Neil Young demands Spotify remove his music.

[Kiss this guy]

Bore off everyone and close the thread.

 

[Bigga]

Where is the outrage about the misinformation from MSM about this 270 doctors lie ?

See, this question is why I don't bother engaging with the 'intelligent' posters on here. They like to avoid the really pertinent questions that would contradict their whole moral purpose as their carry on with their 'principles'. They act like you never asked a question.

They're really good at it.

'Misinformation' also belongs to Rachel Maddow, Fauci, CNN and more.

It's a joke about who's 'misinformation' is more 'accepted'.

 

[Bigga]

But he's happy to be on the same streaming platform (Apple Music) with Gary Glitter, R Kelly and Ian Watkins? Is misinformation worse than pedophilia? How far does he go?

Collective moral compasses are broken on this thread.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Bore off everyone and close the thread.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

But he's happy to be on the same streaming platform (Apple Music) with Gary Glitter, R Kelly and Ian Watkins? Is misinformation worse than pedophilia? How far does he go?

Who knows — we could be on this platform with a murderer, a rapist or a drug-dealing, gang-banging, ex-convict.

Gary Glitter isn’t hosting a show nor does he own the pipeline. Also if you listen to Rogan on Spotify, aren’t you just as guilty then?

See, these “what about” arguments don’t work. Nor do the censorship arguments.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

See, this question is why I don't bother engaging with the 'intelligent' posters on here. They like to avoid the really pertinent questions that would contradict their whole moral purpose as their carry on with their 'principles'. They act like you never asked a question.

They're really good at it.

'Misinformation' also belongs to Rachel Maddow, Fauci, CNN and more.

It's a joke about who's 'misinformation' is more 'accepted'.

What point are you trying to make?

MSM is not a homogeneous blob. Some outlets will have been more sloppy than others.

âMenace to public healthâ: 270 experts criticise Spotify over Joe Roganâs podcast

Doctors and scientists express concern about misinformation on Covid – and focus on an episode with virologist Robert Malone

www.theguardian.com

This is from the 14th, hasn't been edited as far as can tell and accurately refers to the group as "A total of 270 US doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals and professors".

If you have an issue with people on that list working as anything other than MD or epidemiologists, i.e. Phds and nurse practitioners, you might as well stop citing Dr John Campbell PhD RN.

 

[Bill Walker]

See, this question is why I don't bother engaging with the 'intelligent' posters on here. They like to avoid the really pertinent questions that would contradict their whole moral purpose as their carry on with their 'principles'. They act like you never asked a question.

They're really good at it.

'Misinformation' also belongs to Rachel Maddow, Fauci, CNN and more.

It's a joke about who's 'misinformation' is more 'accepted'.

That's probably because they dont see any point in arguing with antivaxx cranks.

Life is too short.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Where is the outrage about the misinformation from MSM about this 270 doctors lie ?

But how outraged should we be? You’re going through the process of vetting each of the 270 names, right? If only like 7 are doctors, I’ll be pretty annoyed at the editor and the reporter, yes. If it’s like 240, who gives a fuck? It’s still 240 to 1.

But is there any number that’s going to change your mind that Malone is right and they’re wrong?

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

Bitterness about not getting all the credit, money and celebrity during the height of his career maybe?

Probably because the research he did into an existing product to help treat covid was found to be no use whatsoever.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

Science is about exactly this, coming to a consensus & NOT shutting down opposing views, they should be encouraged.

The more we try to shut down the debate, the worse it gets. Stop being intolerant of other experts who don't agree with views that you choose to believe.

I really enjoyed this take on the situation...

The first thing everyone should do when choosing which opinion to trust the most is to consider the veracity of the spokesperson. And that means taking into account their history. If this man hadn’t said things very recently that were proven untrue and acted irresponsibly with his social media content then he’d have more power to his message.

Unfortunately, for him, in important roles such as science and medical care, one’s reputation hangs on having a cautious opinion backed up by industry proven data.

It’s not about shutting anyone down, it’s about ensuring that messages given out are safe. “Free speech” includes information sharing routes as basic as local gossip, and that’s not always safe. There has to be governance on some topics.