The term misinformation is a classic example of Orwell’s newspeak. Newspeak has been defined as propagandistic language that is characterized by euphemism, circumlocution, and the inversion of customary meanings.
Misinformation is a catch-all term for anything that a given authority doesn’t want you to hear or see. The accusation of spreading misinformation is being increasingly levelled at independent journalists and content creators in order to banish them.
So, who gets to decide what is and isn’t misinformation? It should be you and me of course. How dare anyone determine on my behalf what is true and untrue right? I’ll figure that out by myself thanks very much.
Governments, NGO’s, social media giants and the legacy media are conspiring to destroy the independent media. This isn’t new but it has accelerated in the last two years.
They claim that misinformation causes real-world harm to people and therefore should be blocked at source to prevent it being seen or heard. Their oven-ready example is anti-vaxxers.
By spreading misinformation about the vaccines they argue, anti-vaxxers might dissuade someone from having a jab who might then become gravely ill and even die, because they refused it. Misinformation therefore, can be shown to kill which justifies the banning of those who disseminate it.
The five hundred pound elephant in the room of course, is nuance. Nuance is the enemy of the censors. I haven’t had a covid jab. I never will. I based my decision (partly) on the hundreds of epidemiologists, virologists and doctors who declared the jabs to be unnecessary and potentially dangerous.
Were they spreading misinformation? I can’t say for sure, but I doubt it. For what gain? Put it this way, the UK drug regulator and the government’s scientific advisers said the jabs are safe and that I should take them.
Hundreds, maybe thousands of healthcare professionals denounced the jabs. A little research shows that the sceptics are no less qualified than the government’s jab pushers. Isn’t it only right and proper that I hear their views?
Should I not get to decide for myself, after hearing all points of view? Who gets to decide that an Oxford scientist who is pushing the jabs is an expert and that the Harvard scientist who says the jabs are dangerous is spreading misinformation?
The answer should be you and me, but in fact it’s government’s working with NGO’s, social media and the legacy media who are determining who you should hear and who should be de-platformed.
Here in the UK, the government is proposing to change the law to make spreading misinformation a criminal offence that carries a two year jail sentence.
They’re constructing Orwell’s Ministry of Truth. They’re not just coming for the independent media, they’re also coming for the right of the individual to hold views or opinions formulated through personal experiences and independent research.
It’s the fight of our lives.
