How Elites Use the Term Misinformation as a Form of Censorship

Table of Contents: Select a Link to be Taken to That Section

Executive Summary

Elites use the term misinformation to categorize speech in a derogatory label without providing evidence that the speech is false.
We cover how dishonest the term misinformation is.

Introduction

The US government, increasingly led by the Democratic party, has normalized censorship, particularly with their partners in Big Tech. This article explains how this works and how the Democrats, in particular, plan to expand censorship.

Our References for This Article

See this link if you want to see our references for this article and other related Brightwork articles at this link.

Age Restricted Content = Censorship?

The following is an example of a video with no reason to be age-restricted.

Don’t let the child-like graphics of this video fool you. This is one of the most precise and accurate explanations of the Vietnam War published anywhere. Unfortunately, YouTube does not allow the video embedded in this article, as can be done with most videos.

More Censorship From YouTube & Google?

One would have to ask why this video would be age-restricted. There is no sex or violence in this video. However, it explains the Vietnam War in a way that contradicts the status quo. This appears to be a low-level type of censorship because the video exposes false explanations about the Vietnam War. Does YouTube have this categorized as misinformation? This video was uploaded several years ago before Google began censoring videos. Now, this enormous archive of uploaded videos that question the status quo must be moved to other video platforms as Google changed the rules and broke the trust of content creators after they made an effort to make YouTube their platform of focus. This fits into a long-term pattern of technology companies that calls into question the unregulated space of technology platforms.

Misinformation on the Coronavirus Vaccine?

We begin by understanding how vaccines work, which is an excellent place to start before getting into claims around vaccine misinformation.

The examples of misinformation given in this PBS video are, in fact, false.

The Economists present the story of a backlash against vaccines. It does an excellent job of describing how, as trust in the government declines and it is caught providing false information, the public is less likely to follow its directives and believe the information they provide. One of the most prolific providers of false information has been Donald Trump, who is the head of the US government.

No Reason to Question the Current Vaccines?

In the article The Pfizer and Moderna Exaggerating the Effectiveness of Their Corona Virus Vaccines, I covered that there are many reasons to question the vaccines that have been developed. Yet, it is presented in the media that anyone who does not believe in the vaccines or writes about them is spreading misinformation. However, both Pfizer and Moderna have been caught repeatedly presenting false information. Yet, neither Pfizer nor Moderna has ever been accused of spreading misinformation. The government could stop pharmaceutical companies from providing deceptive information to the public, but they don’t, as the pharmaceutical companies control governments.

This video is amusing. It talks about skepticism about the vaccine and how a preacher is getting information about the vaccine in black areas. Is there not something a little ironic about a religious leader providing “accurate information?” Is anyone going to bring up the point that religion is false? There is no evidence that any religious people say it is true.

Censorship of “Misinformation”

The following video by Russel Brand covers the elite definition of “misinformation.”

Important Point #1: Moderna Pays for Censorship

Moderna has been caught paying for accurate information to be censored on social media. This means Moderna monitors media and social media and pays to have any information about Moderna that Moderna disagrees with to be censored. This term is called “partnering” with media and social media. Moderna is a massive propaganda apparatus. These relationships are not disclosed in the media or social media entities. This is referred to as the “censorship industrial complex.”

Important Point #2: Supressing Negative Feedback

This would be like Ford saying that people with a poor view of Ford Trucks are “engaging in misinformation.” It isn’t easy to see how this differs from what Moderna is doing.

Important Point #3: The Fake Rape Allegations Came After Moderna Targeting Russel Brand

Moderna communicated their concerns about Russel Brand in August 2023, before the media entities falsified rape allegations against Brand, which led Brand to be demonetized. No criminal charges were ever brought against Brand, and the accusers remained anonymous. The entire point was to try Brand in the media.

Biden has asked companies like Google to remove misinformation from their platforms.

The following request will be to Biden my article on the Vietnam bombing and misinformation. The Est D view is that censorship is good if the Establishment Democrats disagree with the information. The new definition of misinformation is whatever Est Ds and Pharma companies disagree. Soon, the Pentagon will say

“Any room on the censorship bus for us?”

One can say that the video above kills Americans because it reduces the credibility of the US military.

And what was the most prominent example of Big Tech censoring misinformation? It was when Big Tech, along with the establishment Democratic-associated media, colluded to suppress the Hunter Biden email story and to try to have the story associated with unsupported claims about the entire issue being a Russian intelligence operation. However, the story about Hunter Biden’s emails was all true. The emails were his, describing his corrupt dealings with foreign actors. Why did Big Media and Big Tech decide to censor what they called misinformation? It is well known that both Big Media and Big Tech are in the tank for the Democratic Party and did not want the Hunter Biden story to upset Joe Biden’s election bid.

Then the story of the censorship became its own story.

Months after the Hunter Biden emails, Biden was formally made part of an investigation by the IRS and FBI for corruption. Is this more misinformation? Is it still “debunked” a “right-wing conspiracy theory,” and “fake news?” This video also shows an audience in China laughing at how straightforward it is for China to corrupt US elites. Is that Chinese speaker also misinformation? Is the laughing misinformation also?

Was the video of this Chinese speaker shown on any establishment media outlet? Of course, now.

CBS News was a major proponent of Russiagate, which turned out to be false. However, they still discuss how other entities are providing misinformation. CBS was also critical in supporting the war in Iraq without questioning the Bush Administration’s evidence. Yet, CBS never apologized for getting it so wrong. CBS is highly connected to defense contractors and the US intelligence community and does not disclose its contributors’ financial bias to viewers.

CBS and Misinformation

CBS News, as with other major media entities, presented Black Lives Matter protests as entirely peaceful when they were not.

And yet, here, CBS calls the reality of violence, intimidation, and property damage from Black Lives Matter misinformation. I cover in the article Why Claims by Black Lives Matter on Police Shooting Are False, why the BLM provides false information about the incidence of blacks being killed by police. CBS was unwilling to do this, even though the math is incontrovertible.

This illustrates a pattern that unreliable sources of information, like CBS, frequently use the term misinformation. The “solution” that the elite CBS News would seem to be asking for is censorship.

This is why the term misinformation is so baseless. It is merely a way of limiting speech that the powerful entity does not want to be published.

Furthermore, I found something odd when looking up the definition of misinformation.

The definition laid out here states that misinformation is false. However, when misinformation is used, the person applying the term often does not bother proving the information is false.

The term is problematic because it presumes that the person calling out the misinformation knows the provider’s intent of the information. Misinformation is not only false; it is deliberately intended to deceive. But how does the person leveling the accusation know this? That is a high standard to prove, and most entities and people who use the term misinformation not only do not go to the effort to prove the information is false, but they also do not demonstrate that the information is being provided with this malicious intent.

Let us take a recent example from when this article was written.

False Information Incentive From Social Media Giants?

The video also points out that Facebook receives a financial benefit from distributing false information, as false information is often more appealing to users than accurate information. Therefore, as Facebook is only responsible for maximizing profit to provide the highest return for shareholders, it can argue (although it will never admit to it) that its only absolute loyalty is profit maximization, which means promoting false information. This is nothing new, as Facebook’s entire business model is about deceptively surveilling users, and then selling this information to advertisers, advertisers, of course, produce an enormous quantity of false or exaggerated information.

The Financial Conflict of Major Media

Major establishment media entities count pharmaceutical companies as major advertisers. Yet, when they cover health and medical topics, these media entities do not disclose their financial bias and rarely cover how poorly pharmaceutical companies behave and how corrupt they are. As I cover in the article The Pfizer and Moderna Exaggerating the Effectiveness of Their Corona Virus Vaccines, It was stocking to find out how little of the dark side of Moderna was communicated to the public, even though they are one of the significant pharmaceutical/biotech companies promising a vaccine. Major media entities want to a.) be considered the unquestioned truth on all topics, b.) do not want anyone known, and refuse to share their financial conflicts of interest.

When is False Information Misinformation?

Companies from Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, and many others habitually provide false information to their customers. As we cover in the article ” How Facebook is Constantly Lying About its Surveillance of Users, it is not called misinformation if a significant corporation spreads it.

In fact, in addition to being promulgated by the company, those that make money from any of these companies will come out of the woodwork to defend any lie, including business leaders that even claim fake PhDs, as we cover in the article Does SAP’s Hasso Plattner Have a Ph.D.?

Gartner & JD Power Only Provide Accurate Information?

The company JD Power is a fake research entity that exists to sell rankings to marketers. Like GM, car companies with low-quality levels pay JD Power to give them awards, which GM then uses in advertisements to deceive potential buyers. Gartner serves the same function and has the same dedication to research as JD Power in the IT industry. Yet neither firm is accused of distributing misinformation.

Is Facebook planning to ban GM advertisements from its website? Or is something “misinformation” dependent upon whether you are being paid to carry it?

Therefore, it is tough for Facebook to say it opposes false information distribution credibly. Yet establishment media entities view the claim that “Facebook will stop misinformation” as credible.

Our Golden Pinnochio Award

Multiple Golden Pinocchio Award Winner Opposes Misinformation?

Facebook is a multiple-time winner of our Golden Pinocchio Award. Facebook has lied to users about how it surveils them and how their information is used and sold to advertisers. Facebook’s lying is jaw-dropping, often doing the exact opposite of what it claims to do and recycling the same excuses when caught lying. When Sheryl Sandberg or Mark Zuckerberg speak, it’s clear they are lying right when they are speaking.

Yet, is Facebook, which targets its users with ads and surveils them across the Internet and then lies about it, the company to battle misinformation?

This issue of watering down and censoring information is also prevalent at LinkedIn, which I cover in the article How Linked In Has Degraded As A Content Platform. LinkedIn pushes low-accuracy advertisements onto its users and preferences, virtue signaling, and promotional content over content of substance and accurate content.

A review of the shares in the article, whose link is included above, clearly shows this and observes that this behavior pattern has worsened since Microsoft acquired Linked In for $26 B. If you pay Linked In, they will promote any claim you like on their platform.

Conclusion

Misinformation is a term coined by those who oppose freedom of speech. It is used to silence the speech of those with whom they disagree, which is beneficial if the speaker’s proposal is accurate and the person opposing the speech cannot provide evidence to the contrary. Calling something misinformation is the first step in censoring that information.