News
Featured Image
 shutterstock

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, February 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The CEO of an internet watchdog focused on monitoring conversations about COVID-19 has called on Big Tech de-platform and deny service to those who are critical of COVID-19 vaccines.

Last week David Jay of San Francisco’s Center for Humane Technology (CHT) interviewed Imran Ahmed, the CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), in an online meeting watched by over 500 people. Friday’s half-hour long meeting, entitled “The Disinformation Industry and Covid-19,” was dedicated to criticizing vaccine skeptics.

“Big Tech needs to make a decision, now that we expose the intent, the tactics and the deadly impact of the anti-vaxx industry, and the ways in which social media platforms have become integral to their success,” Ahmed told Jay. “Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google can stop this now. They could stop providing services to people whose business is in enabling the spread of disease and death.” 

Ahmed claimed that “anything less than the dismantling of these individuals’ profiles, pages and groups and permanent denial of service” would be “willing acquiescence” on the part of the Big Tech with the so-called “anti-vaxx industry.”

CHT, which organized the event, lists among its lead supporters the George Soros-founded Open Society Foundations among a host of international organizations working for societal change. 

Jay, who led the interview, is an “asexual activist” and the founder of an online community for those who identify as “asexual.”

The CCDH simply states that the organization is “funded by philanthropic trusts.” An August 2020 Off Guardian article notes that as a Non Governmental Organization registered in the U.K. “the CCDH are exempt from audit and can thus keep their finances largely secret.” Ahmed, who has held a number of position in the U.K.’s Labour Party, last year described “anti-vaxxers” as “an extremist group that pose a national security risk.”

Both Ahmed and Jay say that leading critics of vaccines are, in fact, “an industry” dedicated to “sowing doubt” for profit. 

“We’re talking about a highly financially motivated and sophisticated industry that profits from spreading disinformation,” said Jay solemnly. 

The CHT interviewer invoked the specter of racism by saying that that vaccine skeptics pose “terrifying risks to public health, especially public health in communities of color and other communities that are deeply vulnerable to Covid-19.”

Jay said that social media is designed to show people information that will “generate as much engagement as possible” and that “conspiracy theories” are among the content that performs best. He then expressed a conspiracy theory of his own: that leading critics of vaccines are deliberately manipulating algorithms for profit.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine
  Show Petition Text
102437 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

                                                                                                                      **Photo credit: Shutterstock.com

Mainstream media sources are promoting offensive suggestions by some doctors that people who refuse a vaccine for COVID-19 should be "punished" by the government and by business - effectively coercing them into taking the vaccine.

  • One group of doctors writing in 'USA Today' suggested that the government impose special taxes (i.e., fines) on people who refuse the vaccination and that business simply refuse to serve them. [see story below]
  • Another doctor writing in an online publication called 'The Conversation' shamelessly suggested that people who refuse a vaccine should be given a psychoactive drug to induce compliance. [see story below]

But, these suggestions are plain political posturing, and have nothing to do with science or with the recent trends of the disease.

And, in case they haven't noticed, we live in a democracy not a medical dictatorship!

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks policy-makers and business people, at all levels, to pledge to respect the rights of those who, in good conscience, decide not to vaccinate themselves or their children.

People should not have to live in fear of governmental or corporate retribution for refusing a vaccine which is being rushed to market by Big Pharma and their fellow-travelers in NGOs, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

It would be intolerable and immoral for the government or business to coerce someone, and their family, to take a COVID vaccine against their will to avoid a fine, or just so they can do their weekly grocery shopping.

Medical freedom must be respected in principle and also in practice.

So, it is now time that our policy-makers listen to all voices involved in this vital conversation, and start to represent those who will not tolerate being punished for refusing a vaccine.

Simply put, legislatures must begin to act as legislatures again.

Questions must be asked. Hearings and investigations must be held. And, the legislatures of each state and country must return to the business of representing the people who voted for them, assuming their rightful place as the originator of legislation.

We can no longer accept the dictates of executive branches without question, especially now that, statistically speaking, the initial brunt of the COVID crisis has passed.

Neither can we accept the dictates of doctors who seem detached from reality and from science, and who only seem to be attached to the idea of promoting ideas which contribute to the agrandizement of power and control of political interests, and wealth of those who stand to make a lot of money from the sale of a COVID vaccine.

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks government and business leaders to pledge to respect the rights of those who refuse a COVID vaccine, and not seek to punish them for doing so.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/doctors-lay-out-plan-to-punish-people-who-refuse-coronavirus-vaccine-there-is-no-alternative

'US professor: ‘Psychoactive pill’ should be covertly administered to ensure lockdown compliance' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-professor-ensure-lockdown-compliance-by-drugging-dissenters-with-psychoactive-pill

  Hide Petition Text

“That has led to the emergence of actors who have built business models around the gaming of that algorithm,” he stated.

“They make money by convincing people not to trust in scientifically validated public health measures and instead ask them to trust in non-scientific ways of thinking about disease.”

Jay was never clear about how such “actors” usually make their money, although later Ahmed did mention an online conference held by the National Vaccine Information Centre which charged participants $80 to attend. 

Ahmed said that these “actors” understand “instinctively” and “technically” how to “game algorithms” and also that their message is just the “fruit, the fleshy exterior that makes you want to dig in.”

“What they’re really trying to sow is the seed of doubt,” he stated.

“Doubt about authority. Doubt about the deadliness of Covid. Doubt about safety of the vaccine.”

He called it a “battle of authorities” which pitted organized authorities like “Her Majesty’s Government’s Health Service” against those with “special knowledge that only you can get from them — of course, for a fee.”

“Because these are highly monetized and highly productive actors,” he said. 

These “actors” were not named during the meeting, which was mostly a repetitive exchange of remarks about vaccine skeptics and their alleged message that COVID-19 is not dangerous, that vaccines are dangerous, and doctors can’t be trusted. Ahmed recommended that their opponents should stress that COVID is dangerous, praise the vaccine, and shore up doctors’ status. 

“Everyone loves doctors,” he exclaimed.

Ahmed spoke briefly about the original mission of the Center for Digital Hate, which was working against movements spreading misinformation to encourage identity-based hate.

In 2020, the CCDH’s focus moved from concerns about hate groups to monitoring conversations about the coronavirus. In December it produced a booklet entitled The Anti-Vaxx Playbook. In the Introduction, Ahmed states that bad actors on the internet have created “a Digital Counter Enlightenment.”

Digital spaces have been colonised and their unique dynamics exploited by fringe movements that instrumentalise hate and misinformation. These movements are opportunistic, agile and confident in exerting influence and persuading people.

Over time these actors, advocating diverse causes – from anti-feminism to ethnic nationalism to denial of scientific consensus – have formed a Digital Counter Enlightenment. Their trolling, disinformation and skilled advocacy of their causes has resocialised the offline world for the worse.

The CCDH’s “work combines both analysis and active disruption of these networks,” he says.

“CCDH's solutions seek to increase the economic, political and social costs of all parts of the infrastructure – the actors, systems and culture – that support, and often profit from hate and misinformation.”

The document also refers to the most popular antivaxx (or vaccine critical) voices as “super-spreaders.” One of its primary messages to Big Tech is that “deplatforming works” to stop vaccine critical voices from expressing their doubts to others.

The CCDH sent pseudonymous operatives to a private online meeting held by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). The meeting included Barbara Loe Fisher, the president of the NVIC; Joseph Mercola; Del BigTree of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN); Robert F. Kennedy, Jr of Children’s Health Defence; Sherry Tenpenny; and Andrew Wakefield. 

“It was a bit like James Bond infiltrating SPECTRE,” Ahmed said although the conference was open to the public.  

The Antivaxx Playbook describes these and others who are concerned about the dangers of vaccines with the epithet “anti-vaxxers” throughout. It uses emotive language, as did Ahmed throughout his meeting with Jay.  

The two men were a study in contrasts. The Californian Jay, in a t-shirt, began the meeting with a minute of meditative silence, ringing a bell to indicate the beginning and the end. Ahmed, a Cambridge University graduate in a suit and tie, referred to “blackguards” and spoke apologetically about having taken a Greyhound bus as if doing so were a social solecism. He also insinuated that he became infected with COVID-19 last February at a Klu Klux Klan rally he observed in Portland, saying his team had told him afterwards that such extremists deliberately catch COVID-19 and cough on “target audiences.” He offered no evidence that this is, in fact, how he caught the virus.

Ahmed, a graduate of Cambridge University, referred to the British vaccines as a “great hope”, their discovery “a Herculean achievement” and the governance of the British Government, with evident admiration, “swashbuckling.” But he said that these efforts, and any debate about how best to mitigate the pandemic, have been “undermined” by “misinformation.” He compared the vaccine skeptics at the NVIC to “mid-level marketers” and their missions to “a sales industry”.

Jay (who is white) emphasized his belief that vaccine skeptics, whom he described as “wealthy white people”, were targeting people of color. Ahmed repeated his booklet’s admonitions to Big Tech to deplatform vaccine skeptics, saying that trust in social media is the biggest driver in leading people to distrust vaccines. 

Big Tech’s platforms, Ahmed said, “have failed to do their bit against the ‘parallel pandemic’” of vaccine skepticism.  

This January, NVIC president Barbara Loe Fisher responded to the CCDH’s booklet with a video statement.

“It contains false and misleading information about the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination, which was sponsored by the 39-year old U.S. educational charity the National Vaccine Information Center, and held online in October 2020,” she said. 

“Promotion of the CCDH report resulted in the spreading of fake news and misinformation by mainline media outlets in Great Britain and the U.S.”

Fisher decried both the CCDH’s demonization of those who question the safety of vaccines as “malignant actors” and its attempts to silence debate. She also stressed that NVIC is a not-for-profit organization with deeply personal motivations: their vaccine- injured children

“Our not-for-profit charitable organization was established for one reason: we were mothers and fathers of children brain injured by the highly reactive pertussis vaccine in the DPT shot and we wanted a safer pertussis vaccine to replace the one that had hurt our children,” Fisher said. 

“That goal was accomplished after 14 years of consumer advocacy when a less reactive acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine was licensed for babies in the U.S. in 1996,” she continued.

“We also wanted parents to have access to accurate and full information about the risks and complications of both diseases and vaccines before children are vaccinated, so parents and paediatricians could work together to identify those children who are more susceptible to vaccine reactions and protect their health.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.