Yeah, in all of the talk about which governments and/or individuals are influencing X/Twitter, Facebook and TikTok to tip the scales toward posts they approve of and against those they don’t, on my end at least I’ve never heard anything about Substack.
I’d only heard they were more committed to free speech than others, but your article draws that into question.
I can’t say I’m surprised, though I am still saddened.
I think one of the major storylines about our sociopolitical reality in the 21st century is that the average person has lost sight of the importance of Free Speech, and is even willingly giving support to both moronic media members arguing for censorship and government officials doing the same (“All for our good!,” of course!).
Anyway, no matter who you are and what you feel about the upcoming election, please remember: The ends do not justify the means, the means become the how of the ends. In other words, you can’t save democracy by selling out its major principles such as Free Speech; if you want to save democracy, determine what its major principles are and then work to retain them or introduce them to the world.
Yes, I agree with everything you’ve said here. I may be a bit hypersensitive and a hyper obsessed on the subject of free speech and shadow banning in particular. But I guess I don’t know what I’m supposed to think when I post a factual note that is made unavailable without explanation. My sense lately is that they just want to make sure that people know that they are being watched. Unless a lot more people wake up and aren’t afraid to speak out, they’re just gonna steamroll over us. Somebody liked the original note. If it hadn’t been for that happening, I would’ve just ignored the note like so many others, none ever likes them or engages them. But when I went to link to it, it said it was unavailable. And then when I look at the note in my Profile there’s no credit for the one like that I got. Maybe if i go back now, I’ll have the like and it’ll be available. Then they’re just gaslighting or maybe not. We’ve certainly seen our share of gaslighting in the last few years probably more than in the entire history of mankind. ;)
Like you, I “fess up” to being hypersensitive about speech topics. Having said that, I feel like those of us who produce content using our words SHOULD be hypersensitive about this topic!!
I had a blog on Medium from 2019-23. In June of 2021, I wrote an article, linked below, an admitted rant, about media and government smearing Ivermectin.
I wrote the article from a place of righteous anger after listening to some actual scientists on The Dark Horse Podcast discuss the safety and efficacy of using Ivermectin to treat CV-19.
Now, in the article, I write, “the information is talked about in the above podcast; this post is not intended as an informational one that supports my position with links and such. It is a rant. I trust you, the reader, to look into it.”
Perhaps I should have put that up higher in the piece. I don’t know.
What I do know is that about two later, Medium sent me a cryptic message about how they had removed the post for violating some rules relating to “medical misinformation.”
I protested this, asking for specifics. I wanted to know what part of my article was wrong so I wouldn’t make the same mistake again.
They did not give me such specifics, despite asking them several times.
The vagueness and lack of transparency regarding these rules on speech is another BIG problem. I think this speaks to what you wrote, about how it seems like they simply want us to know we’re being watched. By not making their rules clear, or answering inquiries asking for specifics from writers who have been censored, writers begin to self-censor, and/or not write at all.
That’s what happened to me. While I still published some articles on Medium over the next few years, there were many topics I avoided or articles I just never wrote, and when I did write, I had a sense of being watched.
That’s why about a year ago, I announced I’d be leaving the censors at Medium for what I thought was still a censorship-free platform.
This background is the reason I found your experience on Substack discouraging and worth talking about.
Ivermectin is a very interesting drug. Many things I've heard seem to good to be true. One thing does seem to be certain, it is a very safe drug. I suffer from chronic fatigue and there is good evidence in support of its use in treatment.
Yeah, well, I think Ivermectin fell into that strange vortex of cures for COVID-19 that, perhaps fitting for this illusionary Neptune in Pisces era we've been in, turned anything said to take on the dread Corona into having superpowers (for better and for worse!).
If you do end up trying it for chronic fatigue, I'd be curious to hear about the results.
Yes, most discouraging. I'm sick of not knowing if and to what degree I am being shadow-banned and manipulated. I need to spend time studying anyway. These freedoms won't come back, not for some time and not without a reset of some sort.
Yeah, in all of the talk about which governments and/or individuals are influencing X/Twitter, Facebook and TikTok to tip the scales toward posts they approve of and against those they don’t, on my end at least I’ve never heard anything about Substack.
I’d only heard they were more committed to free speech than others, but your article draws that into question.
I can’t say I’m surprised, though I am still saddened.
I think one of the major storylines about our sociopolitical reality in the 21st century is that the average person has lost sight of the importance of Free Speech, and is even willingly giving support to both moronic media members arguing for censorship and government officials doing the same (“All for our good!,” of course!).
Anyway, no matter who you are and what you feel about the upcoming election, please remember: The ends do not justify the means, the means become the how of the ends. In other words, you can’t save democracy by selling out its major principles such as Free Speech; if you want to save democracy, determine what its major principles are and then work to retain them or introduce them to the world.
Yes, I agree with everything you’ve said here. I may be a bit hypersensitive and a hyper obsessed on the subject of free speech and shadow banning in particular. But I guess I don’t know what I’m supposed to think when I post a factual note that is made unavailable without explanation. My sense lately is that they just want to make sure that people know that they are being watched. Unless a lot more people wake up and aren’t afraid to speak out, they’re just gonna steamroll over us. Somebody liked the original note. If it hadn’t been for that happening, I would’ve just ignored the note like so many others, none ever likes them or engages them. But when I went to link to it, it said it was unavailable. And then when I look at the note in my Profile there’s no credit for the one like that I got. Maybe if i go back now, I’ll have the like and it’ll be available. Then they’re just gaslighting or maybe not. We’ve certainly seen our share of gaslighting in the last few years probably more than in the entire history of mankind. ;)
Like you, I “fess up” to being hypersensitive about speech topics. Having said that, I feel like those of us who produce content using our words SHOULD be hypersensitive about this topic!!
I had a blog on Medium from 2019-23. In June of 2021, I wrote an article, linked below, an admitted rant, about media and government smearing Ivermectin.
I wrote the article from a place of righteous anger after listening to some actual scientists on The Dark Horse Podcast discuss the safety and efficacy of using Ivermectin to treat CV-19.
Now, in the article, I write, “the information is talked about in the above podcast; this post is not intended as an informational one that supports my position with links and such. It is a rant. I trust you, the reader, to look into it.”
Perhaps I should have put that up higher in the piece. I don’t know.
What I do know is that about two later, Medium sent me a cryptic message about how they had removed the post for violating some rules relating to “medical misinformation.”
I protested this, asking for specifics. I wanted to know what part of my article was wrong so I wouldn’t make the same mistake again.
They did not give me such specifics, despite asking them several times.
The vagueness and lack of transparency regarding these rules on speech is another BIG problem. I think this speaks to what you wrote, about how it seems like they simply want us to know we’re being watched. By not making their rules clear, or answering inquiries asking for specifics from writers who have been censored, writers begin to self-censor, and/or not write at all.
That’s what happened to me. While I still published some articles on Medium over the next few years, there were many topics I avoided or articles I just never wrote, and when I did write, I had a sense of being watched.
That’s why about a year ago, I announced I’d be leaving the censors at Medium for what I thought was still a censorship-free platform.
This background is the reason I found your experience on Substack discouraging and worth talking about.
https://open.substack.com/pub/thearchetypallens/p/the-ban-on-ivermectin-is-f-ked-d58acc2b3c4f?r=1ob4ym&utm_medium=ios
Ivermectin is a very interesting drug. Many things I've heard seem to good to be true. One thing does seem to be certain, it is a very safe drug. I suffer from chronic fatigue and there is good evidence in support of its use in treatment.
Yeah, well, I think Ivermectin fell into that strange vortex of cures for COVID-19 that, perhaps fitting for this illusionary Neptune in Pisces era we've been in, turned anything said to take on the dread Corona into having superpowers (for better and for worse!).
If you do end up trying it for chronic fatigue, I'd be curious to hear about the results.
Time to pull the curtain back, Dorothy!
Yes, most discouraging. I'm sick of not knowing if and to what degree I am being shadow-banned and manipulated. I need to spend time studying anyway. These freedoms won't come back, not for some time and not without a reset of some sort.