Mark, you're obviously triggered. And your critical thinking skills are, . . . lax.
You've missed the entire point of the discussion; it's about speech. It's not about whether you're an expert in a field and should protect us from those w/ whom you disagree. Why are physicians so consistently arrogant & narcissistic?
The article is abou…
Mark, you're obviously triggered. And your critical thinking skills are, . . . lax.
You've missed the entire point of the discussion; it's about speech. It's not about whether you're an expert in a field and should protect us from those w/ whom you disagree. Why are physicians so consistently arrogant & narcissistic?
The article is about the suppression of speech, specifically speech that contradicts what others hold to be true. Especially being questioned is, stay w/ me here; do corporations have the right to limit speech especially since corps have a financial interest in doing so?
"If platforms like YouTube are basing speech regulation policies on government guidelines, and government agencies demonstrably can be captured by industry, the potential exists for a new brand of capture — intellectual capture, where corporate money can theoretically buy not just regulatory relief but the broader preemption of public criticism."
See, THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE CRUX and you've missed entirely it because you're triggered, lack critical thinking skills and the ability to read carefully.
Mark, you're obviously triggered. And your critical thinking skills are, . . . lax.
You've missed the entire point of the discussion; it's about speech. It's not about whether you're an expert in a field and should protect us from those w/ whom you disagree. Why are physicians so consistently arrogant & narcissistic?
The article is about the suppression of speech, specifically speech that contradicts what others hold to be true. Especially being questioned is, stay w/ me here; do corporations have the right to limit speech especially since corps have a financial interest in doing so?
"If platforms like YouTube are basing speech regulation policies on government guidelines, and government agencies demonstrably can be captured by industry, the potential exists for a new brand of capture — intellectual capture, where corporate money can theoretically buy not just regulatory relief but the broader preemption of public criticism."
See, THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE CRUX and you've missed entirely it because you're triggered, lack critical thinking skills and the ability to read carefully.
speech by other doctors and medical professionals. I think that is called Science, rational discussion of evidence, not dogma and taboos