The best editors of the British Medical Journal (The BMJ) have a message for Mark Zuckerberg Facebook: Get your fact-checkers in line, as soon as possible. As part of one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journals, senior editors express genuine concern about the third-party fact-checkers employed by Facebook / Meta. This complaint arises based on the potentially fraudulent or defective data issues associated with Pfizer’s contract research organization Ventavia .
Second TrialSite the BMJ has wrote a critical article investigating the bombshell evidence that poor practices and control problems qualities emerged during clinical trials on the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. Meticulously researched based on whistleblower documentation, the critical review, written by Paul Thacker in the peer-reviewed journal, raised eyebrows if not more.
However, the BMJ soon got a taste of what Facebook, Google and others are doing on independent media platforms like TrialSite and how Database Italia. Although he BMJ is one of the leading medical journals and the information has been rigorously peer-reviewed, strange things have started to happen.
For example, readers would try to post some information on social media like Facebook to share it with their networks. But “some have reported not being able to share them.” Furthermore, apparently, “independent fact-checkers concluded:” This post could mislead people. ” Those individuals who were simply sharing this content, peer reviewed by The BMJ, they were warned by Facebook that “This information could mislead people.” Also: “Those trying to publish the article have been advised by Facebook that people who repeatedly share” false information “may see their posts moved further down the Facebook news feed.” Additionally, some group administrators received notifications from Facebook that the information was “partially false”. Database Italia received yet another violation notice and subsequently the page was closed without appeal with over 23,000 followers.
So readers were invited to a “fact check” performed by Lead Stories , a third-party fact-checker. Yet, with perhaps the best experts on the planet when it comes to medical research information, he BMJ now he has to check the fact-checkers, just like he had to do all the time TrialSite , finding that the fact-checkers are obviously in error and just as Database Italia had to do many times, an example:
DR. STEFANO SCOGLIO. FACT CHECKERS OR FALSOLOGISTS? MY REPLY TO THE DICTATOR’S SOLDIERS
We report The editor’s note BMJ :
∙ It gives no factual assertion that the BMJ article is wrong
∙ It has a meaningless headline: “Fact Check: The British Medical Journal Did NOT Reveal Disqualification and Ignored Reports of Defects in Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Studies”
∙ The first paragraph loosely labels the BMJ a “news blog”
∙ Contains a screenshot of our article with a stamp on it stating “Revised Defects”, although the Lead Stories article does not identify anything untrue or false in the BMJ article
∙ He posted the story on his website under a URL that contains the phrase “hoax-alert”
Note The editors of the BMJ have contacted Lead Stories but are adamant that they are not wrong. Now Facebook reports the BMJ article.
An incompetent fact-checking regime
Both Mrs. Godlee and Mr. Abbasi have a message for Facebook: your fact-checkers are “incompetent”. The social network would do better to agree, this is the message. While they are there, they should remember that Jen Psaki was aware that high-level White House agents are providing information to Facebook about what is misinformation versus credible real information. For reference, we include the piece The Hill . Perhaps he BMJ it should include Ms. Psaki on their list as well as anyone on the “senior” White House staff who “suggests” they offer help to Facebook.
Authors of the message for Facebook
Fiona Godlee, BMJ Editor-in-Chief
Kamran Abbasi, incoming editor-in-chief of BMJ