Omicron and (to a lesser extent) Delta variants changed the game on transmission. They event provided the receipts in April 2021 of a study showing 90% decrease in virus transmission.
You can choose to believe this is narrative but it was backed by evidence.
The broader question about controlling misinformation is a tricky one and government pressuring social media companies into banning people isn't the ideal situation.
However, framing it as people being banned for "Any suggestion to the contrary" is at the best disingenuous. What I saw were people advocating all manner of alternative to the vaccines and spreading disinformation getting banned. A specific instance: Remember all those yarns about how people would now be sterile because of the vaccine? Well, birth rates are now back up to where they were[2] and nobody's shown to have been sterilized because of it. It's one example of just outright misinformation that deserved a ban.
This is the "fire in a crowded theatre" debate in different clothes, and it's a hard argument. If you think of this in terms of pure capitalist viewpoint, maybe instead of the government pressuring social media companies the alternative is that drug companies sue Meta et. al (and users) for defamation and libel. I'm not sure how that's a better system and wouldn't lead to the very same thing happening but it's the only alternative that seems immediately obvious.
[1]: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm...
[2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/01/10/covid-pan...
And what was that case about? What was this "screaming fire in a crowded theater"? It was the analog that the government chose to use for being the same as them arresting people, under the Espionage Act, for the vile crime of handing out pamphlets encouraging people to resist the military draft. Shenck himself faced up to 30 years in prison. There could scarcely ever be a better argument against ever allowing the government the right to censor.
What about Fauci?
I've seen this claim, but don't recall "you won't get it at all if you have the vaccine" being the narrative when I got mine, which was pretty damn early. I've seen a couple articles posted on here by people making this claim, in support of it, but when I read the articles they end up failing to support it (though a poor or motivated-to-misunderstand reader might think they do)
When was this? Was it for such a brief time that I might have missed it?
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jul/22/joe-biden/...
Politifact: >President Joe Biden exaggerated when he spoke about the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine during a CNN town hall. "You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations," Biden said.
President Transcript: >But again, one last thing. I — we don’t talk enough to you about this, I don’t think. One last thing that’s really important is: We’re not in a position where we think that any virus — including the Delta virus, which is much more transmissible and more deadly in terms of non — unvaccinated people — the vi- — the various shots that people are getting now cover that. They’re — you’re okay. You’re not going to — you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.
>MR. LEMON: Yeah. I want to stay on the subject. I want to get to Dr. Nicole Baldwin. She’s a pediatrician and a Republican.
>Dr. Baldwin, go ahead.
Where did Politifact get "President Joe Biden exaggerated" from? I see no attempt by the president to walk back or clarify what he said.
Do we want to excuse people when they make bad statements because they are on our side?
So sure, it'd be nice if politicians were more precise when answering questions (though it's not gonna happen, for one thing because people don't talk like that) but that's not what I've seen claimed in these cases—it's that these few over-broad statements were the official line, and that dissent from it was smacked down. This runs contrary both to my recollection of events, and to evidence I've seen the few times I've seen the topic come up on here, including this link.
Do you have a source?
Here's an AP News 'fact check' "debunking" a video which claimed Fauci said they weren't effective: https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9996141...
I honestly have no idea how one can claim in good faith not to remember that this was the narrative. It was everywhere.
Where does say "You will not get COVID if you get these vaccines" which you said was the official narrative?
Could you paste the quote here?
Edit or a similar statement that you won't get covid if you get the vaccine