What actually occurred when Twitter acted as a doctor during the coronavirus outbreak, then? According to Elon Musk, everyone will know.
On Sunday, Musk was questioned on Twitter about the possibility of an exposé detailing how the dominant social media platform adhered to the party agenda during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Oh it is coming bigtime,” Musk said.
When will we get the twitter files on covid? The info on the suspension of the many doctors and scientists? Who was involved? Suppression of what has turned out to be factual information.
— Aaron Murray (@murraymints82) December 11, 2022
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 11, 2022
Musk has started a project called the “Twitter Files” in which journalists he personally selected have revealed details about Twitter’s covert efforts to censor discourse on the network, most recently regarding the exclusion of former President Donald Trump.
Musk later added a zinger directed at Dr. Anthony Fauci. Musk, one of the richest men in the world and a pioneer of electric vehicles and space exploration, helped make his Twitter account prominent even before he purchased the social media platform.
He wrote, “My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci,” making fun of the progressive mania for choosing personal pronouns as well as the head of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the nation’s de facto COVID czar.
Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia responded to that.
My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 11, 2022
Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” has already stated that he will permit Twitter to be a free platform for debate on COVID-19 under his ownership, in contrast to the strict moderation of posts that was a trademark of Twitter during the outbreak.
According to an editorial by Megan McArdle in the Washington Post, published on December 3, Elon Musk made the right decision by pledging not to use the COVID censoring mechanism again.
“I understand the temptation to simply say ‘Shut up and go away’ rather than try to argue people away from beliefs I considered to be poorly evidenced and dangerous. I gave in to that temptation more than once. Unfortunately, I now suspect this did more harm than good — and all the more so when it was official corporate policy rather than criticism from a frazzled columnist,” she said.
More on this story via The Western Journal:
“For one thing, moderators aren’t good at determining what constitutes actual misinformation. A lot of the dangerous nonsense about covid that circulated on social media came from the same public health experts social media companies were using as arbiters,” she wrote.
She wrote that the partnership between “public health experts” and social media executives was a breeding ground for suspicions. CONTINUE READING…