I’m concerned about the amount of misinformation on the Covid threads. Mumsnet have a duty of cars to their readers.

[Beadebaser]

A few days ago I reported a post that linked to an unverified claim about a child with vaccine damage from the Covid jab. It is a case that has been weaponised by anti vaxxers and is highly controversial.

The response from Mumsnet was that the post didn’t break guidelines. I pointed out why it was misinformation and was told that their decision had been made - and I could simply turn off the Covid threads if I didn’t agree. I then linked a credible news article explaining why it was misinformation and that the case was being weaponised by anti vaxxers - and Mumsnet didn’t respond.
Misinformation is an online harm and Mumsnet has a duty of care to its readers.

Mumsnet is perhaps different to other social media platforms, as it’s readers often come looking for advice and support. Some readers may be vulnerable. This is why Mumsnet’s duty of care is particularly important.
I think Mumsnet should be doing more to tackle misinformation.
Debate is good, but many posters are being encouraged not to follow the NHS guidelines. If one vaccine hesitant person is deterred from making the right choice due to misinformation - this could lead to a chain of events that could mean someone is unnecessarily in iCU.
Things are pretty critical for hospitals right now, so I think it’s vital that Mumsnet does more to address the issue.

Why can't you let people decided what to believe and not believe themselves?

I don't understand your plane example, lots of people feel unsafe flying so don't travel by planes. We don't stop people taking about place crashes, even though they are very rare.

This level of arrogance , that just gets me , that somehow the general publics level of knowledge and understanding is on a par with scienceists. if we need surgery we respectfully use a surgeon, we dont consider our friend to do the work because they have "done some research". We use people who have the specific skill set and trainning to do the job. Why is it any different?

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo

Why can't you let people decided what to believe and not believe themselves?

I don't understand your plane example, lots of people feel unsafe flying so don't travel by planes. We don't stop people taking about place crashes, even though they are very rare.

I mean we dont assume the people who are flying on the plane the passengers are qualified or skilled enough to fly the plane. In the same way surgeon example. So people who have ' done their research' have they really? Do they have the scientific background? The researchers knowledge? The answer usually is no. So why are they assuming they know as much as the scientists?

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo

Why can't you let people decided what to believe and not believe themselves?

I don't understand your plane example, lots of people feel unsafe flying so don't travel by planes. We don't stop people taking about place crashes, even though they are very rare.

People can belive anything they like unfortunately they can also post it on an internet forum and claim its true when it could not be.

I think i slightly digressed bu the point im trying to make is because we have this level of arrogance in some of general public believing their knowledge and skills are on same par as scientists, what we have duty that the online forums needs to be correct. And not have misinformation or disinformation. I have seen posts about covid with just blatant lies and ive reported and shown why its lies and been told they won't delete because i have proved its false below. My point is its, its deleted it shows to the person who wrote it that its not ok and also theres a chance someone could not see my reply and just assume its real . And then repeating cycle

what we have duty that the online forums needs to be correct

Who decides what is correct?

There's a difference between outright lies, scepticism and different people having different attitudes to risk.

Would anyone claim the covid vaccine is 100% safe for everyone? Are people allowed to say it's completely safe, or very dangerous when neither statement is true?

I just think it's odd to have a talk forum such as this, but then only allow one view. That's not a talk forum, that's an information page. Surely if something is false, it's better to discuss why that's false rather than stop the discussion completely?

Posting about your views on the vaccination can cause real harm to people if it then influences their views. For example, there is lots of undeniable evidence that covid increases risks in pregnancy so encouraging a pregnant woman asking about the vaccine to not take it really could have serious implications. Yes this place is for discussion and different views but not all topics carry the same weigh. Posting about your favourite supermarket or laundry regime is quite different from spreading misinformation about public health measures.

@nordica I agree - in one way it’s affecting everyone, and of course needs discussion. But I can’t imagine another medical condition where it would be acceptable to have countless threads were people are advising each other to reject NHS advice. Would this happen for cancer treatment for example? Particularly if it was critical for the NHS that the advice was adhered to do they can have a fully functioning hospital.

@Winniemarysarah

It’s not up to mn to scrutinise, research, fact check and correct every post that goes up. There’s lies and misinformation everywhere, this is the one forum where people are actually generally interested in the truth, so there’s always someone ready to challenge any bullshit

Misinformation should be taken down if as the OP suggests they took the trouble to give a clear explanation with a verifiable online link that validates the claim something is misinformation. That isn't MNHQ scrutinising every post it's MNHQ taking their duty of care seriously by responding to a report made by a poster expressing concern. I'm sure it won't involve hundreds of reports, and it would need to include a source which specifically refutes the inaccuracy, but it gives a clear message that it isn't tolerated. We all need to play a part in not spouting or proliferating bollox which does seem to happen increasingly

I think there also needs to be a new category of deletion message in such situations which states that it is due to C19 misinformation reported by a MNer.

.

But I can’t imagine another medical condition where it would be acceptable to have countless threads were people are advising each other to reject NHS advice.

Like mesh implants and unnecessary and inappropriate breast surgery?

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo

But I can’t imagine another medical condition where it would be acceptable to have countless threads were people are advising each other to reject NHS advice.

Like mesh implants and unnecessary and inappropriate breast surgery?

Or puberty blockers for children?

Agree with what Zutt says.

Also look at Sodium Valporate, they knew since the 70's that it caused harm to foetus but a conscious decision was made to leave the warning off the side effects sheet. It was parents chatting on social media that started to join the dots and realise what the issue was.

Censorship is far more dangerous than people not having the vaccine. (I'm boostered fwiw)

There are always four sides to a story: your side, their side, the truth and what really happened.

— Rousseau

I understand what people are saying but remain opposed to censorship and the restriction of our access to information, whether it is inaccurate or not.

I think we will see the word ‘misinformation’ taking on a sinister new meaning in the years to come if we allow censorship to gain a foothold this way. It’s Ministry of Truth stuff. It will come to mean ‘information the government/institutions don’t want you to have’.

And I’ve had all 3 vaccinations by the way. I think the vaccines are a good thing. But censorship never is.

@Glassisalwaysgreener should racism be censored? Or child exploitation? Or bullying?

@daisychain01 I agree with that 1000000%.

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo

But I can’t imagine another medical condition where it would be acceptable to have countless threads were people are advising each other to reject NHS advice.

Like mesh implants and unnecessary and inappropriate breast surgery?

And statins. Millions of people on these controversial drugs.

And the NHS dietary guidelines - again, not at all backed by science and causing a lot of damage to people's health

@hamstersarse

I’m not sure it’s idealistic, but it’s certainly libertarian

I trust that people are able to discern their own point of view. Yes, occasionally they may fall foul of liars and treacheries but so what, that’s life, that’s always been the way.

I’d argue it’s more idealistic to think you can accurately censor science. It has so many potential pitfalls. For example, just imagine that case is proven to be caused by the vaccine, and it’s been censored and taken down everywhere…how do you square that with everything?

I go back to that case purely because it’s the one OP specifically mentioned as misinformation, people pile on and go “yeah misinformation” but the truth is no one knows.

I don’t think I’m arguing for censorship, I’m arguing for flagging posts to say pretty much what you have ‘no one knows so be wary about who you throw your weight behind’. It’s not even entirely true to say ‘no one knows’ because there are undoubtedly people who are better placed to draw an educated conclusion. The issue I see is that MN do very little to counter the tribalism that occurs with these kinds of debates (and imho that’s where the harm and radicalisation becomes a problem). As I said earlier, my preference is for threads to be locked rather than deleted. If a discussion veers into unproductive territory let it stand but end the conversation. I’m interested to read alternative views but these threads often turn into the same thing being said over and over again which I think is more harmful/entrenching and benefits no one.

ZuttZeVootEeeVo

If you can see what posts are saying the truth and what are lies, why are you assuming that everyone else can't?

Is anyone assuming that? It’s undeniable that some people, in some subjects, are vulnerable to misinformation though. I don’t know why people end up poisoning themselves in cults, lose their life savings to fraudsters, join hateful groups fighting battles that exist only in their minds, believe vehemently that the earth is flat etc. It’s not specific to covid but for some reason acknowledging that this happens with the subject of covid isn’t really dealt with here.

And we are in danger of making the NHS in a sort of cult that cannot be criticised or even questioned.

As mentioned on this thread there at examples of unintentional medical mistakes being made by the NHS that have only come to light because people have been able to discuss it without censorship.

Thanks for raising these issues.

To give a bit of clarification on our stance: we think, especially with the emergence of new vaccines, it’s understandable people will want to discuss what’s involved. But we are always on alert to anyone here with a specific agenda to share a particular (often extreme) point of view. We'll usually ban such posters as their contributions to threads are rarely helpful. We also delete links to sites that are clearly peddling bad science/fake news.

Sometimes, we see that Mumsnetters challenging posts on threads rather than us deleting them is more effective. Mumsnet, being an open site, does mean that misinformation tends to be robustly challenged on the boards, and many users are here looking for reassurance after all.

When you see posts which you feel are deliberately spreading misinformation, please do hit Report and we will happily take a look.

I understand what people are saying but remain opposed to censorship and the restriction of our access to information, whether it is inaccurate or not.

Libel? Holocaust denial? Posts encouraging law breaking?

@KimMumsnet

Many thanks, that’s great - and sounds right!

The issue I have is that I reported a link about child vaccine damage that (having done a search) is unverified, controversial and has been weaponised by anti vaxxers.

I don’t think it’s the posters fault, but I did feel really uncomfortable with the post as it was on a thread by a Mum wanting advice for her child.

I’ve email several times now, I think initially I was told to hide the thread and it didn’t break terms and conditions, it seemed very difficult to challenge, and when I tried I got no response until yesterday when I started this thread.

The post is still up - as far as I’m aware.

@KimMumsnet I’m just wondering if more can be done. I challenged the post on the thread, so the fact that it wasn’t removed with perhaps give the impression to other posters that the post is ‘true’.

@KimMumsnet @daisychain01 - has had a great suggestion that Mumsnet actually state when they delete that they believe that the post is misinformation - just to make it clear to other posters. Or link to NHS guidance.

I don’t want to shut down discussion - but I think greater clarity, and a quicker response is needed.

@KimMumsnet I would say discussion is vital, so long as the outcome is positive. As a society I think the best thing we can do is support schools and hospitals while things are critical. I’m sure we have made mistakes, nothing is ever perfect. If the outcome of the discussion is harmful - that someone is hurt, or unnecessarily admitted to ICU as a result - that’s when I think censorship (of varying degrees) needs to come into play. Perhaps more censorship is needed when things are critical, and less when hospitals and schools aren’t so stretched?

Post has now been deleted - but took a lot of persistence - sadly.