buffer from criticism. they acted like they wereial me removed from the process and that social media companieso wncould make their own decisions on how to best moderate content . media platforms makede independent choices aboupendent their information. they present course. it s us upo thesp to these comps to make their own decision about the content on their platform. eir platfoand to ensure contents their own standards and policies. twitter, as you know, is a private company and theyd will make their own decisionthe yeah, right. plausibleah,e deniability is thn name of the game. just send fauci on an endless press tour claiming the science is settled and opposing viewpoints aren t just wrong,ut but very dangerous that way. joe biden gets to keep his hands clean. it seems like the people who spread the disinformation, a very energetic and seemedve gt to have nothing else to do but o do that. so we ve got to be out there,bla scientists and the general public and thosend wh
saying that not every singlesayi personng needed to get the coveted vaccine. twitter slapped a misleading label on it for sharing falser a information about the efficacy of the vaccines.s not ab this is not about science.oue o safety this has always or safety. abou this is always been about control. if you cared about the health and safety safety, you wouldn t censor experts or suppress ordinary twitter users for sharinr userg. ip is cdusc data censorship is useda p as a weapon used to silence critics of their agenda. thisis act actually reminds me f the irs targeting conservative groups under the obamama administration. rememberar thattion one ?ou m i do. it s a toothl to keeat one?p the thinkers in line. joining me now, dr. martin caldor, professor of medicine at harvard, and mike davis,harvr president of the internet accountabilityke project . thank you both for joining us .n dr. calderin, explain to usn to