Should Social Media shut down Conspiracy Theories?

toomuchbaloney · May 13, 2020

4 minutes ago, Kitiger said:
From the above article:
"Furthermore, 14 of the first 41 cases had no contact with the seafood market13. In another report, five of the first seven cases of COVID-19 had no link to the seafood market14. Thus, it seems very likely that the virus was amplified in the market, but the market might not have been the site of origin nor the only source of the outbreak. A recent phylo-epidemiological study has suggested that the virus was circulating but unrecognised in November, and was imported to the seafood market from elsewhere, where it subsequently was amplified15."

And none of that suggests that the virus originated in the lab. All of the scientific analysis that I've seen indicates wild origins.

I am still asking someone to provide something which indicates that this is possibly a virus from a lab. There must be something circulating which is convincing people to believe that the virus was man-made or manipulated.

Kitiger, RN · May 13, 2020

4 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:
And none of that suggests that the virus originated in the lab. All of the scientific analysis that I've seen indicates wild origins.
I am still asking someone to provide something which indicates that this is possibly a virus from a lab. There must be something circulating which is convincing people to believe that the virus was man-made or manipulated.

I was simply pointing out that it might not have originated in the wet market.

toomuchbaloney · May 13, 2020

2 minutes ago, Kitiger said:
I was simply pointing out that it might not have originated in the wet market.

OK

Where in the wild it originated may be incidental and essentially irrelevant to the overall question of why people believe it originated in a lab. Would you agree to that?

Kitiger, RN · May 13, 2020

10 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:
OK
Where in the wild it originated may be incidental and essentially irrelevant to the overall question of why people believe it originated in a lab. Would you agree to that?

I think I can agree to that.

Several things bother me, none of which are scientific facts:

1. The labs are there, right where the epidemic started.

2. I don't trust the Chinese government.

3. The virus causes so many different types of problems. Respiratory failure. Blood clots, so strokes, covid toes. Kidney failure. Disrupts the sense of smell. Heart failure. Cytokine storm. And now, Pediatric Multisystem Inflammatory Illness. Can all of this be explained by the virus targeting the endothelium?

allnurses Guide · May 13, 2020

43 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:
And none of that suggests that the virus originated in the lab. All of the scientific analysis that I've seen indicates wild origins.
I am still asking someone to provide something which indicates that this is possibly a virus from a lab. There must be something circulating which is convincing people to believe that the virus was man-made or manipulated.

The title of this thread is the only explanation I know of.

FolksBtrippin, BSN, RN · May 13, 2020

On 5/8/2020 at 6:18 PM, Emergent said:
I understand that private entities can control what speech is put on their media. But is that a wise idea not to air alternative points of view on huge powerhouses such as Youtube, facebook, Twitter Etc?
I'm thinking specifically of this Plandemic lady. I, personally, have not viewed her video. I'm not interested in her particular point of view. I have never felt the need to investigate every conspiracy theory out there.
I do think there is a lot of paranoia in sothat might be well earned. Social media such as facebook and Youtube wield enormous power and influence over public opinion.
The government has pulled a lot of sneaky tricks on the public over the years. I don't trust them. I also don't trust the Chinese government.
I don't trust large pharmaceutical companies or the mega-corporations. Their lust for money, power and influence is insatiable.
Should we give social media giants, who practically hold monopolies on the public form, the abilities to shut down conspiracy theories? I'll bet there are some true ones out there.

I don't think that social media giants should be censoring and my opinion has nothing to do with whether or not what they are censoring is true. When you censor an idea, you give power to it and you validate that there is a conspiracy to keep it out of the conversation.

Open communication is best. We should know this by now.

Wuzzie · May 13, 2020

18 minutes ago, FolksBtrippin said:
I don't think that social media giants should be censoring and my opinion has nothing to do with whether or not what they are censoring is true. When you censor an idea, you give power to it and you validate that there is a conspiracy to keep it out of the conversation.
Open communication is best. We should know this by now.

Sure, leave it up but at least put some sort of disclaimer on it letting the unwitting know that it is not supported by scientific facts and should not be trusted. Frankly I think it should say "This is utter crap and we're embarrassed to leave it up".

FolksBtrippin, BSN, RN · May 13, 2020

Just now, Wuzzie said:
Sure, leave it up but at least put some sort of disclaimer on it letting the unwitting know that it is not supported by scientific facts and should not be trusted. Frankly I think it should say "This is utter crap and w're embarrassed to leave it up".

I like this idea. Right now, Youtube and facebook are taking posts down instead.

Wuzzie · May 13, 2020

1 minute ago, FolksBtrippin said:
Right now, Youtube and facebook are taking posts down instead.

Well, they have that right. Who are we to impose on that? It's not like the information can't be found on other sources.

Emergent, RN · May 13, 2020

1 minute ago, FolksBtrippin said:
I like this idea. Right now, Youtube and facebook are taking posts down instead.

I like the idea as well!

FolksBtrippin, BSN, RN · May 13, 2020

Just now, Wuzzie said:
Well, they have that right. Who are we to impose on that? It's not like the information can't be found on other sources.

It's about how we define public space and private space. I don't think we should define the big social media outlets as strictly private spaces, because they really aren't and shouldn't be labeled as such.

Keep in mind that the big social media outlets aren't spending time and money sorting through the quality of the information on their sites because they really want to, but because there was a strong push for them to do that.

So we could just as easily, and perhaps even more easily push them the other way if we decided that free speech on their platforms was more important.

Wuzzie · May 13, 2020

1 minute ago, FolksBtrippin said:
It's about how we define public space and private space. I don't think we should define the big social media outlets as strictly private spaces, because they really aren't and shouldn't be labeled as such.

But they are. They're private companies and have no responsibility to the public to post anything at all. If FB decided all they want to post is on the topic of cars and get rid of everything else that is within their right. I am not of the ilk that believes the government was pushing any agenda on them. I believe that they weighed the risks and benefits of putting sketchy things on their platform and decided it wasn't worth the risk. There are plenty of other places to read about conspiracy theories. FB is not an island. Honestly, if people don't like their policies then they are welcome to vote with their feet. Nobody is being forced to stay connected to them.