Twitter currently bans everybody who tries to share this study that masks are useless against COVID and have negative consequences.
Irrespective of how everybody feels about masks, isn’t it disturbing that people who work for a social media app and have zero medical background should decide what kind of scholarship gets disseminated?
The same thing has happened to people sharing research on completely different subjects, such as puberty blockers, etc.
It is disturbing that the article abstract has multiple typos or mistakes of usage. Elsevier should do better.
LikeLike
I should have first said, I agree that the censorship of scholarship is disturbing. I’m so used to it happening I already take it for granted. Which is also disturbing!
LikeLike
This is a ridiculous publication. Just one rando putting out hypothesis.
It was removed because it espouses falsehoods about COVID19:
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-629043235973
Social media companies get hammered everyday for publishing false crap. I understand why they would want to ban this low quality hypothesis paper.
LikeLike
This is a ridiculous publication. Just one rando putting out a hypothesis.
It was removed because it espouses falsehoods about COVID19:
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-629043235973
Social media companies get hammered everyday for publishing false crap. I understand why they would want to ban this low quality hypothesis paper.
LikeLike
There’s a billion randos putting out pretty insane hypotheses on Twitter without getting censored. LeBron James just put out a call for people to harass the officer in the Ma’khia Bryant shooting. Nobody is “hammering” Twitter for letting that stand. Somebody else put out the identifying information on the jurors in the Floyd case before the verdict. Nobody got censored for that.
LikeLike
Facebook also censors (or alternatively, slaps a giant “FAKE NEWS!” warning on) anything about Covid that contradicts their preferred narrative. Any heterodox view on masks, vaccines, shutdowns, etc. will immediately catch the eye of the Ministry of Truth, and will be dealt with severely.
I don’t spend much time on FB (I go there mostly just to take my turn in Scrabble), but I do belong to a very small secret group of like-minded people, where we share links with each other. Lately most of my links are either fact-checked and labeled fake news, or outright rejected. And this is in a tiny secret group that is not visible to the general public! Sheesh.
This particular article has been heavily criticized even by UnHerd…
https://unherd.com/2021/04/could-you-spot-a-conspiracy-theorist/
LikeLike
Criticism is fantastic. Censorship is wrong.
LikeLike
I saw a “scientific treatise” published on Twitter, “proving” that Jews were descended from the devil. It wasn’t censored. I saw an article defending pedophilia with infants. It wasn’t censored. There are videos of children being raped on Twitter, and not only doesn’t Twitter censor them, it rejects endless pleas from the victims to take the videos down.
So the idea that Twitter is some sort of a bulwark against bad takes – folks, have you been on Twitter? It’s a cesspool. The only censorship they engage in is strictly political.
JK Rowling’s famous “love whomever you want” tweet has been shadow banned for a year while pro-baby-rape screeds stay up.
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment