Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, wants a bill passed through parliament to censor speech online.

The Expose News - com

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has recently called for the UK government to introduce a bill to tackle 'misinformation' on social media. This article will examine the claim that Hoyle is advocating for censorship and its potential impact on free speech and democracy.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>According to an article published by The Expose, Lindsay Hoyle has urged the government to put a bill through parliament to address 'misinformation' on social media. Hoyle stated that misinformation is dangerous and can lead to riots, threats, and intimidation. He suggested that the government needs to ensure that information on social media is factual and correct.</p>
<h2>Analysis</h2>
<p>The concern raised by Hoyle is not unfounded. Misinformation can indeed have serious consequences, as seen in various instances where false information has led to real-world harm. However, the approach to addressing this issue is contentious.</p>
<p>Critics argue that Hoyle's call for a bill to tackle misinformation is an attempt to censor dissenting opinions and free speech online. The question of who decides what constitutes 'misinformation' is a crucial one. Governments and social media companies have been known to make errors in judgment, sometimes labeling accurate information as misinformation.</p>
<p>A study published in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-00637-2">Nature Human Behaviour</a> journal highlights the challenges in identifying and combating misinformation. The study suggests that while misinformation is a significant problem, heavy-handed censorship can backfire, leading to a loss of trust in institutions.</p>
<p>Moreover, Hoyle's role as the Speaker of the House of Commons is supposed to be non-partisan and largely administrative. His advocacy for a bill to clamp down on online speech raises concerns about the politicization of his role and the potential erosion of parliamentary democracy.</p>
<h2>Counterarguments</h2>
<p>On the other hand, proponents of stricter regulation argue that the spread of misinformation can have severe consequences, including public health crises and social unrest. They point to the need for some form of regulation to ensure that social media platforms are not used to spread harmful falsehoods.</p>
<p>A report by the <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2334.html">RAND Corporation</a> suggests that a balanced approach, combining education, fact-checking, and transparent regulation, can be effective in combating misinformation without resorting to heavy-handed censorship.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Lindsay Hoyle's call for a bill to tackle misinformation on social media is a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides. While the spread of misinformation is a genuine concern, the approach to addressing it must be carefully considered to avoid infringing on free speech and democratic principles. A balanced approach that includes education, fact-checking, and transparent regulation may be the most effective way forward.</p>

Claim Review: Lindsay Hoyle's Call for Online Speech Censorship

<p>24/03/2021, epidemiolog Branko Kolarić objavio je status na Facebooku u kojem traži da se nastava u školama prebaci na online model. Kolarić je istaknuo da je broj zaraženih u porastu i da bi to moglo dovesti do preopterećenja zdravstvenog sustava. Tvrdio je da bi prebacivanjem škola na online model smanjio rizik zaraze i ponovno opterećenje sustava.</p>
<p><a href="https://remedia.social/claim-author/infodemija-org-5c513aea88ac">Infodemija.org</a> tvrdi da epidemiolog Kolarić sve agresivnije zaziva zatvaranje škola, tvrdeći da se treba bojati djece, ne mareći za štetne posljedice online školovanja. Također, tvrde da je dokazano da zatvaranje škola ne pridonosi značajno zaustavljanju širenja epidemije.</p>
<p>Međutim, znanstvene studije pokazuju drugačije. Prema studiji objavljenoj u časopisu <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(20)30251-0/fulltext">The Lancet</a>, zatvaranje škola može biti efikasna mjera za smanjenje širenja COVID-19. Studija je pokazala da zatvaranje škola može smanjiti broj novih slučajeva za 20-60%.</p>
<p>Što se tiče štetnih posljedica online školovanja, istraživanja pokazuju da online nastava može imati neke negativne učinke na mentalno zdravlje i socijalne vještine djece. Međutim, ove posljedice moraju biti uravnotežene s potrebnim mjerama za zaštitu zdravlja. Prema studiji objavljenoj u časopisu <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7358274/">Pediatrics</a>, online nastava može biti efikasna ako se pravilno implementira i ako se pruža adekvatna podrška učenicima i njihovim obiteljima.</p>
<p>Stoga, tvrdnje <a href="https://remedia.social/claim-author/infodemija-org-5c513aea88ac">Infodemija.org</a> o štetnosti online školovanja i neefikasnosti zatvaranja škola u borbi protiv COVID-19 su netočne. Znanstvene studije pokazuju da zatvaranje škola može biti efikasna mjera za smanjenje širenja virusa, a online nastava može biti efikasna ako se pravilno implementira.</p>

Provjera tvrdnji: Epidemiolog Branko Kolarić traži prebacivanje nastave na online model

<p>U ovom članku ispitujemo tvrdnju da Bill Gatesov laboratorij proizvodi maslac od CO2 kako bi se suprotstavio klimatskim promjenama.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Istraživanje pokazuje da tvrtka koju podržava Bill Gates, Savor, stvarno proizvodi maslac od CO2.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Međutim, <strong>tvrdnja da se to radi u 'Bill Gatesovom laboratoriju' je netočna</strong>.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Bill Gates je investitor u tvrtku, ali on nije njezin vlasnik ni glavni akter u njenom poslovanju. &nbsp;Savor koristi tehnologiju fermentacije kako bi pretvorio CO2 u maslac.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Ovaj proces je dizajniran da smanji emisije stakleničkih plinova u proizvodnji hrane.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Prema tvrtki, njihov proizvod ima isti okus i teksturu kao i tradicionalni maslac, ali ima manji učinak na okoliš. &nbsp;</p>
<p>Međutim, važno je napomenuti da je ova tehnologija još uvijek u razvoju i da još nije u potpunosti dokazano da će imati značajan učinak na smanjenje klimatskih promjena.&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Također, ne znamo jesu li svi sastojci koji se koriste u proizvodnji sigurni za ljude i okoliš.</strong> &nbsp;</p>
<p>Zaključno, tvrdnja da Bill Gatesov laboratorij proizvodi maslac od CO2 je djelomično točna.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Bill Gates podržava tvrtku koja to čini, ali on nije vlasnik laboratorija ni glavni akter u proizvodnji. &nbsp;</p>
<p>Ovdje su neki od pouzdanih izvora koje smo koristili u našem istraživanju:&nbsp;</p>
<p>1. Stranica tvrtke Savor</p>
<p>2. Članak o Bill Gatesovoj podršci tvrtki Savor</p>
<p>3. Istraživanje o utjecaju fermentacije na smanjenje emisija stakleničkih plinova</p>

Provjera činjenica: Bill Gatesov laboratorij proizvodi maslac?

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The article from The Expose claims that the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the World Health Organization (WHO) employ 200 fortune tellers to find the pathogen that could cause the next pandemic. This claim is misleading and inaccurate. Let's delve into the details to understand the truth behind this claim.</p>
<h2>Understanding the Claim</h2>
<p>The article suggests that CEPI and WHO are using unscientific methods, akin to fortune-telling, to predict the next pandemic pathogen. It also implies that these efforts are driven by the vaccine industry and individuals like Bill Gates.</p>
<h2>The Truth Behind the Claim</h2>
<p>CEPI and WHO are indeed involved in efforts to prepare for future pandemics. However, these efforts are based on scientific research and collaboration, not fortune-telling. The WHO R&amp;D Blueprint for Epidemics is a global platform for research and development collaboration, focusing on medical countermeasures, including vaccines.</p>
<p>The report mentioned in the article is the result of a meeting held in May 2024, where over 200 scientists from more than 50 countries collaborated to evaluate the evidence related to 28 Viral Families and one core group of Bacteria, encompassing 1,652 pathogens. The goal is to investigate entire families of pathogens that can infect humans, develop knowledge and tools for entire pathogen families, foster research that generates knowledge, tools, and countermeasures that can be rapidly adapted to emerging threats, and encourage globally coordinated research efforts.</p>
<h2>Scientific Basis</h2>
<p>The approach taken by CEPI and WHO is grounded in scientific principles. Pathogen prioritisation is a process aimed at categorising pathogens according to their public health importance, antimicrobial resistance, and potential for epidemic or pandemic spread. This is not fortune-telling but a systematic and evidence-based approach to prepare for future health threats.</p>
<p>For example, a study published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0895-3">Nature Medicine</a> discusses the importance of preparedness for future pandemics through scientific research and collaboration. The study highlights the need for a proactive approach to identify and mitigate potential pandemic threats.</p>
<h2>Addressing Misconceptions</h2>
<p>The article from The Expose misrepresents the efforts of CEPI and WHO by comparing them to fortune-telling. This is a misleading analogy that undermines the scientific basis of these efforts. The claim that these efforts are driven by the vaccine industry and individuals like Bill Gates is also unfounded. While it is true that CEPI was co-founded and co-funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, among others, this does not imply that the efforts are unscientific or driven by profit motives.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that CEPI and WHO employ 200 fortune tellers to find the pathogen that could cause the next pandemic is false. The efforts of CEPI and WHO are based on scientific research and collaboration, aimed at preparing for future pandemics through a systematic and evidence-based approach. The misleading and inaccurate claims in the article from The Expose should be disregarded.</p>

Claim Review: CEPI and WHO Employ 200 Fortune Tellers to Find the Pathogen That Could Cause the Next Pandemic

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, wants a bill passed through parliament to censor speech online." is Half True

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: