I’ve written a piece for Mail+ today on why it was wrong for YouTube, Facebook and Twitter to remove content defending the lab leak theory and label it ‘misinformation’, given that it’s now entered the mainstream. One of the best arguments against censorship on Social media is that the ‘independent’ fact-checkers the companies rely on to determine which points of view are respectable and which are ‘conspiracy theories’ will inevitably make mistakes – and the transformation of the lab leak theory from fringe hypothesis to most likely explanation is a perfect illustration of this. Here’s an extract:
A few weeks ago, former New York Times science writer and freelance British journalist Nicholas Wade wrote a blog post setting out the case for the lab leak theory in meticulous detail and it was as if the spell was broken. Suddenly, those putting forward this hypothesis were no longer “conspiracy theorists”, even if the Wikipedia page on Covid-19 Misinformation still describes us in that way.
On May 14, 12 days after Wade’s piece appeared, 18 scientists, including some from MIT and Harvard, wrote a letter to Science, a prestigious journal, saying both theories were “viable” and deserved rigorous investigation.
Shortly afterwards, the editorial board of the Washington Post called for the lab leak theory to be properly looked into and – a few days ago – even Dr Fauci himself conceded defeat, saying he’s “not convinced” Covid-19 developed naturally and calling for further investigation.
What all this goes to show is that no one has a monopoly on the truth when it comes to this virus – not eminent scientists, not government advisors, and certainly not social media companies. Those of us who depart from the official narrative should not be accused of spreading “misinformation” and silenced by the powers that be. Rather, we should be permitted to set out our case in the public square, supporting it with evidence and reason, and if the gatekeepers of respectable opinion think we’re wrong, they should set out their reasons in the same spirit of open debate, not smear us as “cranks” or “conspiracy theorists”.
When it comes to the lab leak theory, we may still turn out to be wrong. But the only way to find out is through a dispassionate, rigorous investigation. Censorship has never been a good technique for finding out the truth.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“Dr James Moreton Wakeley is a former parliamentary researcher with a PhD in History from Oxford.”
I’m afraid it shows.
I think it’s necessary to be able to stand a bit more outside the box of the political class to present a more penetrating observation of it.
Not “a fantastic original essay”. It just doesn’t get to the essence. More a missed target, if correct in parts.
Yes, but the question begged is who are the political class dancing around. Moreton Wakeley is quite funny about their victimhood but how about Gates, Schwab, Soros, Bezos, GAVI, GM food, digital surveillance etc. These are what Boris Johnson with his limited vocabulary would say are making “fantastic” progress while the rest of us are under the cosh
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-4th-industrial-revolution
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-speech-to-un-general-assembly-26-september-2020
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-call-with-bill-and-melinda-gates-19-may-2020
https://www.gavi.org/investing-gavi/resource-mobilisation-process/gavis-3rd-donor-pledging-conference-june-2020
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-digital-identity-and-attributes-trust-framework/the-uk-digital-identity-and-attributes-trust-framework
https://www.anhinternational.org/news/close-the-back-door-to-unregulated-gene-edited-foods/
Not bad, but I agree with Rick and Phantom, I have read better in LeftLDS and Iain Davis and in Off-Guardian where the authors felt able to be more decisive and specific.
However it makes good points about group-think , this applies to a wider London metro set than just politicians of course and in my mind is fundamental to the problems in the UK. It applies to ‘climate crisis’ as much as covid. There is a set of people who hated that Brexit and Trump delayed their imperious movement to a global hegmony. They are using covid to ‘get their own back’ in as unpleasant a way as possible.
But this is not a conspiracy with a capital ‘C’, its just the confluence of forces that want to make a lot of money and gain a lot of power by unleashing a resource constraint capitalism , using a fairly mild virus and 1degC/century of ‘heat’ as the means to pump fear into the populace and create a regime with them on top.
http://www.nommeraadio.ee/meedia/pdf/RRS/Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf
Mr Wakeley is right about the preference for computer models over empirical evidence, but to explain it as the result of the education of the political class is mere labelling, a non-explanation. I have no doubt they would prefer empirical evidence in a micro second if it suited their purposes.