Some observations:
-
I am more hesitant to post content in public spaces because I do not always have energy to do deep research needed to debunk fact-checking responses.
-
I am more cautious about what I post, as I don't enjoy being publicly shown to have made an error (which many readers will assume to have occurred if I don't reply to factcheck type criticisms)
-
As a result, I am slowing down. Sure, some things which would be in the public interest to be publicised are getting past me, but the quality of the posts I am making publicly is going up.
Ditto everything above for face to face conversations.
Basically the "fact-checking" and censorship is making me carefully double-check my conclusions before making any kind of public statement. If others are doing the same, this means that the quality of argument being presented from the side of those who question the mainstream narrative is being consistently improved and strengthened.
I think this explains the recent media debacle around Ivermectin. It is getting increasingly difficult for them to create the illusion of fact-checking, and as a result they are panicking and getting careless. This is making even more people start to pay attention. For example, my sister has started to research Ivermectin following conversation with me. (She is very trusting and has taken the Vax. All her information sources are mainstream). This weekend I was able to show her that almost everything she had read about Ivy in the mainstream is unreliable at best, and deliberately fradulent at worst. As a result I see the early signs of her beginning to question what she is being told.
So my take-away from this is, let us recognise the opportunity in the censorship, and just keep making it harder and harder for them to debunk the increasingly coherent and compelling arguments mounting against the media narrative. I still believe that Ivermectin is the key to unlocking the conspiracy around vaccines, covid, the election, and all the other malfeasance that lead up to what are increasingly looking like pre-meditated crimes.
And it pushes people more and more to use alternative communication channels
Yes definitely! I can see the people around me starting to wonder how it is that I seem to know about these things that they don't know about. I often ask them if they've heard about this or that yet - not trying to talk to them about it, just asking them if they've heard about it. And when they say no, I don't push it, I just say, "Oh OK, just wondered if that was something that was being reported in the mainstream."
The other thing which I think many people are still unaware of is how powerfully search engines are manipulating their perspective, so trying to encourage people to use multiple search engines is something else we can keep doing. I've been using Duck Duck Go for ages, but putting Ivermectin in as a search term shows me that has plenty of bias going on...
Wow that's a nice name there fren
:)