I googled Alex as I didn't know who that was. The government has an interest in public health. 1.2 million Americans (likely many more) died as a result of covid. There were refrigerator trucks filled with bodies in places. It was hell. People who spread misinformation literally kill people and themselves. It seems like the government back then actually worked with companies to craft guidance rather than threatening their licenses, suing, etc. There's no comparison at all to the current time. America was founded to rid ourselves of royalty and the first amendment is proof of that. Now America is gone.
You don't have to tell me it was hell, I was there.
People, the government and scientists were all spreading misinformation depending on what the official messaging was at the time.
Case in point: Early on, the government was saying "Masks are not effective at stopping COVID-19" due to them wanting to control supply. When that happened, there was a large number of studies that came out showing just that. When you looked at the methodology, it was "Mask over mouth, cough into Petri dish" and see if any COVID was detectable in dish. Also "Virus particle size is much smaller than openings on mask"
When the government changed it's stance, all of those were retracted.
It took the WHO 2 YEARS to change their stance and say that COVID-19 was airborne:
>In the spring of 2020, as covid-19 took hold, confusion reigned among scientists, doctors, public health experts, and others. Many insisted the spread of the new virus was through the air, yet the World Health Organization refused to use the terms “airborne” or “aerosol”1 in the context of covid-19 until 2021.2 This had repercussions as the world debated mask wearing (and what types of masks were suitable) and whether indoor spaces were a factor in infection.
>Now, four years later and after two years of deliberation by experts,3 WHO has altered its definition of the “airborne” spread of infectious pathogens in the hope of avoiding the confusion and miscommunication that characterised the first year of the pandemic—and threatened attempts to control the virus’s spread.
There are several top level comments here acting like this is the first time the government has done something like this. It's not.
The previous administration was doing the same thing; Publicly saying that they wanted to change laws, that these companies were killing people etc. At the same time, they were also asking the companies to remove people for their speech. The threat was implicit.
I don't like that the current republican administration is doing it now, I didn't like it when the previous democrat administration was doing it then.
The only way to keep it from happening is for everyone to speak up, for that to happen you also need to recognize when your team is doing the same thing and call them out. Look at the comments saying "I bet we won't hear from the freeze peach crowd", of course you won't see them. Not because they don't care however but because their disagreement of the government action is getting lost in the noise of your crowds.
It's the first time the government in the US has done this. 100%.
I see. You're trying to pretend that intentionally subverting public health measures should be free speech and that the Biden administration did something like what the authoritarians are doing now. I disagree, though I'm not super familiar with the government intervention or lack of during covid. I have no desire to discuss it as it has no relevance to this context.
You're lying by creating a false equivalence and don't deserve replies.
Free speech is free speech, it doesn't come with qualifiers about public health crisis or anything else. The old canard "You can't shout fire in a crowded theater" can from a Supreme Court case in which the government was prosecuting someone for an anti-war speech(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States). That was 1919, so maybe a bit before 2024.
Please don't accuse me of lying, it's rude. Especially if you are also saying you are not familiar with what happened at that time.
It is a shame that you are unable to look at a situation where high level officials from one administration were asking why someone was allowed to express their views and that the administration was looking into how to hold them accountable and see how it is the mirror.
"Facebook needs to move more quickly to remove harmful, violative posts" - White House press secretary Jen Psaki
"Shouldn't they(Facebook and Twitter) be liable for publishing that information and then open to lawsuits?" - MSNBC
"Certainly, they should be held accountable, You've heard the president speak very aggressively about this. He understands this is an important piece of the ecosystem." - White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield
“We can do this the easy way or the hard way, These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” - FCC Chair Brendan Carr
You have an extreme point of view. You literally lead with it should be okay to scream fire in a theatre. That's absurd. There was a fire, more than a million folks died, many rules were altered including operation warp speed. There's no real reason to even reply to this insanity. Good job troll.
You're spouting nonsense to conflate the contexts. Here we had the FCC guy directly threaten people, they immediately cancelled the show and I assume hundreds of people's jobs. Why? Because the authoritarian was displeased with how he was characterized. This is precisely why we formed America and the 1st Amendment.
