Saturday, February 4, 2023

Twitter Scandal Highlights Importance Of Science

THE SCANDAL OF THE ‘Twitter Files’, raised by the New York Post in recent weeks, points the finger at the…

By Editorial , in Technology , at January 9, 2023

THE SCANDAL OF THE ‘Twitter Files’, raised by the New York Post in recent weeks, points the finger at the most famous ‘social platform’, acquired by Elon Musk in October for 44 billion dollars. He denounces that for a long time he was, yes, the watchdog of truth, as the Anglo-Saxons say, but he did it only one way: in the interest of the US Democrats and to the detriment of the Republicans.

Based on a solid investigation and many ‘internal’ revelations, the New York Post, politically aligned to the right like its editor Rupert Murdoch, maintains that the leaders of the Bird had not, under pressure from the FBI, published sources and particularly harassing rumors for the progressive front at least in three cases: in 2020, when they covered up news of Hunter Biden’s Ukrainian affairs that could have damaged his father Joe’s electoral race; and during 2021, when they obscured Trump’s website and censored the criticisms of Stanford epidemiologist Jay Bhattacharja of lockdowns and anti-Covid restrictive measures.

There is no doubt that the story should alarm anyone who cares about free information, because it shows a dangerous tendency to manipulate it, all the more serious as it is in favor of that Democratic Party which bears the rejection of such practices in its very name. Therefore it must be condemned without hesitation and the victims have every right to raise their voices, sue those responsible and obtain adequate compensation. That said, we must, however, ask ourselves whether the wrong suffered makes everything that the injured parties claim, or have done, immediately right and holy.

The muzzle that Twitter has imposed on Trump’s tweets, for example, can erase the fact that The Donald is the president who has not been able, or wanted to, to stop the assault on Capitol Hill, that, yes, an attempted coup with dead and wounded, who could turn American democracy into a dictatorship, and will be remembered as an infamy in US history? Obviously not.

And yet, a few days ago, in this newspaper, Laura Calosso, speaking precisely of the ‘Twitter Files’ case, wondered if “we are not facing a coup d’état”, and these words should really, to use her expression, “make everyone jump in the chair”. Because the question equates, in fact, two episodes – there having hidden news, here having allowed a revolt – of which the incomparable gravity is evident. And it suggests that censorship is just one way of manipulating information.

What is dear to my colleague, in fact, does not seem to me so much the need to denounce the injustice suffered by Trump and the other illustrious ‘obscured’, as to have the opportunity to launch, precisely on the basis of the axiom that the truth it reveals itself as such when it is frightening and pushes for censorship, an unquestionable anathema against the so-called restrictive measures in the fight against Covid.

Whether these measures are simple rules of scientific common sense, studied on the basis of the characteristics with which the virus spreads, does not matter. They are simply to be condemned – taking for granted, among other things, valid alternatives which, however, are never even mentioned – as general rehearsals of an incipient and global State of Exception, tending to take advantage of the health emergency to limit individual freedoms.

After all, as is a good rule, it is precisely the opening that clarifies what the aim of the piece is. «These days we are talking about Covid again and someone is waving the “spectre” of the lockdown. But did it help? Has it had any positive effects on the pandemic? No. And someone had said it at the time about him, but it had been blacked out. Is it possible that only today we discover that the lockdown has caused more harm than good?

If you have the patience to read this article, you will know how things went». I gave my all and even more patience, but, again, I did not understand why the censure suffered by Professor Bhattacharja and his two colleagues who in the so-called Great Barrington Declaration had denounced the lockdown as useless and costly in economic, human and health terms, should count as an ordeal and demonstrate that they were right.

Observation of Two Things

If this is the case, then I would like to observe two things: the first is that in 2021, the era to which the dispute dates, eighty luminaries no less luminous than the trio of critical colleagues immediately published a counter-manifesto which denied the accusations against health policy and social restrictions adopted by Western governments. The second is to conclude, as my colleague Calosso does, that «The lockdown has produced enormous economic, social and psychological damage. Today we know that it was those who subsequently did their utmost to spread the goodness of unseen solutions to hide the risks.


And woe to question them…» It seems very imprudent. Why, then, has China managed to control infections only thanks to the lockdown, and as soon as it lifted it by popular acclaim, the infections soared and now threaten a flashback here too? Of course, restrictions alone are not enough: vaccines are also needed, and the Chinese ones, as is known, have a much lower efficacy than ours. But from here to pass off as successful the theses of those who, like Bhattacharja and his school, two years ago, proposed to solve the pandemic through herd immunity that proved unattainable due to the speed with which the coravirus varies, there is . In fact, no one does it anymore, except the most ardent sovereignists, such as Bolsonaro and Trump.

Demenostration of Chinese Case

The Chinese case demonstrates that the problem is not the damage and social costs, albeit undeniable, created by the lockdown or green passes. They are the much heavier ones created by the pandemic when it is left free to run. The reasoning is similar to that comparison between the side effects of vaccines and complications from Covid which should convince the novaxes to lay down their hostility, but it is clear that if one declares war on Science, the numbers are of no use, on the contrary: they do not count.

This article is originally published on