Why are Youtube and Facebook so scared of scientific debate about the Pandemic at all? What is it about some scientific theories that they find so offensive, so dangerous, that it must be banned from their platforms? Darren Birks asks the questions.
We have long known that Facebook, Youtube and Twitter are not impartial on political issues, despite what their founders and chief execs may say. But now these social media giants have begun to remove any scientific theory, data, or evidence, often by qualified experts, that differs from the official government messages. This isn't even a freedom of speech issue as some have claimed, it is far more sinister than that. These totalitarian organisations are actively suppressing scientific debate, pushing one narrative, and attempting to control what we think with their communistic ways.
In a move that should concern us all, Youtube and Facebook have removed a video by a scientist who challenges the Lockdown hypothesis. The video, by Professor Knut Wittkowski, did not contain some outlandish conspiracy theory but mainstream science, debating that the lockdown was a mistake and offering a different strategy that, they suggest, would have been more effective. All of this is well within mainstream science begging the question what is so terrible about these theories that Facebook and Youtube think that we, the public, cannot hear them? What alarmed Facebook and Youtube so much about a scientific theory that highlights the failings of the current strategy?
Last month Youtube's CEO said the platform would remove ‘anything that is medically unsubstantiated’ or that ‘goes against WHO [World Health Organisation] recommendations’. As a result, YouTube is now censoring not just those more out-there conspiracy theories, but also respectable scientists who are challenging government responses to Covid-19.
The increasingly authoritarian Twitterati did the predictable Ad Hominem attack on Professor Knut Wittkowski in an attempt to discredit his theory. Because if you 'can't disprove the theory, discredit the man' is now the norm. the second his name came up they were trawling his Wikipedia and Linked-in pages trying to find something they could point to as 'proof' that if he was less than perfect, his theories were trash. Questioning his qualifications, politics, and experience rather than debating his theories. Pity they didn't do that with Professor Neil Ferguson whose professional and personal life are both a mess.
Having looked at the video and the follow-up, there seems nothing that should have spooked Facebook and Youtube. Nothing that is going to put their patrons in danger, nothing that is inciting violence or attacking their beloved progressive groups, it's just dry scientific debate.
Increasingly we are being controlled by a media with a globalist agenda where debate, if not dissent, isn't just discouraged, but expunged. Youtube claim it's platform is "Where you create the content". but it's where they control the narrative.
Comments