zlacker

>>ruarai+(OP)
How soon before stuff like this is marked as misinformation if it isn't coming from established media outlets? You know, dangerous conspiracy theories, and all that. Real world consequences, etc. and so forth.

>>mancer+Lm1
Are you saying an opinion piece stating that we should leave open the possibility of a leak is misinformation? That doesn't make any sense.

>>wallaw+ep1
Not OP, but I'm assuming he was arguing that, given that the major social media platforms have said they will remove any Covid information that is misleading, would they even allow posts like this "suggesting the possibility of a Wuhan lab leak is plausible".

Note Facebook has previously explicitly banned posts "falsely claiming the virus is man-made". Source: https://www.npr.org/2021/02/08/965390755/facebook-widens-ban...

>>hn_thr+yq1
From FB's policy https://www.facebook.com/help/230764881494641

  " Claims that it was created by an individual, government, or country

    Excluding claims that it was studied in, came from, or leaked from a lab without specifically calling it man-made"

So discussing possibility of a lab leak is not a problem, it's the deliberate bioweapon aspect that they're banning.

  "The goal of this policy is to remove common viral hoaxes that have been repeatedly debunked by independent fact-checkers."

>>bosswi+Yu1
How are these Fact Checkers to decide on a complicated and political question like a Wuhan lab leak hypothesis? They have a claim to truth, based on what credentials or mechanisms, that the rest of us don't have access to?

>>mancer+XK1
https://youtu.be/l7o4A16QCxE

Hidden camera investigation of Facebook moderators (ie fact checkers)