Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content
Posted by margo on November 21, 2020, 6:17 pm
I'm pro vaccines in general, fully vaccinated and so are my children. We've all regularly got re-vaccinated, over and again, for inter-Africa travel: yellow fever, Hepatitis Boosters, etc. If I query something online* about this new vaccine, though, do I run the risk of getting labelled an "anti-vaxxer"? Will reasonable positions be conflated with the outer-fringes of the anti-vax movement?
At the end of the day, it's possible the government won't have to mandate anything, of course. Foreign countries will require a vaccine certificate at immigration, and domestic private venues, gyms, sports venues, concert halls, theatres and transport businesses may start asking for them, or their liability insurance will go through the roof.
----- - -- - article recently seen:
Coronavirus vaccine: Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content Jon Stone
Shadow culture secretary says government should ‘stamp out’ misinformation
INDEPENDENT -- THE government should bring forward emergency legislation to “stamp out” dangerous anti-vax misinformation ahead of the roll-out of the Covid-19 vaccine, Labour has said.
The shadow culture secretary, Jo Stevens, and the shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, have written to the government warning that “our historic strength in vaccine uptake must not be taken for granted” as the prospect of a treatment for the virus looms.
Keir Starmer’s shadow ministers are calling for financial and criminal penalties for social media companies that fail to censor posts promoting anti-vaccination content, which they note is rampant on those platforms.
The opposition ministers say anti-vaccination groups with almost 100,000 users can be found within seconds of logging on to Facebook.
An analysis by a think tank, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, suggests that misinformation and disinformation about vaccines is also spreading on newer forms of social media, such as TikTok, where the hashtag #vaccinesaredangerous has almost 800,000 views.
In addition, dozens of anti-vaccination petitions have been posted on the government’s website, some with almost 200,000 signatures.
“The government has a pitiful track record on taking action against online platforms that are facilitating the spread of disinformation,” said Ms Stevens.
“It has been clear for years that this is a widespread and growing problem and the government knows, because Labour has been warning them for some time, that it poses a real threat to the take-up of the vaccine.
“This is literally a matter of life and death, and anyone who is dissuaded from being vaccinated because of this is one person too many.”
In the joint letter, the two shadow secretaries of state said that “groups flagged months ago to social media companies remain active”, despite commitments by the government and industry.
Last week, social media giants agreed a package of measures with ministers to tackle anti-vaccine misinformation. Facebook, Twitter and Google promised to “step up work with public health bodies to promote factual and reliable messages” and committed to “swifter responses to flagged content”.
The digital secretary, Oliver Dowden, said that “Covid disinformation is dangerous and could cost lives”, and that there was "much more that can be done" to counter it.
However, the government has stopped short of saying such misinformation should necessarily be removed, instead raising the prospect that it could instead be de-monetised, given that “making money from this dangerous content would be wrong”.
Imran Ahmed, a former Labour adviser who runs the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, said: “Despite big tech's promises, Google is still funding anti-vax misinformation websites by placing advertisements on them, while Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube give well-known anti-vaxxers a platform to spread dangerous conspiracy theories and lies to millions of users.
"Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, big tech has made bold claims of intent, but failed to follow through with effective action. It is vital that there are sanctions when social media companies fail to fulfil their duty of care to users and society at large. The government must stop falling for big tech’s excuses, and introduce financial and criminal penalties for failures that lead to serious harm.
“We have all done our bit to contain coronavirus. It's beyond time for social media companies and regulators to do their bit too.”
Free speech campaigners however warned that the approach could be counterproductive and “push the argument underground”.
“In the midst of a public health emergency ensuring that there is accurate information about treatments and vaccines is key,” Ruth Smeeth, chief executive of Index On Censorship told The Independent.
"However we can’t ignore that people may challenge and push back against the scientific facts. Surely the answer isn’t to ban the anti-vaxxers but to explain why they are wrong on every available platform.
"Demonstrate why the science is right rather then push the argument underground where rational argument will be lost." LINK
When did you last hear a Liarbour stooge advocate more freedom as a cure for a social ill?Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018
Re: Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content
Think of it this way m...if vaccines were so efficacious and if the arguments for them so strong why push opposition underground? I can only see censorship as being counter productive to the aims of those imposing it..
Re: Labour calls for emergency censorship laws for anti-vax content
Further info about think tank, Center for Countering Digital Hate, mentioned in the (above) Independent article:
Previous Message
Comments read online
The Independent's article reveals the agenda is being pushed by a strange organisation called the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) (and yes, although it is based in East Finchley, London, it uses the American spelling).
The Center for Countering Digital Hate previously came into prominence for its role in the Labour Party “anti-semitism” controversy.
Its patron is Rachel Riley, the pro-Israel TV presenter who notoriously smeared Jeremy Corbyn.
The CCDH's boss, Imran Ahmed, who is quoted in The Independent article, used to work as a spin doctor for Blairite Labour Party politician Angela Eagle.
In 2020 the CCDH suddenly, and inexplicably, switched its focus from Labour "anti-semitism" to attacking those who dared to challenge the official line on Covid.
This has now evolved into these calls for all questioning of vaccines to be censored.
In doing so, the CCDH has been rolling out the same smearing, emotive language (“hate”, “populism”, “conspiracy theories”) that it previously used in an entirely different context.
Big pharma did this to themselves. Its *nobody else's* fault ..
Now they will precipitate the next crisis of trust, by lobbying to censor people for any kind of criticism.
Its almost a reflection of US foreign policy - pharma seem incapable of any kind of diplomacy, or any kind of sensible, constructive thought or action.
Thugs in suits.
- Shyaku
..And of course the Labor Party will go along with it - "blooding"..
"Everyone should be tested for coronavirus every month to give people “freedom passes” to resume everyday activities, Jeremy Hunt says.
"The former health secretary today urges Boris Johnson to set an Easter deadline to return to more normal life through mass testing with rapid home testing kits, even if vaccines have not come through by then.
"Pilot schemes in Liverpool are offering tests to anyone who wants one but Mr Hunt, who chairs the Commons health select committee, urges the government to go further and give people an incentive to be tested by allowing them “to go out, shop and go to work” if they test negative.
A nightmare world with severely reduced freedoms awaits us I fear. And speaking of fear, that's the way through which it is being achieved: many people so desperate for a solution after the incessant scare stories, they're happy to sign up for Big Brother controlling them as long as they're "safe". And the Left, which might be the natural place to look for dissent have been largely taken in by the "make sacrifice to save lives" mantra that they're not seeing what world we will be left with.
Re: Big pharma did this to themselves. Its *nobody else's* fault ..
Imran Ahmed founded CCDH in December 2017. He frequently appears in the media as an expert in online malignant behaviour (identity-based hate; misinformation; extremism; fake news; trolling; and social media). Imran is a trustee of the charity, Victim Support. He was appointed to the Steering Committee of the UK Government's Commission on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force in April 2020. Imran holds an MA in Social and Political Sciences from the University of Cambridge, is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, and tweets at @imi_ahmed
The Center's board supports and scrutinises the work of the Center, ensuring good governance, adherence to our values and the sustainable deployment of our resources. Our board members are:
Simon Clark (Chair)
Damian Collins MP
Dr Siobhan McAndrew
Kirsty McNeill
Lord Jonny Oates
Ayesha Saran
Imran Ahmed Chief Executive Officer
- Ms Riley leads such a busy life. Her name has appeared many times on this board.
No info on the funders apart from the fact that they are 'philanthopic trusts and members of the public'.
One of them - Damian Collins is the Con MP Folkestone and Hythe
'Damian Collins @DamianCollins Yesterday I took part in the @CommonsBBCom debate on #OnlineHarms. There are difficult decisions to be made about what harmful content is and what needs to be done, but I don't believe those decisions should be made solely by the chief execs of the social media companies 1/2'
'This is a broken business model that prioritises the amplification of content that engages people, and doesn't care whether or not that content is harmful. That is simply not good enough #OnlineHarms 2/2'
I'm not anti-vax either, having a GP father who had childhood polio. But this virus is not polio or smallpox or yellow fever, and it's doubtful whether vaccination would be either justified or necessary for the bulk of the population, particularly in poorer countries. There is far more potential danger to them from vaccination, particularly with one of these untried and highly unusual mRNA vaccines. The previous article I wrote for AHT - "Vaccines - who needs them?" sounds like an anti vaxer rant, but like much of my input is based on the wise words of Didier Raoult, who suggested that a vaccine needed to be tested on 50 or 100,000 people before it could be pronounced safer than catching the infection for anyone under 50. The Russian and Chinese vaccines to my mind are worth considering, if you don't manage to get exposed to the Virus. Anyway who could possibly trust these manipulators?
Re: Two things here...
Posted by margo on November 23, 2020, 11:38 am, in reply to "Two things here..."
Thanks, David. Out of interest, why would you consider the Russian or Chinese vaccinations? are they not also based on mRNA?
No Margo -
Posted by David Macilwain on November 23, 2020, 12:29 pm, in reply to "Re: Two things here..."
The Chinese one is a "traditional" killed virus type, while the Russian one is based on the Human Adenovirus, which provokes an immune response that is also effective against Coronavirus. When the Russian one was first announced a couple of months back there was a good article about it, and how it was based on a dual mechanism which made it more effective. THe Oxford vaccine is similar, but based on a monkey Adenovirus, introducing an unknown quantity. I try to be non-sectarian and scientific and unprejudiced, though sometimes prejudices are in order. Cheers David.
Thanks for info (nm)
Posted by margo on November 23, 2020, 2:10 pm, in reply to "No Margo - "
on November 21, 2020, 6:17 pm
Previous Message