Should Social Media shut down Conspiracy Theories?

[Emergent]

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.

[emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B]

I agree with wuzzie. Freedom of speech, as I understand it, is within the public domain. That is, the government cannot restrict your right to say stupid and/or untruthful things in public. So therefore I believe that private companies are within their rights to moderate content on their domains based on their terms of service.

Whether they remove the content is then their decision. I thought I saw something about Twitter moving towards highlighting tweets that contain information known to be false. Can’t find that link tho’.

[heron, ASN, RN]

I have to say that I have trouble with the proposition that freedom of speech includes the right to a free mass platform with no consequences for publishing untruths that have grave, sometimes fatal, effects on innocent people. In my opinion, the 2016 presidential election is a prime example. As is the anti-vaccine krep.

Rather than demand that everyone, including little children “take responsibility for their own protection“, perhaps it’s the adults who are skeptical of mainstream science or journalism who should take responsibility to search out those alternative opinions.

ETA: I draw a big distinction between unpopular opinions and unpopular facts. To me, the line is determined by the presence or absence of verifiable supporting evidence as opposed to unproven/disproven assertions.

[lifelearningrn, BSN, RN]

10 minutes ago, heron said:

I have to say that I have trouble with the proposition that freedom of speech includes the right to a free mass platform with no consequences for publishing untruths that have grave, sometimes fatal, effects on innocent people. In my opinion, the 2016 presidential election is a prime example. As is the anti-vaccine krep.

I agree with you 100%. I think this goes into the false equivalency culture we seem to have going. As if non-scientific, armchair scientists should be given equal consideration. Opinions should be weighed as heavily as actual peer reviewed, scientific data.

10 minutes ago, heron said:

ETA: I draw a big distinction between unpopular opinions and unpopular facts. To me, the line is determined by the presence or absence of verifiable supporting evidence as opposed to unproven/disproven assertions.

Exactly.

[herring_RN, ASN, BSN]

I agree with Heron regarding unpopular opinions and unpopular facts. Opinions should not be censored. False "facts" should not be presented as true. There is a public health reason hospitals are putting facts on their web sites.

Quote

There's a lot of information circulating about COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus, so it’s important to know what’s true and what’s not.

TRUE or FALSE? You can protect yourself from COVID-19 by injecting, swallowing, bathing in or rubbing onto your body bleach, disinfectants or rubbing alcohols.

The answer is false. These products are highly toxic and should never be swallowed or injected into the body. Call 911 if this occurs.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/2019-novel-coronavirus-myth-versus-fact

[heron, ASN, RN]

2 hours ago, lifelearningrn said:

I agree with you 100%. I think this goes into the false equivalency culture we seem to have going. As if non-scientific, armchair scientists should be given equal consideration. Opinions should be weighed as heavily as actual peer reviewed, scientific data.

Exactly.

All that being said, as a lifelong sci-fi and fantasy junky, I’m always chuffed to have the chance to ask “what if?”.

I start tuning out, though, when I hear certain dog-whistles. There are certain conspiracy theories that are a remake of all the classic rationales for toxic xenophobia. Been hearing that offal since I got Inundated with it at my childhood dinner table by my John Bircher stepfather.

I like the idea of labelling questionable posts. Especially if it includes links to those alternative sources.

Perhaps transparency - as in: trust but verify, might be a useful concept here. It’s one of the critical functions of a free press, after all. There are freedom of the press issues here. (Too bad the New York Times can’t sue Trump for libel/slander!)

Off topic. Carry on ...

[toomuchbaloney]

22 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

I didn't say originate and neither did Trisha, I believe the word used was escaped. Meaning they were working with/on the virus (not a man made created one) and the virus somehow got out into the public. Again, even though people who worked there and had knowledge of this and stated as much, we will probably never see "evidence" bc the Chinese gov had plenty of time to make sure of that.

I posted an article about this on a different thread.

So are you believing that the virus was manipulated in the lab, causing ability to spread via human to human transmission, and that it escaped accidentally? That would be the definition of lab origin of a contagion.

What evidence have you seen or heard which causes you to believe this? Is it more than the fact that there are labs in that immediate area? Is it more than speculation or feelings or fears? Can you provide any kind of supporting information to help us/me understand this belief? Please pull that relevant article into this thread if it supports the concern that this contagion escaped from a lab.

Trump and Pompeo have said this too...and they also cannot give any specific reason why they believe this lab origins theory while having told us things previously that were not true. Credibility becomes an issue.

[Guest219794]

9 hours 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.

Same question I have asked others, but very little response:

Do you support complete, unfettered access, including Nazis, Klan, and pedophiles?

I believe that advocating this is a legitimate position, with which I disagree.

If not, then you accept some sort of control.

What are your thoughts?

[Emergent, RN]

So, facebook removed a group page advocating for opening up the state of Michigan from the strict quarantine.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/facebook-deletes-michigan-anti-quarantine-group?utm_content=buffer812a8&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=fb-theblaze

This was posted on a page that I belong to wanting to reopen Washington. I have to say, the first page that I joined had so much trash talking I had to drop out.

Another page cropped up to reopen Washington that I still belong to. They screen all subject matter and it seems to be more civil than the previous one.

I'm not crazy about the governor of Washington State, but I don't like to see some of the disparaging remarks that some people make online.

I don't know how well they were moderating that page in Michigan. I know the first page that I belong seemed to be a free-for-all, with lots of insults of anybody who even had a moderate point of view, such as me. For instance, I find the insult libtard unacceptable.

[Hoosier_RN, MSN]

52 minutes ago, Emergent said:

For instance, I find the insult libtard unacceptable.

Insults to either side of the aisle shuts down communication and destroys the integrity and message of the messenger. To bad that so many don't get it. It's juvenile at best

[Emergent, RN]

6 minutes ago, Hoosier_RN said:

Insults to either side of the aisle shuts down communication and destroys the integrity and message of the messenger. To bad that so many don't get it. It's juvenile at best

There are a lot of immature people venting on those pages. One woman was complaining that people are paranoid around her because she has allergies and she smokes, so she has a cough.

I'm thinking to myself, quit smoking you idiot! And quit complaining.

But the worst ones are the guys who probably also are the type that comment underneath news articles. I can't believe what people will say online.

[GamerNurseRN]

On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2020 at 6:31 PM, Rose_Queen said:

As private entities, it is not up to us to "give social media giants ... the abilities to shut down conspiracy theories". However, I do like that FB will provide fact checking immediately below posts that have been deemed false information. It can still be seen, but the countering viewpoint is also presented.

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2020 at 4:08 PM, Hoosier_RN said:

Their fact checking is not always correct, though, so I don't always trust when I see that caveat note. Case in point, I attended a gathering late last year in another state, I heard and recorded a certain element-it was political ranting. Something was posted referencing it, and FB posted that this was false and a rumor, etc. I can attest to the fact that I stood there, heard it 100%, and knew that the comment was made. This has made me leery of social media and their statements

After what is coming to light with the General Flynn fiasco, The FBI is the last entity on the planet that I would trust right now with anything.

[GamerNurseRN]

No, they shouldn't. When free dissent is taken away, we will never get it back. Do we censor the lunatics who are all over social media with their anti-vaxxer insanity?

"Misinformation" is defined as anything that doesn't fit the "We're all gonna die if we don't bankrupt the country" narrative.