Zuckerberg regrets bowing to Biden 'pressure' over Covid

Pressure to remove blatant misinformation is no bad thing.

The threshold for censorship should be quite high, suggesting anyone should drink bleach is clearly wrong and would be immediately deleted outside of Covid restrictions too. But speaking against government action is not. And surely the administration itself shouldn't be involved in saying what is and isn't wrong, if something was a crime it should be for police to determine.

Some of you really need to realize that this is all fun and games until someone you don't like plays the same game. If you open the gate for government to censor and control social media, you should be wary when that government changes the next guy and the one after that can do the exact same thing and you may not like them as much.

the media should be held responsible for the content. And false information.

Look at the amount of nuts that thinks looking on Facebook or instagram is doing research

Uh it seems majorly dishonest of independent to not consider the age profile of the voters

The study actually does mention age and notes republican deaths were 76% higher BEFORE the vaccine. There is a larger gap after so that makes sense but it's not 2x deaths because of vaccination, independent there is taking the piss.

"Between March 2020 and December 2021, the
part of our study period that overlaps the COVID-19 pandemic, average excess death rates
were 5.4 pp (76%) higher among Republicans than Democrats"

Majorly dishonest? The anti vax disinformation was majorly dishonest, which is what the Biden administration was trying to keep a lid on. The anti vaxxers were shouting fire in a crowded theater.

The general point stands.

Beford the vaccine other measures such as distancing and isolating with symptoms were subject to disinformation from covid denialists....who had a big overlap with anti vaxxers.

But what really stands out is the divergence in death rates post the appearance of vaccines. Which suggests a core issue not of age.

"Researchers from Yale University who studied the pandemic's effects on those two states say that from the pandemic's start in March 2020 through December 2021, "excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all adults, but not before."

https://www.npr.org/2023/07/25/1189939229/covid-deaths-democrats-republicans-gap-study

https://globalepidemics.org/2022/05/13/new-analysis-shows-vaccines-could-have-prevented-318000-deaths/

There is some confusion or misunderstanding here.

You wrote:

"Republican deaths were 76% higher BEFORE the vaccine."

Vaccines were rolled out starting January 2021:

"Between March 2020 and December 2021, the part of our study period that overlaps the COVID-19 pandemic, average excess death rates were 5.4 pp (76%) higher among Republicans than Democrats."

True acually, the study goes on to use March 2021 as a pre-post vaccine in the next chart. No clue why the March 2020-Dec 2021 timeline was used .

Trump was recommending all kinds of snake oil from Ivermectin to hydroxychloroquine, without foundation. That is the key - foundation.
There was also the bleach nonsense from Trump.

As for Vitamin D, again, the situation isn't anything remotely like described.
Studies into different illnesses have shown that a vitamin D deficiency is also detected, but that doesn't mean vitamin D supplements are a magic bullet:
There is an association between low vitamin D status and severe outcomes from COVID-19. However, many risk factors are the same for both low vitamin D and severe COVID-19, and so causality cannot be established. In addition, vitamin D is a negative acute phase reactant meaning levels reduce during inflammation, which could be seen in COVID-19… There is insufficient evidence to recommend vitamin D supplementation with the sole intention to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission or treat COVID-19

https://phw.nhs.wales/topics/latest-information-on-novel-coronavirus-covid-19/information-for-health-and-social-care/vitamin-d-and-covid-19-professional-briefing/

Backed up by this trial: https://www.bmj.com/content/378/bmj-2022-071230

This is not about free speech, this is about dangerous medical misinformation and false claims being made for medical products.

As for: "polarisation and radicalisation you refer to was a direct result of government interferance in free speech and basic human rights."

Claim absolutely without foundation, beggars belief anybody could write that view in view of the covid denial and anti vax propaganda being peddled during covid, and the polarisation in social media and via news outlets like FOX.

I get that, it's trying to get a reaction from you, it's why we're seeing things designed to foster devision and it works, good for advertising.

You haven't mentioned any of the conspiracy theories you said Zuck wanted to push, that's on you not me.

Misinformation is clickbait, so social media owners will use it unless the penalty is greater than the reward.

"Haven't a lot of them now turned out to be true?"

No, no they have not.

5G was not to blame
Covid wasn't a bio-weapon
No "Great Reset"
There was no hoax
Bill Gates had nothing to do with it
The vaccines worked
The reported "Millions of corpses as a result of the vaccine" never materialised
There was no "Deep State" plot

………….

The conspiracies were nonsense. You can try to lend creedence to the general conspiracy landscape with the old chestnut of "Well, this thing that a conspiracy-head said was true so…." and pretend that all these conspiracies should be listened to, but it won't work.

You should let it go at this point. It's 2024. it's over! You were wrong. Sane heads prevailed.

Honestly I shall give him a small pass on Covid as I am someone who is very pro vaccine and Trump's government used to contact Twitter to take down stuff when he was president (according to Jack).

The Hunter Biden one is complex, USA needed Trump to lose because another 4 years of him would have been a nightmare, but yeah how that was handled was a massive failure by all especially by Facebook.

I do wonder if it hadn't been incorrectly dismissed as "Russian propaganda" would it have made a difference, possibly but then I'm quite glad that Trump lost so swings and roundabouts.

I'd argue all them with you except the 5G, I've better things to be doing though, you may think it's over but there's a long way to go yet. Threads on boards should have been locked not deleated, Getting banned for raising the red flag about things like AstraZenaca and being called a conspiracy theorist because of it is something I can live with. Sane heads didn't prevail, just look at what's happening with the HSE uptake and the reasons behind it, over 40% of their staff surveyed thinks it causes serious harm and they won't take it. Anyway this is the politics thread, let's park it.

He did say it yes.

He also never lies does he?

BTW seems you’re spewing out Kremlin propaganda can you show us where Biden promised “the” Ukraine NATO membership and that’s how the war started, thanks.

Orwell road is probably asleep now so I can wait until tomorrow.

Define misinformation. We had two referenda where a government minister blatantly misrepresented the legal advise of the AG. He's still there. Remember when Biden said if you take the vaccine you won't get COVID and you can't spread it? Governments have no business pressuring anyone to remove posts. The governments only job is to remove posts that are braking the law.

Trump said it, not I. Take it up with him.

This is the second time you're throwing Kremlin something at me when I did no such thing. You seem a little worked up over this topic, confused even. Failing to understand relatively simple sentences. Kremlin everywhere. Maybe step back from the internet for a bit.

Take it easy.

This is the real take away from this fiasco.

What you claimed it says: "over 40% of their staff surveyed thinks it causes serious harm"

What the survey actually says:

healthcare workers are worried that Covid-19 vaccines will cause serious side-effects.

There is a massive difference between stating something will be the case, and having a concern it might be.

You have misrepresented the results of the survey. That is spreading anti vax misinformation.

It is not "pretty much the same thing". Words have meaning.
Your previous claim is misinformation.

You confirm your bias in not engaging with the full content of the survey which shows broad support for vaccination.

You have jumped on a headline out of context purely because you think it is anti vax and says what you want it to say. It does not and is not.