The media gaslights us once again
Lab leak "conspiracy theorists" weren't racist and crazy after all.
In case you missed it …
Florida Gov. DeSantis signed a bill revoking Disney's self-governing power, saying Disney will now be treated like other theme parks in the state.
Finland's leading transgender treatment expert has lately made comments critical of allowing teens to transition. Meanwhile, in the U.S., Mississippi is on the cusp of banning transgender surgeries and drugs for children under 18. More than a half dozen other states also have legal restrictions on pharmaceutical interventions for teens.
Elon Musk:
Dear Friends —
The more information that comes out about the lab leak theory – that Covid escaped from a lab in Wuhan – the more obvious it is that the American public was shamelessly gaslighted.
The lab leak theory is finally being taken seriously by (some of) the government
The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. Energy Department and the FBI both conclude the virus came from a lab. Four other agencies still say the virus was a result of a natural transmission, and two are undecided.
The lab leak theory, something fairly obvious to many from day one, is gaining more and more credibility, despite the attempts by scientists, the media and our government to convince us otherwise.
They all lied to us. Public health agencies lied to us. The media lied to us. In fact, not only did the media lie to us, they shamed us into thinking it was immoral to even ask whether the virus came from a Wuhan lab.
They were treated, as Jonathan Turley says in a New York Post op-ed, as a “conspiracy theorist or racist or racist conspiracy theorist.”
What they said
In 2020, one study called the lab leak theory an example of “toxic white masculinity” (why? I’m equally willing to believe a woman leaked the virus as I am to believe a man did) and “anti-Chinese racism.”
Sen. Tom Cotton was criticized in the Washington Post for supporting a “coronavirus fringe theory.” A writer for The Atlantic, who was also on the advisory panel for the Global Disinformation Index (which we discussed last week), posted the following:
Scientists told a Nature reporter the lab leak theory made “it harder for nations to collaborate on ending the pandemic — and fuel online bullying.”
A full year after the theory emerged, New York Times Science and Health reporter begged people to stop talking about it entirely.
And then there are the absolute, firm denials that the theory could be true. Journalists who are supposed to remain unbiased, ask questions, and search for the truth, went ahead and categorically stated that the lab leak theory was debunked.
Until February of 2021, Facebook included the theory under its umbrella of posts that had “false claims about Covid-19” and banned them.
Like the Hunter Biden/NY Post story, the Jussie Smollet story, the Covington teens story, and an ever-growing list of other stories, this story was orchestrated by the media to ensure we didn’t have a fair debate.
We didn’t know for sure at that point where the virus originated … we can’t even say now with 100% certainty that we do. But by casting one side as racist kooks, the media ensured we couldn’t even entertain one very possible scenario.
This is why censorship matters. This is why we fight to stop it. Just about every theory is better when it’s dragged out into the light and argued about and fought over and discussed. We don’t have to agree with everyone. But we should let them speak.
— Ken
Finally …
Wow, I thought for sure that my comment would have been ignored but dang! The mustard color is better .
Thank you so much and I hope your case win in court against your sister’s killer
Kat B
The lesson here is that the media needs to be honest about what they know and what they don't.
In this case, some folks in the media were too quick to dismiss a plausible claim that hadn't been proven or disproven, but that public health authorities considered unlikely. And conservatives were too quick to glom onto the theory without direct evidence. Both sides got ahead of the facts and would have been wiser to wait for the facts to emerge. In this case we might not ever know the definitive truth, but the media needs to follow the story wherever the facts lead.
Contrast that with what we're learning about Fox News' conduct after the 2020 election, when commentators were promoting election conspiracy theories that the network knew were false. Tucker Carlson (who privately acknowledged that the election fraud claims were insane) even called for a reporter to be fired for doing her job debunking Trump's lies. And now they're forbidding poor Howard Kurtz from reporting on the scandal.
Prematurely dismissing an unproven theory or pushing a theory you know to be false: They're both bad, but which one's worse?