Regular readers of RedState know very well that for the past 18 months or so, we have been working hard to provide accurate and complete information about the Wuhan coronavirus, election integrity, Hunter Biden and our government’s corruption-and the results , When they compromised “fact checkers” (a/k/a promoters), we faced the consequences of BigTech Think we are a little too close to the truth. When this happens, our traffic will be restricted, our revenue will be reduced, and our reputation will be affected. They label us “unreliable”. “
Since a lot of our traffic comes from social media links, we have to predict which topics might attract fact checkers to summon flying monkeys and ban hammers, and prepare to fight the destiny of “offensive” works with uninterested semi-sophons. At RedState VIP, we are free to study these topics in depth without worrying about incurring Fasc-book’s anger, but this will reduce the coverage of these key information, and more importantly, we should not be expected to publish articles or articles containing accurate scientific information. Discuss honestly the theory behind the paywall. (Reminder: Every VIP subscription increases our ability to ignore large technologies completely; use the code HOUNSELL to subscribe to get a discount.)
In the past few months, I have written extensively and freely on COVID-19 science on RedState, including reports on the theoretical feasibility of laboratory leaks, simply because it is now considered acceptable by BigTech. Before May, even if there is no credible information (only the Chinese government and researchers interested in the economy), these posts will almost certainly be slapped by the Facebook fact check. The existence or current existence of the virus clearly proves that the virus came from outside. Wuhan Institute of Virology anywhere.
I think we should be grateful for this.
But when we published our story last year, we were not wrong.We published a story about a theory Now our own government thinks it is at least as reasonable as the transfer of zoonotic diseases ——At least some famous virologists thought it was worth studying. We are right, but to this day, Facebook is still operating false information, supervised by “fact checkers”, but with impunity. Their established goal of preventing the spread of misinformation has become more complicated by preventing and subsequently deleting factual information and reports. Why, you might ask? Well, this may be related to the fact that the people who may be responsible for the development of this virus are included in refuting the possibility that they are responsible. Remember Peter Dassak? Chairman of the Eco-Health Alliance that provides funding and research information to the Wuhan Institute of Virology? The person sitting in the WHO team responsible for investigating the origin of the virus?He is a Facebook fact checker.
Although most people will be happy to be right all the time, I am not. In fact, I’m tired of it.
“But Scott! Are you unhappy that you have been proven correct?”
I happen to have Written here on July 15:
Although it is certainly correct to see that this story may eventually be told, it is frustrating that only certain approved media members are allowed to tell it. Our report on this information is clear and true from day one. Our source of information is wrong, and now the media is chasing our reports, acting as if it is brand new and destructive information.
Since the beginning of the pandemic, RedState’s exclusive reports have covered topics related to completely misrepresented statements made by the Wuhan laboratory, Dr. Shi Zhengli, and Fauci at the Senate hearing. Suddenly, after Senator Rand Paul wiped the floor with Anthony Fauci at a Senate hearing in May, Leading to a re-examination of the laboratory leak theory, We can talk about it.
However, despite being suddenly allowed to write it without being condemned, we are still labeled as conspiracy theorists and extremists.It turns out that our report is correct The potential of laboratory leak theory. Our report is correct NIH funded Wuhan laboratory. Our view of Peter Daszak is correct Conflict of interest etiquette. We are right to question Dr. Shi Zhengli Ability to verify the authenticity of the origin of the virus. We are right There is no scientific basis behind the theory of zoonotic spillovers. Again, great, but what was the result?
Recently, our report that questioned the integrity and authenticity of the WHO report on the origin of the virus has once again proved to be true. Is RedState derived from any MSM article that claims to have a certain “journalism” color when reporting things we already know to be true? Does our information indicate that the WHO team is supervised and can only access content approved by the CCP, is it wrong? no, it is not. Was the latest report of WaPo new information that has not been reported before? No, but that didn’t stop them from reporting it as before.Just as Bunch in his Thursday:
It now seems certain that the Chinese have been improperly influencing the WHO in an attempt to evade responsibility for causing the COVID-19 pandemic. Their extreme defense against laboratory leaks, including their attempts to cover up the truth, will only make them more suspicious. There is too much evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is the most likely place of origin.
On Friday, China announced that it would no longer cooperate with the WHO in any investigations into the origin of the new coronavirus. Accepting this means that they are cooperative at some point. We know this is very inaccurate.
From Bunche One piece today:
To be honest, nothing is missing here. China is a totalitarian garbage dump, managed by fanatical genocidal lunatics, including “President” Xi Jinping. They will never really cooperate with any real investigation. Instead, their motivation to participate is to use their influence to help cover up what the evidence says they did.
At this point, basically No evidence The virus originated in nature Increasing circumstantial evidence It comes from Wuhan Institute of Virology.
For several months, we have been reporting this information, and WaPo also released misinformation, but people still treat them with respect and call RedState some “conservative blogs.”
Does this mean that we will ultimately be considered credible?
of course not. Single-source and anonymous-source articles have been printed by lie losers in MSM, but fact checkers remain silent on this. Although it has always been correct, it is certainly frustrating that my report and that of my RedState colleagues did not deserve the respect. I’m tired of being right, and there are still some biased and incompetent scammers in random “fact-checking” agencies who can unilaterally determine what we are saying is not true without any evidence or data, so that We are disqualified from participating in public debates about any topics we choose to cover.
I am tired of being correct and at the same time being excluded from the discussion topic. I would rather be completely wrong. At least then I can defend their stupidity.
