Keeping us safe from bad information

I didn't find the widely-shared interview with two moderately anti-lockdown California ER doctors all that persuasive, but I'm getting pretty tired of being protected from information that people think is too dangerous for me to hear.  So although I didn't link to the interview to begin with, I'm happy to link to it now, while it's still possible.

And the fact-checkers and community-standards police can bite me.  I'll decide what's misinformation and what's not, thank you.  I'd have a lot more patience with this approach if half of the garbage I see on "respectable" news sites didn't clearly fit my own definition of misinformation.


E Hines said...

Here's another example of our Betters protecting us from information that will damage The Narrative:

Eric Hines

douglas said...

I thought they had a lot of good questions and a fair amount of good data and some reasonable extrapolations from that data. I also thought they started reaching and stretching that extrapolation to fit things it really didn't, because they were really executing a counter-propaganda effort. They weren't strictly interested in the truth. People like that are awfully hard to find these days.