WorldlinessAwkward69
WorldlinessAwkward69 t1_izs9uoj wrote
Reply to comment by Cheshire90 in An analysis of 4511 vaccine-related tweets show that anti-vaccine messaging tends to focus on the "harmful" nature of vaccines, based on personal values and beliefs rather than hard facts. Anonymity did not affect the type of content posted, but did affect volume of content. by glawgii
No one is silencing anyone. Science papers go though more rigor than some anonymous post on twitter. You are discounting expertise. With that logic of open source discourse the next time you need surgery just take a random account’s opinion off twitter to treat you.
WorldlinessAwkward69 t1_izppj7v wrote
Reply to comment by Cheshire90 in An analysis of 4511 vaccine-related tweets show that anti-vaccine messaging tends to focus on the "harmful" nature of vaccines, based on personal values and beliefs rather than hard facts. Anonymity did not affect the type of content posted, but did affect volume of content. by glawgii
The problem is there is no way to verify these experiences and there are many fake/disinformation accounts.
WorldlinessAwkward69 t1_iztl6w2 wrote
Reply to comment by Cheshire90 in An analysis of 4511 vaccine-related tweets show that anti-vaccine messaging tends to focus on the "harmful" nature of vaccines, based on personal values and beliefs rather than hard facts. Anonymity did not affect the type of content posted, but did affect volume of content. by glawgii
No, I'm just saying because some idiot said it on twitter doesn't make it true/verifiable, and this guy knows it because he wouldn't ask some random twitter/reddit/social media moron to perform brain surgery on him.