-that-changes-everything/

I am not talking about liability, I am talking about what they choose to censor.

[mcambl61]

On 8/13/2021 at 11:42 AM, PBS said:

The drugs mentioned are not approved in Australia for prevention / treatment of Covid 19, plus one of the presenters repeatedly, Alan Jones (been successfully sued for slander more than once) deliberately misrepresented statistical finding in UK regarding Covid matters. Why an alleged news channel is endeavouring to promote drugs or content contrary to Australian government official advise I do not know. Sky News in Australia often represents right of centre opinion as fact, they are a disgrace.

So, you are a leftist and you want to decide what information or views are acceptable. 

 

Sadly, leftists think they have that right. And they run ninety percent of the media. 

[AussieBob]

8 hours ago, dj230 said:

I am not talking about liability, I am talking about what they choose to censor.

You clearly did not read what the issue is - and that is why you have no understanding about what you are saying.  Over and Out.

[PBS]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

So, you are a leftist and you want to decide what information or views are acceptable. 

Sadly, leftists think they have that right. And they run ninety percent of the media. 

No, not a 'leftist', last time I voted was for a moderate Conservative government. You come across as an American, a country where 'free speech' is abused to express idiotic conspiracy theories / misinformation without any ownership of responsibility for negative outcomes e.g. Trump and Co.

[BlueSphinx]

On 8/13/2021 at 9:31 AM, Smithydog said:

One definition of “Fake News” is “News that is factually flawed or lacks supporting evidence”. I am confident that there are countless others and therein lies part of the problem.

The term “fake news” has been “irredeemably polarized” in that it has been co-opted by people with agendas, fixed points of view and especially political figures, to refer to any information put out by sources that do not support their partisan positions or their agenda. 

I read some good points in the following article. It talked about the challenge we face, amongst others, on “Fake News” being how we determine Misinformation from Disinformation.

https://www.verizon.com/info/technology/fake-news-on-social-media/

Misinformation is false information that one spreads because they believe it to be true. Disinformation is false information that one spreads even though they know it to be false. They must display an intent to try and deceive people.

Both types can achieve the same result. The Disinformation types are no better than conmen or fraudsters and deserve our ridicule. Their efforts for their own personal gain, only disrupt the legitimate messages from getting proper and effective airtime. 

Opinion Hosts are a natural result of people wanting to hear their own message on TV, despite any thought as to its actual accuracy. The hosts and channels know it will generate ratings and improved viewer numbers. Crafting their messages to appeal to their viewer bases shows intent.

I personally believe they are a major part of the problem on both sides of the debate, Sky News included, amongst many others. Until such hosts are held accountable for what they say on the air, how they say it, and how they later retract inaccuracies, I fear the debate will continue and won't be surprised to see more of the punitive action like what social media platforms have been doing. Taking away their viewer base seems to be the only way they will make changes.

 

In follow-up of @Smithydog's valuable contribution.

Dr Geert Vanden Bossche is a somewhat controversial figure, as he has been relentlessly warning - against the common narrative - for the disastrous consequences of mass-vaccination during a pandemic. But this latest contribution of his on his blog, will be appreciated on 'both sides of the fence' as he provides here some very common sense guideline principles on how to not lose your sanity in that constantly changing and highly confusing landscape of covid-information.

Attached 3 excerpts from his highly recommended article on that subject:

Some guidance to separating the wheat from the chaff
by Geert Vanden Bossche - 15 August 2021

#1 - Many of us are now becoming increasingly confused by the wealth of messages and news they are continuously receiving on the evolution of this pandemic and on how to react.
The level of contradiction has sometimes grown to an extent that even the veracity of scientific research and publications has been questioned. If you have been following the science sections of several popular mainstream media or alternative news outlets over the last few months, you will recognize that views and interpretations on mass vaccination campaigns, and all the flanking measures that derive from it, have now turned this initiative into a highly controversial topic.

#2 - There is no single publication, no single review, no single brilliant mind that has the analysis, let alone the solution, at hand. It’s all about collecting pieces of a complex puzzle and putting them together. If you have only a few pieces, some of which don’t even have to match, you can easily come up with several proposals on how the final image of the puzzle would look like. However, the more pieces you collect, and especially the more they also match each other, the narrower the number of options and the more one will be able to fine-tune predictions on how this final image will look like. If one truly takes the effort of taking a deep dive in the different disciplines that color this pandemic to first find the most critical pieces and to then complement those with additional matching pieces, it is possible to make fairly accurate predictions on how the pandemic is going to evolve. This doesn’t even require to collect every single molecular detail. When it comes to solving complex problems, I’ve always been much inspired by the following statement from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, stated by Sherlock Holmes:  ‘When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth’.

#3 - 10 guiding principles (on which he further expands in the article):
 
#1 - Don’t pay as much attention to the opinion of silo-thinkers as you do to opinions from experts capable of drawing from the following fields: Immunology, Vaccinology, Virology, Evolutionary Epidemiology.

#2 - Along the same lines, don’t pay too much attention to the ‘expert’ opinions of those who are (but here, I’d now better use ‘past tense’, i.e., ‘were’) too eager to show up all the time on TV shows and mainstream broadcasting media for there is no expert who can, at the same time, be a spotlight hog and do all the hard work required to analyze and digest the current evolution of this pandemic, not just in their small place, but also globally.

#3 - Don’t pay any attention to views, opinions from experts who have a conflict of interest and whose viewpoints may, therefore, be affected by elements that are not purely science-driven.

#4 - Ignore experts who fiercely refuse to revisit their opinions for fear of shame or losing face.

#5 - DYOR: Do your own research to find out about people’s background and the veracity of the messages they are conveying.

#6 - Along the lines of 5.: Do ignore fact checkers. It's obvious that their scientific illiteracy does not allow them to even understand the basics of the dynamics of this pandemic, let alone to validate what experts are saying.

$7 - Don’t waste your time paying attention to the rhetoric of experts, politicians or any other person who tends to push some mainstream judgements about vaccinated as opposed to nonvaccinated people.

#8 - Don’t engage with people who support conspiracy theories. These theories are complex, endless, uncertain, not as waterproof as people may try to make you believe and, most importantly... will prevent you from sleeping at night.

#9 - Look at trustworthy sources and information as a vaccine skeptic, but not as an anti-vaxxer.

#10 - If you feel completely overwhelmed by the abundance of information and contradictory messages and have not the energy, resources or capacity to digest it, don’t allow yourself to fall prey to resignation.

The full article can be accessed on his blog >
https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/post/some-guidance-to-separating-the-wheat-from-the-chaff?postId=6199445b-8cc1-43a9-bb96-afc5ce537719

[Smithydog]

46 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

#6 - Along the lines of 5.: Do ignore fact checkers. It's obvious that their scientific illiteracy does not allow them to even understand the basics of the dynamics of this pandemic, let alone to validate what experts are saying.

 

A very good appraisal by Dr Geert Vanden Bossche on the subject and some excellent advice. Personally, I have experienced a variety of opinions on his Articles.

The only point he raised that I would say I have a different opinion slightly on is the one on Fact Checkers. Yes, a Fact Checker is often not a degree qualified and experienced expert in the field. However the best individuals and groups rely on specialists in the medical field, like ones suggested by Dr Geert, to provide the scientific verification or not of a fact. 

They also use actual peer reviewed scientific papers to support their findings. The bad ones, especially those biased, do not do the same. 

So if you are going to use a Fact Checker to support your argument, try and make sure they are as independent as possible as a start. Read their check reports and see what they used as verification. See if they stick to facts and not passion in their argument.

The best fact checks, if you choose to use them against the advice of Dr Geert, are those written dispassionately, use and quote real experts in the actual subject they are checking and demonstrate no bias in who they check. They fact check everyone!

[JerseyBKK]

On 8/12/2021 at 11:23 PM, js89 said:

I've yet to see a properly designed and peer-reviewed study, published by a reputable medical journal that shows that Ivermectin is better than no treatment or placebo.

Open discussion is good. Promoting an unproven treatment that lulls credulous people into a false sense of security is not. Covid disinformation is not benign: it comes with consequences that kill some of those who choose to believe it. 

You won't see such a study because those cost millions of $$$ and Invermectin is cheap. Meanwhile next year Big Pharma will probably make over $300 BILLION from Covid vaccines. Big Pharma and their lackeys in government and media have $300 Billion reasons to suppress any discussions about any cheap alternatives to their vaccines.

[JerseyBKK]

Interesting things are happening in India but no media coverage.

Full story: https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/indias-ivermectin-blackout/article_e3db8f46-f942-11eb-9eea-77d5e2519364.html

 

Uttar Pradesh on Ivermectin:  Population 240 Million [4.9% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 26

COVID Daily Deaths: 3

The United States off Ivermectin: Population 331 Million [50.5% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 127,108

COVID Daily Deaths: 574

Let us look at other Ivermectin using areas of India with numbers from August 5, 2021, compiled by the JHU CSSE:

Delhi on Ivermectin: Population 31 Million [15% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 61

COVID Daily Deaths: 2

Uttarakhand on Ivermectin: Population 11.4 Million [15% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 24

COVID Daily Deaths: 0

Now let us look at an area of India that rejected Ivermectin. 

Tamil Nadu announced they would reject Ivermectin and instead follow the dubious USA-style guidance of using Remdesivir. Knowing this, you might expect their numbers to be closer to the US, with more cases and more deaths. You would be correct. Tamil Nadu went on to lead India in COVID-19 cases.

Tamil Nadu off Ivermectin: Population 78.8 Million [6.9% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 1,997

COVID Daily Deaths: 33

 

 

[Rain]

On 8/2/2021 at 2:02 AM, yetanother said:

guess they are not up-to-date; lots of ivermectin studies, many quoted here in various threads; 

even if the efficacy issue was "maybe,maybe not" open discussion is required in intelligent society 

Intelligent societies.

A rare find, if at all.

[mcambl61]

Youtube is a leftist echo chamber. Full of biased deletions and suspensions. 

[Rain]

16 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Youtube is a leftist echo chamber. Full of biased deletions and suspensions. 

Your masters are Google and everything associated.

Beware.