[fanofourforebears]

Had a brief discussion with someone who grew up in a Communist country who is concerned that if we don't have a truly free and independent press we could be in trouble if we are not already in regards to issues such as Covid 19.  Thoughts?

[fanofourforebears]

Had a brief discussion with someone who grew up in a Communist country who is concerned that if we don't have a truly free and independent press we could be in trouble if we are not already in regards to issues such as Covid 19.  Thoughts?

[JustAnotherFan]

Had a brief discussion with someone who grew up in a Communist country who is concerned that if we don't have a truly free and independent press we could be in trouble if we are not already in regards to issues such as Covid 19.  Thoughts?

Well the press has been free to promote absurd conspiracy theories about the source of Covid-19, miracle cures, and the tyranny of NPIs so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?

[JustAnotherFan]

Had a brief discussion with someone who grew up in a Communist country who is concerned that if we don't have a truly free and independent press we could be in trouble if we are not already in regards to issues such as Covid 19.  Thoughts?

Well the press has been free to promote absurd conspiracy theories about the source of Covid-19, miracle cures, and the tyranny of NPIs so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?

[Snorlax94]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

[Snorlax94]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

[Genuine Realist]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

I think you are correct, previously known as fan of four feathers or what not. He was quite an idiosyncratic poster, one quite easy to ignore with or without a moderator.

[Genuine Realist]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

I think you are correct, previously known as fan of four feathers or what not. He was quite an idiosyncratic poster, one quite easy to ignore with or without a moderator.

[teejers1]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

I think you are correct, previously known as fan of four feathers or what not. He was quite an idiosyncratic poster, one quite easy to ignore with or without a moderator.

Correct, which is why I cringed at an earlier post welcoming  FooF.  But it's been  a while, so understandable.

[teejers1]

I believe fanofourforebears is from the old thunderdome — kind of an early beta of what a Stanford sports parler would be  — whose demise illustrates what happens when a social media website is “free” to have no rules, no policies, no moderators, no fact-checking and no ground rules.

Perhaps that is the “freedom” this nebulous mystery friend from a mystery oppressed country so fervidly yearns for.

I think you are correct, previously known as fan of four feathers or what not. He was quite an idiosyncratic poster, one quite easy to ignore with or without a moderator.

Correct, which is why I cringed at an earlier post welcoming  FooF.  But it's been  a while, so understandable.

[akiddoc]

If FOOF posts some of the things he posted on that board, he will be quickly disappeared here. Assuming it's a "he."

[akiddoc]

If FOOF posts some of the things he posted on that board, he will be quickly disappeared here. Assuming it's a "he."

[fanofourforebears]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me. Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan. I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”

If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

[fanofourforebears]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me. Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan. I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”

If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

[M T]

FanOfForeBears makes a statement, and asks for thoughts.  At least, JAF responded with his thoughts, and tied them to COVID-19. 

I was the one that welcomed FanOfOurForebears in a reply to his first post on the Cardboard.  I know nothing of Thunderdome or the apparent history some of you may have (Discussed back in June here).  GR, if FanOfForeBears is idiosyncratic, he's not alone here.

HOWEVER, FanOfOurForebears, unless I misunderstood it, your post seems to have essentially nothing to do with COVID-19 and is instead about freedom of the press.  Am I wrong?    A worthy topic of course, but despite some diversions into politics that I hoped would have ended with the election (but haven't), this COVID-19 forum is intended to be about the disease and its ramifications.  See the Terry Rule.

[M T]

FanOfForeBears makes a statement, and asks for thoughts.  At least, JAF responded with his thoughts, and tied them to COVID-19. 

I was the one that welcomed FanOfOurForebears in a reply to his first post on the Cardboard.  I know nothing of Thunderdome or the apparent history some of you may have (Discussed back in June here).  GR, if FanOfForeBears is idiosyncratic, he's not alone here.

HOWEVER, FanOfOurForebears, unless I misunderstood it, your post seems to have essentially nothing to do with COVID-19 and is instead about freedom of the press.  Am I wrong?    A worthy topic of course, but despite some diversions into politics that I hoped would have ended with the election (but haven't), this COVID-19 forum is intended to be about the disease and its ramifications.  See the Terry Rule.

[JustAnotherFan]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”

If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"

Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

But if we are going down this path, none of the "rights" in the Bill of Rights are absolute, and some are simply waived off as no big deal. The only examples I have seen of the freedom of the press being infringed has been when cops kept shooting rubber bullets, bean bags, and chemical agents at mainstream reporters who were covering the George Floyd / Black Lives Matter protests in the summer. So again, what are you getting at?

[JustAnotherFan]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”

If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"

Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

But if we are going down this path, none of the "rights" in the Bill of Rights are absolute, and some are simply waived off as no big deal. The only examples I have seen of the freedom of the press being infringed has been when cops kept shooting rubber bullets, bean bags, and chemical agents at mainstream reporters who were covering the George Floyd / Black Lives Matter protests in the summer. So again, what are you getting at?

[fanofourforebears]

FanOfForeBears makes a statement, and asks for thoughts.  At least, JAF responded with his thoughts, and tied them to COVID-19. 



HOWEVER, FanOfOurForebears, unless I misunderstood it, your post seems to have essentially nothing to do with COVID-19 and is instead about freedom of the press.  Am I wrong?  

Hi M T.  I believe when it comes to a new illness and the Government's response to it, a free and independent press is essential to guard against tyranny and propaganda.  I don't follow all that is in the media as much as others.  So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.  I sure hope it is and continues to be free and independent, but from what I have heard from others there appears to be some valid concerns, hence the topic of this post when it comes to its coverage of all things Covid-19.  Thanks for your being the first to welcome me to the board.

[fanofourforebears]

FanOfForeBears makes a statement, and asks for thoughts.  At least, JAF responded with his thoughts, and tied them to COVID-19. 



HOWEVER, FanOfOurForebears, unless I misunderstood it, your post seems to have essentially nothing to do with COVID-19 and is instead about freedom of the press.  Am I wrong?  

Hi M T.  I believe when it comes to a new illness and the Government's response to it, a free and independent press is essential to guard against tyranny and propaganda.  I don't follow all that is in the media as much as others.  So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.  I sure hope it is and continues to be free and independent, but from what I have heard from others there appears to be some valid concerns, hence the topic of this post when it comes to its coverage of all things Covid-19.  Thanks for your being the first to welcome me to the board.

[fanofourforebears]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

[fanofourforebears]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

[BostonCard]

So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.

Can I follow-up on this?  Can you offer some examples of what the American media has not reported on with regards to COVID-19?  Secondly, who is suppressing the press' independence with regards to how it reports COVID-19?

BC

[BostonCard]

So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.

Can I follow-up on this?  Can you offer some examples of what the American media has not reported on with regards to COVID-19?  Secondly, who is suppressing the press' independence with regards to how it reports COVID-19?

BC

[JustAnotherFan]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

[JustAnotherFan]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

[Genuine Realist]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

'Idiosyncratic' was somewhat euphemistic, as you may discover shortly.

[Genuine Realist]

....He was quite an idiosyncratic poster...

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

'Idiosyncratic' was somewhat euphemistic, as you may discover shortly.

[Snorlax94]

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

'Idiosyncratic' was somewhat euphemistic, as you may discover shortly.

LOL

Well put, GR

[Snorlax94]

teejers1, Snorflax, Genuine Realist, akidcoc, you might be mistaken about me.  Thank you for your response JustAnotherFan.  I will try to live up to the definition given below for idiosyncratic as used as an adjective (and hope this will suffice to keep me from being disappeared from here):

1. pertaining to the nature of idiosyncrasy, or something peculiar to an individual: The best minds are idiosyncratic and unpredictable as they follow the course of scientific discovery... 
   
   Now, back to the topic I hope you might find interesting to discuss:
   
   

“The First Amendment is the safety valve of our democracy,” says US free press advocate Trevor Timm (TED Talk: How free is our freedom of the press?). “It has always been the bulwark against secret government, against authoritarianism and against tyranny.”



If we need the press to be free and independent, is the press or to what degree is the press of today free and independent in how it is covering and investigating matters related to Covid-19?  What is your take?  Thoughts?

Perhaps you could start by answering the question I posed: "Do you or your contact believe that the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid?"



Fox News is the most popular source of TV news in the country. It has been free to peddle lies and disinformation that has most likely led to a worsening of the pandemic, and has undermined public health efforts. There is lots of money to be made selling snake oil so places like OAN and the Washington Examiner are also in on it. The government has not infringed on their "right" to package lies as journalism. In fact, the chief executive has amplified them. So what are you getting at?

Hi Just Another Fan, I don't know if or to what extent the government has been preventing the press from reporting even the most absurd claims regarding Covid-19.  What do you know on this?  Just as an example, but do you remember the push to "ban" HCQ and the push for Remdesivir in the reporting on treatments for Covid19?  For me it raised concerns about politics and/or the a little too much influence by Big Pharma over what is and was being reported.  How about you?  Some of the protocols, treatments, and even the way the new vaccines are being developed need a free and independent press to investigate and report on if we are to be well informed.  Don't you agree?  I am concerned if we have or don't have a free press and to what degree we can rely upon and trust what and how things are being reported on Covid-19.  And when I speak of freedom, it is the freedom to report the truth or what is thought to be the truth in good faith, not lies.  That is why I asked the question.  I don't like lies.

You do realize that Hydroxychloroquine is produced by Big Pharma, right? And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)? The media did lots of pushing HCQ, especially right wing media such as Fox News and OAN. It seems you have a lot of concern without a scintilla of evidence that the government has done anything to infringe upon the media's right to free speech. You don't seem to actually care about the First Amendment, you just want to push nonsense. I don't have time for it. You're now the third person on my ignore list.

'Idiosyncratic' was somewhat euphemistic, as you may discover shortly.

LOL

Well put, GR

[fanofourforebears]

So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.

Can I follow-up on this?  Can you offer some examples of what the American media has not reported on with regards to COVID-19?  Secondly, who is suppressing the press' independence with regards to how it reports COVID-19?

BC

Hi BC, long time reader of your posts, especially on Stanford Football.  Yes, of course you can follow up. Thank you for the contributions you make here. I will have to get back to you to truly respond to what you have asked, I was hoping to glean your thoughts, not provide support for why I asked the questions I did.  Maybe I can do so in part by how I answer JustAnotherFan below?

---

... And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)?

 
Good point.  This touches upon my concern.  What if the Public health officials also have ties to Big Pharma or those who own and control both Big Pharma and much of the Main Stream media.  Might that impact the independence and freedom of the press and therefore have an impact on the trustworthiness and truthfulness of what is being reported? 

  you just want to push nonsense.  

  Lives are being ruined, livelihoods destroyed, viable and economical treatments banned, bad and costly treatments using ventilators including coercing those at risk to sign DNR are being pushed while isolating them from human contact. Statistics are being manipulated. Are you for what is taking place?

[fanofourforebears]

So far, based solely upon the opinions on the American media I have received from those who follow how it has reported on Covid-19, I now question how free and independent it is.

Can I follow-up on this?  Can you offer some examples of what the American media has not reported on with regards to COVID-19?  Secondly, who is suppressing the press' independence with regards to how it reports COVID-19?

BC

Hi BC, long time reader of your posts, especially on Stanford Football.  Yes, of course you can follow up. Thank you for the contributions you make here. I will have to get back to you to truly respond to what you have asked, I was hoping to glean your thoughts, not provide support for why I asked the questions I did.  Maybe I can do so in part by how I answer JustAnotherFan below?

---

... And you do realize that Big Pharma is not the same thing as the government (although they certainly have their hands in each other's pockets)?

 
Good point.  This touches upon my concern.  What if the Public health officials also have ties to Big Pharma or those who own and control both Big Pharma and much of the Main Stream media.  Might that impact the independence and freedom of the press and therefore have an impact on the trustworthiness and truthfulness of what is being reported? 

  you just want to push nonsense.  

  Lives are being ruined, livelihoods destroyed, viable and economical treatments banned, bad and costly treatments using ventilators including coercing those at risk to sign DNR are being pushed while isolating them from human contact. Statistics are being manipulated. Are you for what is taking place?

[fullmetal]

Given that I have seen a whole rainbow of opinions and "facts" published (sometimes too hastily) about all manner of Covid-19 topics, I'd say the press is pretty free to do whatever the heck it wants, including publishing typos and poor grammar...

Here's where things break down: you can effectively implement de facto censorship by gaming search algorithms to overwhelm news readers with a barrage of seemingly different articles promoting opinion X over all other opinions or articles.  As it turns out, in today's internet news economy, you can publish whatever you want, but what others read is filtered by "popularity" and "engagement" to monetize ads.

Check out this Twitter account that lists the ten top-performing link posts by US Facebook pages in the past 24 hrs: https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10

I have no qualms about our freedom of press.  In fact, elements of the "press" have been known to promote falsehoods and dangerous opinions without consequence, so maybe we're too free?  (Dangerous opinion, I know.)  It's what's in between the press and our eyeballs that might be the problem, if we allow something to get in between the press and our eyeballs.

[fullmetal]

Given that I have seen a whole rainbow of opinions and "facts" published (sometimes too hastily) about all manner of Covid-19 topics, I'd say the press is pretty free to do whatever the heck it wants, including publishing typos and poor grammar...

Here's where things break down: you can effectively implement de facto censorship by gaming search algorithms to overwhelm news readers with a barrage of seemingly different articles promoting opinion X over all other opinions or articles.  As it turns out, in today's internet news economy, you can publish whatever you want, but what others read is filtered by "popularity" and "engagement" to monetize ads.

Check out this Twitter account that lists the ten top-performing link posts by US Facebook pages in the past 24 hrs: https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10

I have no qualms about our freedom of press.  In fact, elements of the "press" have been known to promote falsehoods and dangerous opinions without consequence, so maybe we're too free?  (Dangerous opinion, I know.)  It's what's in between the press and our eyeballs that might be the problem, if we allow something to get in between the press and our eyeballs.

[oldalum]

 viable and economical treatments banned

As someone who tries to keep up with the evolving medical literature on treatment of Covid-19, I'd greatly appreciate some clarification and evidence regarding this statement. Does "viable" mean "proven effective," "possibly effective," or if something else, what? I'd also appreciate evidence about which specific treatments you are referring to, who has banned them and how, and why? Thanks in advance.

[oldalum]

 viable and economical treatments banned

As someone who tries to keep up with the evolving medical literature on treatment of Covid-19, I'd greatly appreciate some clarification and evidence regarding this statement. Does "viable" mean "proven effective," "possibly effective," or if something else, what? I'd also appreciate evidence about which specific treatments you are referring to, who has banned them and how, and why? Thanks in advance.

[fanofourforebears]

 viable and economical treatments banned

As someone who tries to keep up with the evolving medical literature on treatment of Covid-19, I'd greatly appreciate some clarification and evidence regarding this statement. Does "viable" mean "proven effective," "possibly effective," or if something else, what? I'd also appreciate evidence about which specific treatments you are referring to, who has banned them and how, and why? Thanks in advance.

Hi Old Alum, here goes... Our bodies are designed to both protect against attacks to our cells and to repair damage from the attacks from toxins. Healthy cells can release Exosomes and/or certain Enzymes, which seek out and digest the toxins when under attack. Also, cells can recover from damage from toxin attacks by using essential nutrients, such as vitamin C or D3 to conduct needed repairs and maintenance.
Sometimes we need a little help so treatments can and might be needed. Two treatments that have had some success are Vitamin C and Hydroxychloroquine. Vitamin C reduces damage to cells from toxins. Hydroxychloroquine stimulates the body to release of lysosomal enzymes which eat and digest toxins. Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)) is known to have worked to treat Sars and the work done by Raoult Didiet showed treatments that included HCQ are preferable to putting patient on ventilators and knocking them out or to the more expensive and likely to cause side effects to the liver and kidneys such as Remdesivir which have been pushed for and encouraged to be used instead of therapies or treatments including HCQ. Raoult Didier's studies also showed a reduction in clogging from using HCQ are a help to the patient. Most treatments in both America and France involving HCQ have nonetheless been either discouraged or banned. This is unfortunate as Doctors should be able to decide, not politicians as to what is best for their patients.

---

Given that I have seen a whole rainbow of opinions and "facts" published (sometimes too hastily) about all manner of Covid-19 topics, I'd say the press is pretty free to do whatever the heck it wants, including publishing typos and poor grammar...

Here's where things break down: you can effectively implement de facto censorship by gaming search algorithms to overwhelm news readers with a barrage of seemingly different articles promoting opinion X over all other opinions or articles.  As it turns out, in today's internet news economy, you can publish whatever you want, but what others read is filtered by "popularity" and "engagement" to monetize ads.

Check out this Twitter account that lists the ten top-performing link posts by US Facebook pages in the past 24 hrs: https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10

I have no qualms about our freedom of press.  In fact, elements of the "press" have been known to promote falsehoods and dangerous opinions without consequence, so maybe we're too free?  (Dangerous opinion, I know.)  It's what's in between the press and our eyeballs that might be the problem, if we allow something to get in between the press and our eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I want a free press, as in "free" to investigate and report the truth wherever it leads them.  I am not sure just repeating what has been handed to them, as appears far to often to be the case today qualifies.  For instance, the reporting on the cost of the Covid-19 restrictions linked by Mick, that does not seem to be a very accurate or responsibly investigated story, or those stories coming from organizations such as the CTP.  I think we deserve more truth from the media and this means more unbiased investigation and reporting.

[fanofourforebears]

 viable and economical treatments banned

As someone who tries to keep up with the evolving medical literature on treatment of Covid-19, I'd greatly appreciate some clarification and evidence regarding this statement. Does "viable" mean "proven effective," "possibly effective," or if something else, what? I'd also appreciate evidence about which specific treatments you are referring to, who has banned them and how, and why? Thanks in advance.

Hi Old Alum, here goes... Our bodies are designed to both protect against attacks to our cells and to repair damage from the attacks from toxins. Healthy cells can release Exosomes and/or certain Enzymes, which seek out and digest the toxins when under attack. Also, cells can recover from damage from toxin attacks by using essential nutrients, such as vitamin C or D3 to conduct needed repairs and maintenance.
Sometimes we need a little help so treatments can and might be needed. Two treatments that have had some success are Vitamin C and Hydroxychloroquine. Vitamin C reduces damage to cells from toxins. Hydroxychloroquine stimulates the body to release of lysosomal enzymes which eat and digest toxins. Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)) is known to have worked to treat Sars and the work done by Raoult Didiet showed treatments that included HCQ are preferable to putting patient on ventilators and knocking them out or to the more expensive and likely to cause side effects to the liver and kidneys such as Remdesivir which have been pushed for and encouraged to be used instead of therapies or treatments including HCQ. Raoult Didier's studies also showed a reduction in clogging from using HCQ are a help to the patient. Most treatments in both America and France involving HCQ have nonetheless been either discouraged or banned. This is unfortunate as Doctors should be able to decide, not politicians as to what is best for their patients.

---

Given that I have seen a whole rainbow of opinions and "facts" published (sometimes too hastily) about all manner of Covid-19 topics, I'd say the press is pretty free to do whatever the heck it wants, including publishing typos and poor grammar...

Here's where things break down: you can effectively implement de facto censorship by gaming search algorithms to overwhelm news readers with a barrage of seemingly different articles promoting opinion X over all other opinions or articles.  As it turns out, in today's internet news economy, you can publish whatever you want, but what others read is filtered by "popularity" and "engagement" to monetize ads.

Check out this Twitter account that lists the ten top-performing link posts by US Facebook pages in the past 24 hrs: https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10

I have no qualms about our freedom of press.  In fact, elements of the "press" have been known to promote falsehoods and dangerous opinions without consequence, so maybe we're too free?  (Dangerous opinion, I know.)  It's what's in between the press and our eyeballs that might be the problem, if we allow something to get in between the press and our eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I want a free press, as in "free" to investigate and report the truth wherever it leads them.  I am not sure just repeating what has been handed to them, as appears far to often to be the case today qualifies.  For instance, the reporting on the cost of the Covid-19 restrictions linked by Mick, that does not seem to be a very accurate or responsibly investigated story, or those stories coming from organizations such as the CTP.  I think we deserve more truth from the media and this means more unbiased investigation and reporting.

[BostonCard]

Fanoffourbears...

I'd like to direct you to this lengthy thread on hydroxychloroquine

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=19212

It's a nine page thread going back to March where the results of clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine were linked.  As you can see, it started out promising, but once you get towards the end and the high quality randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials are reported, you can see that the results are basically null.  While it is, of course, impossible to prove a negative, the results to date are incompatible with hydroxchloroquine having a clinically meaningful effect.

The limited data I have seen on Vitamin D is similar; while patients who do poorly disproportionately have vitamin D deficiencies, that turns out to be a marker of poor health generally, and supplemental vitamin D doesn't seem to make a difference.  I've seen less about vitamin C, but as a water soluble vitamin, I would be surprised if large quantity supplements do much other than get excreted in the urine.

There are cheap drugs that do work and they are being used for people with COVID-19.  Chief among these is dexamethasone, which results in an improvement in survival, especially amongst the sickest patients.

I think it is important to keep an open mind about drugs that could help with COVID-19, especially approved drugs that are available in generic formulations cheaply.  But it is also important not to get too caught up on any one therapy.  Most drugs or vitamins aren't going to work, so it should be no surprise if your favorite one doesn't.

BC

[BostonCard]

Fanoffourbears...

I'd like to direct you to this lengthy thread on hydroxychloroquine

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=19212

It's a nine page thread going back to March where the results of clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine were linked.  As you can see, it started out promising, but once you get towards the end and the high quality randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials are reported, you can see that the results are basically null.  While it is, of course, impossible to prove a negative, the results to date are incompatible with hydroxchloroquine having a clinically meaningful effect.

The limited data I have seen on Vitamin D is similar; while patients who do poorly disproportionately have vitamin D deficiencies, that turns out to be a marker of poor health generally, and supplemental vitamin D doesn't seem to make a difference.  I've seen less about vitamin C, but as a water soluble vitamin, I would be surprised if large quantity supplements do much other than get excreted in the urine.

There are cheap drugs that do work and they are being used for people with COVID-19.  Chief among these is dexamethasone, which results in an improvement in survival, especially amongst the sickest patients.

I think it is important to keep an open mind about drugs that could help with COVID-19, especially approved drugs that are available in generic formulations cheaply.  But it is also important not to get too caught up on any one therapy.  Most drugs or vitamins aren't going to work, so it should be no surprise if your favorite one doesn't.

BC