Academics Justifying COVID Info Censorship, the Agenda to Not Allow Both Sides of the Argument
You often here how there are two sides to a story. This is the case for anything pretty much. There is a claim, and a counter-claim. In a clean fashion, one side is wrong, and one side is right. Sometimes, it’s not so cut and dry, and you can have both sides with some things that are right and wrong.
We find ourselves at a time when agendas are being pushed with little concern to openly air out the arguments. Instead, censorship is reigning. Be it in the mainstream media that simply doesn’t talk about certain things so people aren’t even aware of them, or the social media big tech giants that censor and ban content that attempts to provide the counter-argument.
A recent article on The Conversation by a “Professor of Psychology” and “Research Fellow in Education” is openly advocating to silence opposing voices. They don’t want both sides of an argument to get air time or exposure anywhere. They want people to follow Scientism, where only “trusted”, “authoritative” and “approved” scientists can know what is true or not.
And to prevent optimism bias, we also need to avoid presenting “both sides of the argument” in the messaging – the science tells us that there’s only one side.
One side. That’s science for them. Be it climate change (formerly global warming) or COVID-19, there is only one side. The other scientists who have arguments and data for their counter-argument don’t matter. You, peon who can’t think for yourself, need to listen to the approved an sanctioned authoritative experts, and no one else. You need us to tell you what to think and what to believe.