Having
finally been censored by the Facebook so-called fact-checkers, I have decided
to take the opportunity (as a matter of responsibility) to explain why
censoring the free flow of communication (even when the intentions are good)
rather than ensuring an open-source free-flow of peer to peer communication,
will not only stifle human innovation but also speed up the decline of human
civilization.
The
post that was censored (a post that I shared) contained a video of a person
testing CO2 levels beneath his cloth mask. In the description, I wrote the
following: “This is a good example of Civilian Journalism. In this video, the
man tests the oxygen/Co2 levels when wearing a mask and not wearing a mask.
Whether or not one agrees with his conclusion and/or the validity of the test
results (which I'm not sure that I do), I think that we the people benefit by
counting on one another for research, rather than counting on profit-driven
corporations to do it for us.”
As
you can see, in sharing an example of Civilian Journalism, while also sharing
the findings of one Civilian Scientist (for which I also clearly stated that I
wasn’t sure I agreed with), I was soon rewarded by a notice stating, False
Information, Checked by Independent fact-checkers.
The
first problem here, is that instead of actually checking the claims of the post
itself, Facebook’s fact-checkers used an entirely different claim - made by an
organization that was mentioned in the video - to then reverse-check it with
the organization’s claim (that didn’t actually conflict with claims in the
video) to then claim that the
information in the video was false, which was not only inaccurate but also a
form of misinformation now being purveyed by Facebook’s so-called
fact-checkers.
Here
is the response that I posted on my Facebook timeline: It seems to me that the
Facebook fact checker's claim of inaccurate information is in itself inaccurate
or slanted. A common theme I'm seeing these days has to do with responding to
statements or information with counter-information associated with a slightly
different claim or statement. For example, in the case of a citizen journalist
self-testing CO2 levels associated with wearing masks, the man never claims
that OSHA discourages the use of masks. "Facebook fact checkers
nevertheless respond by claiming that "OSHA encourages workers to use
facemasks..." and therefore labels it as false information. Which is kind
of like fact-checking someone who says drinking plenty of liquids is important
on a hot day, and having Facebook respond by labeling it False Information:
drinking bleach is not recommended.
The whole thing would almost be humorous, as though the
cognitive flow of thinking of one of the most influential and powerful
communication companies is now in the process of degenerating to
child-level levels of cognitive ability. Unfortunately, as Facebook happens to be one of the most powerful communications companies in the world, what flows down and through it, can and will affect (or infect, as the case may be) human civilization, herein presenting a clear and present danger to human civilization if their censorship is left unchecked by the the real fact-checkers, the people of the world. To be continued in Part 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment