Amazon cancel another science book — wrong message. By RT.
NY Times journalist-turned-Covid-19 skeptic Alex Berenson briefly had his latest anti-lockdown book pulled from Amazon along with its electronic version. … First the paperback and then the electronic edition of “Unreported Truths about Covid-19 and Lockdowns – Part 3: Masks” were removed from Amazon on Tuesday …
The book attempts to debunk the hypothesis, favored by most governments but apparently lacking convincing scientific proof, that wearing non-medical masks [helps stop] the spread of Covid-19.
However, Berenson had made a point of posting the new book on Barnes & Noble and Apple Books. His tweets about Amazon censorship apparently sent followers into the arms of Apple Books, where the title proceeded to soar to number nine within a few hours. …
“Unreported Truths about Covid-19 and Lockdowns – Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates” was briefly banned in June before a massive backlash against the move, spearheaded by Tesla billionaire Elon Musk, successfully convinced the tech giant to change its mind.
In addition to spuriously deleting Berenson’s book, Amazon hosted “several fakes” of the manuscript, the writer claimed, complaining the e-tailer “refused to pull them despite my repeated requests.”
However, Berenson’s complaints not only convinced Amazon to bring his book back online –- they drove the e-book to #1 in the epidemiology section.
Berenson is far from the only Covid-19 skeptic to be mysteriously deplatformed from Amazon. Writer James Perloff was disturbed to find his book “Covid-19 and the Agendas to Come: Red Pilled” banned last month, echoing Berenson’s concerns about the absence of a concrete explanation for the sentence. Both writers protested that all their information was thoroughly researched and footnoted.
The censorship from big tech is growing. Academic freedom is gone. Only establishment viewpoints on certain topics are allowed.
Knowledge advances by argument and by testing ideas, not by cancelling them. The antidote to untrue speech is better speech, etc.
We’ve seen the tactic of putting up fakes before. The fakes contain little or distorted content, and frustrate or misinform people who search for the real thing online.
Before the Copenhagen climate conference in 2009, Christopher Monckton broke the news in a speech that a nascent world government was being proposed. He’d found a copy of the draft treaty. Many governments around the world intended to sign it, in the guise of controlling carbon dioxide emissions. A YouTube of the speech went viral. Back in those days it was too unacceptably brazen to just cancel something, so instead the establishment forces flooded YouTube with fakes (typically edited to leave out the important parts) and made it very difficult to find the genuine speech. Btw, at that conference the governments of the world, led by China, refused to sign the proposed treaty, citing doubts about the science. So close.
hat-tip Stephen Neil
