Their definition of misleading says it "includes information [...] that contradicts official government records". Because no government record has ever been wrong before, right?
I have a couple people in my social circle that were banned from fb for saying he was wrong early on about masks being ineffective. And several others were banned later for pointing out fauci's earlier stance and calling it all propaganda. You are not allowed to think for yourself. Pick up that can.
What I don't understand is why there were no nations giving away n95 masks and education on how to wear it. It seems like we hivemind to the unsustainable lockdowns.
Don't know if you remember last march/April, but there were no N95 masks to give out in a lot of places...
I don't understand why most functional governments didn't eventually have a monthly care package of "here's your masks, hand sanitizer, the latest newsletter, and your stimulus check".
Partly because it isn’t the role of government to “give” you things you might want while they are paid for with foreign debt in box.
It was killed for political reasons.
“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20200303020926/https://twitter.c...
"Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS!
They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!"
Even better, as a user, can I appeal to the authority of a different government than the one I live in? Let's say I appeal to the authority of Brazil as governing my content even though I live in the US. How does that work?
B. Because no government has ever lied on official records when there is a disaster. For sure. And no government is currently, right now, lying on their records to save face. For sure.
I find it insane that Silicon Valley companies have such short memories, and can’t even comprehend that 1 year ago the same policies would have resulted in banning anything Trump disagreed with.
It's sad. I used to work there. What monster did we create, exactly.
> Misleading content related to civic and democratic processes: Content that is demonstrably false and could significantly undermine participation or trust in civic or democratic processes. This includes information about public voting procedures, political candidate eligibility based on age / birthplace, election results, or census participation that contradicts official government records. It also includes incorrect claims that a political figure or government official has died, been involved in an accident, or is suffering from a sudden serious illness.
Banned misinformation "includes _census participation_ that contradicts official government records."
Census participation. For example, "You didn't register in the census last year? You're ineligible to vote." It's aimed at misinformation that discourages people from voting.
That seems much more reasonable, and far more precise, than information that contradicts any government record.
It’s so easy to look at the past and think “How did people let this happen?”.
And yet here we are.
I hope stopping the anti-vaxers and election fraud people is worth it.
As mentioned elsewhere, the full quote is very different:
“information about public voting procedures, political candidate eligibility based on age / birthplace, election results, or census participation that contradicts official government records”