SPECIAL REPORT: YouTube Removes Viral Video by Kern County Doctors Presenting Alternative P.O.V. On COVID-19 Response

Does sheltering in place make sense as a response to COVID-19? Maybe, maybe not. But we'll never know if each time those who question the lockdowns are gagged or forbidden to present an alternative P.O.V.

On Friday I shared a significant video by a pair of doctors who presented facts based on the last few months of historical data. Based on what they've observed, the doctors drew conclusions at odds with the prevailing views and held a media event to make known their findings.

By Tuesday, a few days later, after more than 5 million people had watched it (including Elon Musk, who tweeted about it), the video was removed by YouTube as inappropriate. Why? "For violating YouTube's terms of service." (i.e: Community Standards.)

When ABC of Bakersfield, California contacted YouTube for further illumination on this action, a company spokesperson for the social media giant "issued a statement saying the video was pulled because the content contradicted the guidance of the local health authority."

Was it because the doctors pointed out that there has never once been a pandemic in human history in which the response has been to quarantine the healthy instead of the sick?

“We quickly remove flagged content that violate our Community Guidelines, including content that explicitly disputes the efficacy of local healthy (sic) authority recommended guidance on social distancing that may lead others to act against that guidance," said the statement. "However, content that provides sufficient educational, documentary, scientific or artistic (EDSA) context is allowed -- for example, news coverage of this interview with additional context. From the very beginning of the pandemic, we’ve had clear policies against COVID-19 misinformation (emphasis mine) and are committed to continue providing timely and helpful information at this critical time.”

* * * *

Does it make sense for YouTube to exercise censorship so as to prevent any alternative viewpoint on a significant issue that impacts all of us?  I do concede that they have a right to maintain standards. On the other hand, how do we learn what is true and what is not if we're not even permitted to hear something contrary to a government sanctioned point of view? (And in this case, they stated it was a local health policy, which seems to stretch credulity.) How can the court of public opinion draw accurate conclusions on important matters if they are not permitted to hear more than one side of an issue?

Abraham Lincoln went out of his way to hear all sides on important issues and maintained a cabinet comprised of contrary views for the express purpose of listening as they each argued their positions.

* * * *

Here's the beginning of that ABC News story.

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — YouTube issued a statement Tuesday regarding the removal of a video press briefing with Accelerated Urgent Care doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi. The video was the first of two videos playing the entire briefing from a press conference last week. Reports of the video being taken down suggest YouTube pulled it for violating community guidelines.

23ABC received an email from YouTube on April 27 giving the station notification the video had been taken down, citing YouTube’s “community guidelines.” 23ABC has appealed the ruling through YouTube.

23ABC News also reached out to YouTube regarding the notification and a company spokesperson issued a statement saying the video was pulled because the content contradicted the guidance of the local health authority.

YOU CAN READ THE REST OF THE STORY HERE:
https://www.turnto23.com/news/coronavirus/video-interview-with-dr-dan-erickson-and-dr-artin-massihi-taken-down-from-youtube

AND WATCH THE ORIGINAL CENSORED VIDEO HERE:
https://www.turnto23.com/news/coronavirus/accelerated-urgent-care-doctors-recommend-lifting-shelter-in-place-order

* * * *

When I wrote my original blog post, my working title was, The Most Important BIog Post of My Life. While posting I changed it to the softer, less hysterical-sounding Important Information Related to COVID-19 -- April 24.

ADDENDUM: Here is a blog post that presents an opposing point of view regarding the statements made by Dr. Erickson, claiming it to be shoddy statistics and false claims. 

For what it's worth, it's sometimes useful to be aware of the psychology concept of "confirmation bias." We're all, to some extent, stained by pre-existing presuppositions. Our inability to observe things through a totally objective lens ought to keep us humble. All too often we don't know what we don't know.

Related Links

He Who Controls the Narrative Controls the People

For the interested, a Friend Link to my poem, The Lamp of Liberty