When I got kicked off Twitter for expressing an informed opinion about the potential efficacy of a certain drug in treating a well-known disease, I sought refuge in alternative platforms, thinking — perhaps naively, that the reign of medical and political censorship had not extended its tentacles into every part of the blogisphere. Alas, I was mistaken.
Twitter's fact-checkers don't check facts - they check adherence to a particular narrative, and whether you are "on message" and consistent with the policies they support. So they are checking political correctness, not truth.
They genuinely believe your message is dangerous, not to the medical health of readers but to their "political health" and their compliance with the policies that so many governments and corporations have decided to impose on much of the world.
Countless others have tweeted the same information as you, but you were popular enough to be dangerous (too many followers) while not high-profile enough for your cancellation to cause an outcry.
Twitter's fact-checkers don't check facts - they check adherence to a particular narrative, and whether you are "on message" and consistent with the policies they support. So they are checking political correctness, not truth.
They genuinely believe your message is dangerous, not to the medical health of readers but to their "political health" and their compliance with the policies that so many governments and corporations have decided to impose on much of the world.
Countless others have tweeted the same information as you, but you were popular enough to be dangerous (too many followers) while not high-profile enough for your cancellation to cause an outcry.