PDA

View Full Version : Facebook Must Shut Down the Anti-Vaxxers



shadowstalker
7th March 2015, 00:25
Facebook Must Shut Down the Anti-Vaxxers (http://time.com/3714990/zuckerberg-vaccines-facebook/)

Jeffrey Kluger @jeffreykluger Feb. 19, 2015

Mark Zuckerberg should unfriend the crazies before more people get hurt

Mark Zuckerberg has never been famous for his reading choices. No one knows or cares if the founder of Facebook got around to Moby Dick when he was at Harvard. But in January, Zuckerberg launched an online book club, offering reading recommendations to members every two weeks. Earlier suggestions included such important works as Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature and Sudhir Venkatesh’s Gang Leader for a Day.

But Zuckerberg dropped something of a small bombshell with his most recent—and most excellent—choice, On Immunity by Eula Biss. It’s a thoughtful exploration of what’s behind the irrational fear and suspicion in the anti-vaccine community, as well as a full-throated call for parents to heed medical wisdom and get their kids vaccinated. “The science is completely clear,” Zuckerberg writes, “vaccinations work and are important for the health of everyone in our community.”

So kudos to Zuckerberg for getting the truth out and challenging the lies.

And shame on Zuckerberg for enabling those lies, too.

Social media sites can do an exceedingly good job of keeping people connected and, more important, spreading the word about important social issues. (Think the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge would have raised the $100 million it did for research into Lou Gehrig’s disease if people couldn’t post the videos of themselves being heroically doused?) But it’s long been clear the sites can be used perniciously too.

Want to spend some time in the birther swamp, trading conspiracy theories with people who absolutely, positively can tell you the Kenyan hospital in which President Obama was born? You can find them online. Ditto the climate-denying cranks and the 9/11 truthers.

But the anti-vaxxers have a particular power. People who buy the nonsense on a birther or truther page can’t do much more than join that loony community and howl nonsense into the online wind. Climate change denial is a little more dangerous because every person who comes to believe that global warming is a massive hoax makes it a tiny, incremental bit harder to enact sensible climate policy.

Anti-vaxxers, however, do their work at the grass-roots, retail, one-on-one level. Convince Mother A of the fake dangers of vaccines and you increase the odds that she won’t vaccinate Child B—and perhaps Children C, D or E either. And every unvaccinated child in her brood increases the risk to the neighborhood, the school, the community—the entire herd, as the epidemiologists put it. The multi-state measles outbreak that began in Disneyland, along with the epidemics of mumps and whooping cough in Columbus, Ohio and throughout California, have all been fueled by falling vaccine rates.

One thing that would help—something Zuckerberg could do with little more than a flick of the switch, as could Twitter CEO Dick Costolo and the other bosses of other sites—is simply shut the anti-vaxxers down. Really. Pull their pages, block their posts, twist the spigot of misinformation before more people get hurt.

The very idea of muzzling any information—even misinformation—will surely send libertarians to their fainting couches. Similarly, people who believe they understand the Constitution but actually don’t will immediately invoke the First Amendment. But of course they’re misguided. Is Facebook a government agency? No, it’s not. Is Zuckerberg a government official? No, he’s not. Then this is not a First Amendment issue. Read your Constitution.

It’s not as if the folks at Facebook aren’t clear about the kinds of things they will and won’t allow on the site, providing a brief listing and a detailed description of what are considered no-go areas. “You may not credibly threaten others, or organize acts of real-world violence,” is one rule, so nobody would get away with posting instructions for, say, how to build a pressure cooker bomb. There is nothing in the regulations that specifically prohibits trafficking in bogus medical information, but the first section of the policy statement begins, “Safety is Facebook’s top priority,” and then goes on to say “We remove content and may escalate to law enforcement when we perceive a genuine risk of physical harm, or a direct threat to public safety.” (Emphasis added.)

It’s worth wondering if Facebook would consider a page arguing that HIV does not cause AIDS and that therefore condoms are not necessary a threat to public safety. What about one that told teens that bogus research shows it’s OK to drive drunk if you’ve had no more than, say, three beers? If the site managers didn’t block these pages and a multi-car crack-up or a cluster of HIV infections occurred as a result, would they wish they they’d made a different decision? It’s hard to know. (As of publication time, Facebook had not responded to TIME’s request for a comment on, or further statement about, its policies.)

Facebook is equal parts town square, medium of communication and commercial bazaar—complete with ads. And it does all of those jobs well. What the site shouldn’t be is a vector for lies—especially lies that can harm children. Free speech is not in play here. This should be an easy call.

Earthlink
7th March 2015, 00:38
Raggedy Ann was originally made by the author of children's books, and he made it originally with eyes that were X X

He did this because he started a campaign to end vaccinations after his daughter died from getting vaccinated. Apparently it was done behind his back too.

Also, f/b made their initial IPO, so, it is too late now for them to go back, I guess. We should start another site just like it, even call it FaceBinder or something, but then never do an Initial Public Offering.

Anyway then the CIA bought controlling shares? Something like that.

Why does so much stoopid stuff happen?!?!?!? Well, those who print the money decide where it goes, and if they decide it goes into stupid, people will go there too.

WhiteFeather
7th March 2015, 00:45
Raggedy Ann was originally made by the author of children's books, and he made it originally with eyes that were X X

He did this because he started a campaign to end vaccinations after his daughter died from getting vaccinated. Apparently it was done behind his back too.

Also, f/b made their initial IPO, so, it is too late now for them to go back, I guess. We should start another site just like it, even call it FaceBinder or something, but then never do an Original Public Offering.

Anyway then the CIA bought controlling shares? Something like that.

Why does so much stoopid stuff happen?!?!?!? Well, those who print the money decide where it goes, and if they decide it goes into stupid, people will go there too.

I like the name Fakebook.

T Smith
7th March 2015, 01:10
Facebook Must Shut Down the Anti-Vaxxers (http://time.com/3714990/zuckerberg-vaccines-facebook/)

Jeffrey Kluger @jeffreykluger Feb. 19, 2015

...One thing that would help—something Zuckerberg could do with little more than a flick of the switch, as could Twitter CEO Dick Costolo and the other bosses of other sites—is simply shut the anti-vaxxers down. Really. Pull their pages, block their posts, twist the spigot of misinformation before more people get hurt.



Kluger obviously never studied at the Tavistock Institute. If it were that simple Facebook et. al would have censored the information long ago. But if they were ever to even attempt to "shut the anti-vaxxers" down, it would backfire miserably. It would produce the exact opposite effect as the one intended; it would serve to awaken far more people than it would keep the information from. Nothing serves to arouse the curiosity more than taboo.

zen deik
7th March 2015, 01:32
It's bigger than he is now.....it's ALIVE....

amor
7th March 2015, 04:42
Those who read the internet re vaccines and genocide finally realize that we are in a war with the elite who are not above spreading a germ to give a reason for vaccinating and then spiking that tool with death. Also, to load an infant under two years old whose immune system has not yet developed with a multitude of germs, spiked with additional death is direct murder. The immune system is made to fight one thing at a time, each of which takes time. We are not normally flooded with several deadly diseases at once, and so it is counter productive to think you are doing anything other than weakening the immune system with this hugely unnatural assault.

gripreaper
7th March 2015, 05:52
Anti-vaxxers, however, do their work at the grass-roots, retail, one-on-one level. Convince Mother A of the fake dangers of vaccines and you increase the odds that she won’t vaccinate Child B—and perhaps Children C, D or E either. And every unvaccinated child in her brood increases the risk to the neighborhood, the school, the community—the entire herd, as the epidemiologists put it. The multi-state measles outbreak that began in Disneyland, along with the epidemics of mumps and whooping cough in Columbus, Ohio and throughout California, have all been fueled by falling vaccine rates.

Jeez, this is SUCH propaganda, and this is my response cross posted from Funny Pro-vaccine Video (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?80363-Funny-Pro-Vaccine-Video&p=939165#post939165) thread.

Boy, they are sure ramping up their propaganda to entrain this meme into our consciousness.

Innocent Warrior
7th March 2015, 06:27
We're getting ads on our local radio stations which argue against the "anti-vaxxers" information. There are also posters about it at the medical centres.

If my neighbour's child is vaccinated and my child is not, what risk is my child to my neighbour's child if the vaccines work? The vaccinated children receive their first vaccination within minutes of birth, before they even leave the birthing suite. If the vaccines work, the children who haven't been vaccinated are at risk of infecting only each other, right? The issue pro vaxxers fail to address is their apparent lack of faith in the effectiveness of the vaccines, so why should anybody listen to their rants about unvaccinated children?

edina
7th March 2015, 14:34
This organization, NVIC (National Vaccine Information Center), (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http://www.nvic.org/&ei=roVPVNafJdbpoASN4YCYBw&usg=AFQjCNFqer6dnErzLp0i2oOmTD3qtyLmIw&bvm=bv.77880786,d.cGU) has done some great work in helping to support families of vaccine injured children navigate their way through the vaccine court.

They are also an great resource for tracking the attempts to legislate forced vaccinations.

Last October, their Facebook page was attacked in a way that simply stunned me. I wrote about that in this post. (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76447-Ebola-the-covert-op-of-modern-medicine--Jon-Rappoport-September-13-2014-&p=894192&viewfull=1#post894192)

The more people organize and collaborate together on this issue the better.

Also, a very well presented documentary about this just came out this week, BOUGHT (https://www.boughtmovie.net/free-viewing/). I think they're are keeping open to warch for free through the weekend.

----->

I agree, the more vaccines are forced down people's throats, the more people will question why this is actually happening and educate themselves.

Lifebringer
7th March 2015, 16:59
P.F.S.Z.=People'sFreeSpeechZone.com? Where you can say whatever you want to say/share as in JAC/just a curiosity PS will put Facebook off the highend like myspace.com, if we open a site similar FB, Google, Yahoo, and others would have a fit. A little competition by the people would show them how it's supposed to be done.

AwarePublicMind.com?

Lifebringer
7th March 2015, 18:12
Time to use the verbal grapevine, and not the networking one. Discussions at family reunions and holiday and birthday gatherings just before shutting down the occassion. Talk to the youth, elderly and friends about what has happened, while the public was worrying about Monica's dress and ColdwarEnding/Starwars. Seems those in the past didn't have much compassion for their fellow man or woman. This time..this time right here, right here? WE got to get this right and don't slap the wrist in justice, if the person is mentally ill with greed and distrucion to the planet, people, or other nations. Just fire them or retire them and remove all contact lists, laptops, and port/memory sticks. Send them home or jail, depending on the crime.

grannyfranny100
8th March 2015, 04:36
Look at the bigger picture. Free speech is fundamental to our culture but you might not understand that until they remove your viewpoint on something. Verbally fight for your opinion on Facebook, et al but don't limit my freedom to express my viewpoint. You are just aiding TPTB in their fascist ways.

Wind
8th March 2015, 14:50
Since 2009 and the flying swine episode I have told people not to take vaccines, of course almost all of them think that I am a nutcase, but if it stops even one person from taking those injections, then it's worth it. When I was a child, no one ever asked me if I wanted to be vaccinated. If I would have been able to arcticulate something then, I would have said no!

A Voice from the Mountains
9th March 2015, 00:41
People who write trash articles like the one posted in the OP are suddenly going to feel very funny when they realize they're in the minority and everyone is looking at them as accessories to mass murder and genocide.

The best case scenario for them would to be to admit their profound ignorance on the topics they write about, their incompetence as "journalists," and simply retire from writing articles.

etheric underground
12th March 2015, 11:04
I went for a check up to my G.P the other day...while I was there I wanted her honest opinion on vaccinations ( as Im about to have my first child)
I did not at first relay that I have already decided not to vaccinate.... she had some pretty impressive reasons why I should, including how bad
hooping cough is here in Australia. What altered her rebuttle was when I asked her if her kids had been inoculated with 58 different shots, like kids today, and
when I asked her why we give vaccinations to babies before 6 months old when they dont yet have there own antibodies....her tone changed and she tried to
bombard me with research jargon and the problems associated if they are not immunised. Weirdly after all her ranting and professional B.S she quite simply stated if
I was not to vaccinate my child, then do not let people come into contact with the baby with obvious virus' ( colds, flus etc..) in the first 6 months to a year.
and that the worst places to take a child was shopping centres, day care and doctor surgeries. She did not once agree with me but enough was said between the lines for me to realise that Doctors are controlled and manipulated, they believe the crap driven into them at college. When she said that the indigenous people ( aboriginals) love all the free vaccinations...and they realise the worth of them, I deeply understood that my doc, for all her intelligence was aiding and a bedding disease and death and she would not understand my decision.