Censorship Goes on Trial | Mercola.com

S

Scott

Verified User
Mercola.com published an article I found interesting today, thought it might be worth a bit of discussion. Mercola.com articles are only available behind a paywall after 48 hours, so if anyone would like to read the full article, I suggest you at least download it before then. There's a "Download PDF" button near the top left of the article.

**
April 26, 2023

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

Louisiana and Missouri v. Biden et al was filed May 2022 by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, and plaintiffs Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Dr. Kulldorff — co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration

The lawsuit alleges the Biden administration "colluded with social media giants Meta, Twitter, and YouTube to censor free speech in the name of combating so-called 'disinformation' and 'misinformation'"

The judge overseeing the case has allowed it to proceed and denied a motion from the government to dismiss it

Due to a federal court ruling, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials testified under oath at depositions about whether they colluded with Big Tech to censor certain users

Federal officials encouraged social media shutdowns targeting those injured by COVID-19 shots or speaking out against them; other social media posts deemed “misinformation” were shadow-banned, which refers to using algorithms to bury the posts so they’re rarely, if ever seen
**

Full article:
Censorship Goes on Trial | Mercola.com
 
Phoenyx said:
Mercola.com published an article I found interesting today, thought it might be worth a bit of discussion. Mercola.com articles are only available behind a paywall after 48 hours, so if anyone would like to read the full article, I suggest you at least download it before then. There's a "Download PDF" button near the top left of the article.

**
April 26, 2023

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

Louisiana and Missouri v. Biden et al was filed May 2022 by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, and plaintiffs Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Dr. Kulldorff — co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration

The lawsuit alleges the Biden administration "colluded with social media giants Meta, Twitter, and YouTube to censor free speech in the name of combating so-called 'disinformation' and 'misinformation'"

The judge overseeing the case has allowed it to proceed and denied a motion from the government to dismiss it

Due to a federal court ruling, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials testified under oath at depositions about whether they colluded with Big Tech to censor certain users

Federal officials encouraged social media shutdowns targeting those injured by COVID-19 shots or speaking out against them; other social media posts deemed “misinformation” were shadow-banned, which refers to using algorithms to bury the posts so they’re rarely, if ever seen
**

Full article:
Censorship Goes on Trial | Mercola.com
Click to expand...

I recently heard Bhattacharya say that he has high hopes for this legal action. I dont know enough about it to opine.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I recently heard Bhattacharya say that he has high hopes for this legal action. I dont know enough about it to opine.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about it to know what their odds of winning are, but I certainly hope they do well. A little more from the introduction of the article:

**
In what’s being described as “the most important free speech lawsuit of this generation,” the federal government is being sued for working with social media companies to censor Americans.1

The lawsuit — Louisiana and Missouri v. Biden et al — was filed May 2022 by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, and plaintiffs Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Dr. Kulldorff — co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which scientifically critiqued the effects of prolonged lockdowns in response to COVID-19.2

The lawsuit alleges the Biden administration "colluded with social media giants Meta, Twitter, and YouTube to censor free speech in the name of combating so-called ‘disinformation’ and ‘misinformation.’" In so doing, it suppressed and censored the truth “on a scale never before seen” on topics relating to COVID-19 shots, COVID-19’s potential laboratory origins and Hunter Biden’s laptop.3 A joint statement regarding witness depositions reads:4

“Plaintiffs allege Defendants have colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content “dis-information,” “mis-information,” and “mal-information.”

Plaintiffs allege the suppression of disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and contents constitutes government action and violates Plaintiffs’ freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”​
**

Full article:
Censorship Goes on Trial | Mercola.com
 
“We rate Mercola.com a Quackery-level pseudoscience website that sometimes advocates for dangerous, inaction or action, to serious health issues.” (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/mercola/)

“Mercola is a doctor of osteopathy who has frequently promoted false, misleading and even dangerous medical advice. His site promotes products and his blog includes false and/or misleading information about medical topics.” (https://library.bu.edu/fakenews/bias)

“Researchers and regulators say Joseph Mercola, an osteopathic physician, creates and profits from misleading claims about Covid-19 vaccines.” (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/24/...ytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare)

“Mercola and colleagues advocate unproven and pseudoscientific alternative health notions including homeopathy and opposition to vaccination.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola)
 
Access to social media has nothing to do with free speech.

Free speech allows you to express your opinion on whatever forum to which you have access.

It does not in any way afford you access to whatever privately owned forum or medium you wish to access.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Phoenyx said:
Not all of the left. In fact, some on the far left are being censored too- made a thread on that here:
Biden’s DOJ Indicts Four Americans for Their Political Views on Russia | justplainpolitics.com
Click to expand...

In this case those guys had the audacity to make their views--which were highly contrary to the current administration's--known widely. Can't have people criticizing the doddering fool we have as president can we? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think the issue is more that they're going up against the deep state in this case- the Ukraine war has had the general support of both parties, with the exception of some on the right who seem to generally be aligned with Trump. There was also a very lukewarm resistance from democratic progressives that but they soon slunk away in fear once the establishment democrats criticized them for it. Really embararassing. I'd hoped for so much more from the likes of AOC.
 
Last edited:
NiftyNiblick said:
Access to social media has nothing to do with free speech.

Free speech allows you to express your opinion on whatever forum to which you have access.

It does not in any way afford you access to whatever privately owned forum or medium you wish to access.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to the subject of the opening post, I don't think accessing social media has anything to do with it. The offices of the organization were raided and 4 of their leaders have now been indicted, all on the apparently trumped up charge that they were acting on the behest of Russia. The idea that Russia has this outsize influence on American politics is something that the deep state has been using for a while now. I get into this subject more in another thread I created today, this one:

Report on the Censorship-Industrial Complex | justplainpolitics.com
 
archives said:
“We rate Mercola.com a Quackery-level pseudoscience website that sometimes advocates for dangerous, inaction or action, to serious health issues.” (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/mercola/)

“Mercola is a doctor of osteopathy who has frequently promoted false, misleading and even dangerous medical advice. His site promotes products and his blog includes false and/or misleading information about medical topics.” (https://library.bu.edu/fakenews/bias)

“Researchers and regulators say Joseph Mercola, an osteopathic physician, creates and profits from misleading claims about Covid-19 vaccines.” (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/24/...ytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare)

“Mercola and colleagues advocate unproven and pseudoscientific alternative health notions including homeopathy and opposition to vaccination.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola)
Click to expand...
I can't see the OP, but Mercola and Oz are besties.

Any article that cites either of them is guaranteed to be an ad for something and nothing more.
 
archives said:
Thinking such, I also provided three other sources, and they are endless if you need them, the guy is a quack, a quack making a lot of money off of being such
Click to expand...

Alright, I checked your other links. I've never heard of Boston University's "Guide", but you may find the following article interesting:

Servants of Power: Higher Education in an Era of Corporate Control | truthout.org

The New York Times is regularly lambasted by at least one well known politician and journalists, including at least one who used to work for them. Some recent articles of note:

Ralph Nader: The New York Times Is Diminishing Itself | Scheerpost

New York Times Fails To See Its Own Hypocritical Practices | Scheerpost

Patrick Lawrence: Why Is The New York Times Still Hyping ‘Russiagate’? | Scheerpost


As to Wikipedia, there are plenty of sources pointing out its bias. Here's one:

Wikipedia Weaponization: A dissection of bias | sharylattkisson.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top