Now Even the Sociologists are Talking about the Covid Censorship! By James Reed

This is nothing news in content, but the event and mode of reporting is significant. It is no news to readers that a level of censorship and suppression has occurred in the Covid plandemic, which is unprecedented in human history. This has not ended by a long shot, for example, with leading Covid critic, cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough, being slowly stripped of his academic affiliations. The article summarised below, documents earlier aspects of this intellectual suppression, and it was published in a mainstream sociology of science and policy journal, Minerva. This may indicate that the truth about Covid may be slowly seeping out. The question then to be asked when all is known, discussed in another article, is : is there a Covid amnesty, and forgiveness? I say; no way should crimes against humanity be lightly dismissed.

https://jackanapes.substack.com/p/hot-off-the-presses-censorship-and

“Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics

Here’s a link to the paper, and a pdf is embedded down below. (But if you want to read it, please go to the link and download a pdf to show them how popular the article is.)

Abstract:

“The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.”

The paper was published in Minerva: A Review of Science, Learning and Policy. It is a well-respected journal in the sociological and historical study of science and knowledge, currently published by Springer.

The paper was co-authored by myself, Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ety Elisha, Brian Martin and Natti Ronnel. (In some ways it is a follow-up piece to the past research we’ve done on censorship and suppression in vaccine science that I wrote about here.)

It is based on in-depth interviews with scientists and doctors around the world who have faced censorship and suppression due to their views on COVID-19. Many of the people we interviewed for the study are undoubtedly familiar to anyone reading this post, but we maintain their anonymity in the paper. Although the current stark reality of censorship and suppression is also undoubtedly familiar to most people reading this, it will be news to many outside our circles, and we felt there would be value in having it documented and discussed in the peer-reviewed academic literature.”

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-022-09479-4