Goldtent TA Paradise

what do you call it when something that was officially misinformation is now just “information?” Does it become “un-misinformation”? Or, is it now “de-misinformation,” or just “re-information?”

1. Fullgoldcrown says:

   March 2, 2023 - 11:21 am at 11:21 am

   Let’s recap the major conspiracy theories that all passed their six month expiration date over the last two weeks and are suddenly no longer misinformation. And, what do you call it when something that was officially misinformation is now just “information?” Does it become “un-misinformation”? Or, is it now “de-misinformation,” or just “re-information?”

   So confusing. Anyway, take a look at these FOUR giant issues that for the last three years were totally banned from public discussion by anyone who was cancelable:

   — As mentioned above, the Wuhan lab leak is no longer a conspiracy theory, having received support from two federal agencies, FBI Director Chris Wray, and now the US Senate.

   Remember that in 2020, Fauci and Francis Collins were so concerned about “lab leak” misinformation that they organized a secret media campaign to discredit anyone who promoted the idea. Oh, and lest we forget, it was a hate crime — “racist” — to blame the Wuhan Flu on Chyna.

   But not now!

   — A recent Lancet meta-analysis of SIXTY-FIVE other studies concluded that natural immunity is as good as, or better than, vaccine acquired immunity. The study showed that prior infection offered 78% protection against reinfection from the original Wuhan, Alpha or Delta variants at 40 weeks, although it slipped to 36% against Omicron. But natural immunity’s protection against severe illness remained around 90% across all variants after 40 weeks.

   It was bad enough that people were getting canceled on social media for promoting natural immunity. I don’t need to show you the montages of U.S. government officials, media personalities, and so-called “experts” babbling about how much better vaccine-induced immunity was than natural immunity, which was the reason why you should get your shots, your second shots, your third boosters, and so forth and so on.

   Never mind!

   — A George Mason University study compared areas with and without jab mandates, and concluded that the mandates neither increased vaccine uptake nor reduced covid cases. Imagine that. (Well, you can’t honestly say they didn’t do “anything,” since they did trash the economy.)

   Haha, if you’d tried posting something on Facebook last year about jab mandates failing to slow the spread of covid, I hope you stood back outside the blast radius.

   — And last but not least, the “gold standard” Cochrane meta-review pretty much definitely ended the mask debate: masks don’t work, at least if slowing the spread of covid is how you define “working.” But they are very effective for virtue signaling though. The best bit is you don’t even have to wear them, just put a mask in your bio pic. (You can also wear it alone in the car if it makes you feel more attractive or soothes your anxiety.)

   Since I personally have been labeled a “mask denier,” and “science denier,” and received death threats over my successful mask lawsuit precluding mask mandates in 31 Florida counties, not to mention being canceled from several platforms, I can tell you that this particular issue was more verboten than any other issue.

   Now it appears that *I* — not my critics — was following the science all along. THEY are the science deniers. And I bet a lot of you people are in the same boat as me.

   All four findings had previously been designated as “misinformation” or “disinformation” by the government and by major social media “fact checkers,” who still, by some miracle, appear to remain employed.

   So what on Earth is going on the last couple weeks? At least part of the explanation must include the freeing of Twitter, because of the Missouri v. Biden case, and because of the “Twitter files” exposure of government meddling in social media. At minimum, the lawsuit and those disclosures forced the government to stop, at least for the time being, or at least to stop being so obvious about it. That allowed one floodgate of free discourse to open, and the truth was out and running.

   That’s my best explanation. But I knew SOMETHING like this was coming, as I predicted in my last year-end post. A pressure had been mounting and it was obvious that something had to give.

   Let’s spend a moment contemplating the ooor fact checkers. Alas, the world peers but dimly at those tarnished souls who, hawking themselves as worthy of our trust, claimed to know the truth but then were shown to be mistaken, false, and overthrown, their grasping demands for our faith lying shattered and exposed. Isn’t it tragic to watch these self-appointed “fact-checkers” undone by their own lies, exposed as without honor, their dime-store reputations in tatters?

   The fact-checkers are now but shadows of their former selves. In other words, I bet the fact checking industry is about to fall on hard times.

   ? The Lancet meta-study in particular got Bill Maher’s goat, and he delivered another monologue in an interview expressing his general skepticism of media, using the natural immunity issue as exhibit number one. Maher played it a LITTLE soft, explaining that it’s not so much that the media are liars, but he thinks they don’t tell both sides of the story anymore.

   Twitter avatar for @billmaher
   Bill Maher
   @billmaher
   My problem with the media from both sides isn’t that they lie. It’s that they tell me their side of the story that they want me to know and not the whole story.
   Image
   4:23 PM ? Feb 28, 2023
   25,112Likes3,749Retweets
   Well. Maybe Bill Maher thinks the media isn’t “lying” but not everyone agrees on that point. I wondered if it was just me, and asked ChatGPT what it thought about whether media ever lied, and it seemed to be leaning more toward my side:

   Well, well well. Just wait until the media lobby finds out about this. They’ll fix ChatGPT’s algorithm, don’t worry.

   Anyway, I next asked ChatGPT for some suggestions about how we can spot unreliable news. I was most interested in its fourth suggestion, which actually broke my ChatGPT session. It locked up, unable to complete the sentence and after that, it wouldn’t take any more requests. I had to “reboot” and start a whole new session.

   Here’s ChatGPT’s fourth suggestion for finding fake new, the one that broke the algorithm:

   Haha! Who says AI is useless. I think that particular advice is excellent, and it immediately reminded me of this old chestnut:

   How worried should we be, indeed! Just not about covid. We should be worried about journalism’s mental health.