Last week, a 25-minute film segment that teased the story of a medical virologist, Judy Mikovits, PhD went viral on social media. Almost overnight it had reached millions of views and shares on YouTube before being pulled from the platform. In response, media outlets scrambled to shut down questions raised by the video, and a flurry of news articles, blog-posts from medical professionals and other “experts” were shared to dismiss the claims made in the film. Most of the articles I’ve read accuse her of exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic for personal gain (she recently released a new book), and citing that she is not a “credible source” because she is a “known anti-vaxxer” was fired from her job, arrested for stealing lab property from the former employer and her scientific research was redacted. Pretty damning stuff.
When it comes to the validity of the claims made in the video, I don’t have a dog in that fight. I’m not a doctor, or an expert in virology. I barely passed high school chemistry. I also happen to be a cynic, and frankly whether Mikovits’ is taking advantage of people’s insecurities during the pandemic to further her career, or she is telling the truth and she got railroaded by the system on the surface seems (at least to me) equally plausible.
What I do find interesting however, is observing the reaction around the ‘outbreak’ (sorry it was too good to resist) of the video itself, and the conclusions one can draw from it.
1.) MANIC SUPPRESSION
YouTube (owned by Google) and a multitude of other platforms have booted it from their systems, citing that the video was removed for being in violation of their policies. This has devolved into a hilarious game of virtual ‘whack-a-mole’ as individual account-holders keep uploading copies of the video, by the way). Just prior to the video releasing, YouTube’s CEO, Susan Wojcicki publicly announced that YouTube will “remove information that is problematic”, referring to videos whose contents go against the WHO recommendations regarding COVID-19. While not ‘technically’ a violation of first amendment rights (since the company is free to dictate their own corporate policies), the optics are terrible here and it should raise some serious questions in people’s minds about exactly how much control these platforms should have over what information is deemed ‘acceptable’ for public consumption. Doesn’t sound very American to say the least.
2.) METHINKS [THE MEDIA] DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH
The sheer volume of articles condemning the video (and those who share it) is breathtaking. I get that a viral video catching fire like this tends to prompt a response, but I am floored by how many articles popped up in such a short period of time. This smacks of a knee-jerk reaction to the information put out there by the video, but the question in my mind is why? Why is THIS video out of all the content out there inciting such a violent, and overwhelming reaction? The answer given is that this video is dangerous because it contains false information which could influence people to make bad choices based on it (such as not wearing a mask in public). More on this later, but the response to this was so quick, venomous. and numerous, I can’t help but wonder why this has struck such a nerve with the powers that be.
3.) PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLYING
Not only were there a flood of responses and rebuttals to the video, but one of the other things I noticed was the general tone of every one. As someone who wasn’t sure what to make of what was being put out there in the video, I was genuinely surprised at the level of vitriol and condescension that emanated from them.
One doctor hosting his own podcast, known as “Z-dogg” expressed genuine exasperation and frustration for even having to address the video at all. He went so far as to say that he was “shook that Americans are so frickin’ stupid as to take even as second of this … horrible conspiracy garbage seriously”.
Maybe he’s in the right here, but the mean-spirited way he tried to make his point was unnecessarily harsh and uncalled for. Quick note here: when a person becomes frustrated and angry when pressed about a subject, I become immediately suspicious of your motives… why are you getting so upset over this? From a psychological aspect, it is interesting how agitated people get when talking about this. If I were a cop investigating a criminal I would be suspicious of their motives. Lastly, just a general PSA: for those of you trying to influence behavior, my grandma always said “you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar”…just sayin’.
From a layperson’s perspective, I genuinely wasn’t sure what to make of the video, and normally I would look to someone in that field to patiently explain to me in terms I could understand why this was all nonsense. Instead I listened to a professional doctor mock and shame anyone giving it a moment’s consideration. It wasn’t just him either. EVERY article I read smacked with an air of superiority, and attacked the intelligence and judgment of those in anyone stupid enough to entertain these allegations.
Another blog that was passed around (Zdogg also links to it on his video post) calls her a “grifter” and asserts that she was little more than a failed lab researcher when she got recruited to become reasearch director for the Wittemore-Peterson Institute for Neuro-Immune Disease (where all the controversy started).
Link HERE
Additionally, I noticed that each article I read peppered terms like “anti-vaxxer” and “conspiracy theory” into every other sentence (or so it seemed). I’ll link a few of these below, but I encourage you to do your own research. (A simple Google search will bring back a treasure trove of articles, so no need for an exhaustive analysis.)
4.). WHERE’S THE BALANCE?
Probably most concerning to me, as someone new to the name Judy Mikovits, was the absence of any sort of balance to the stories. The counter-articles only seemed to throw around terms like “anti-vaxxer”, “discredited scientist” , “grifter” or “conspiracy theorist” as if using that term in and of itself settled the matter. Being a curious person, that wasn’t good enough for me. These are loaded terms, by the way, and the reason they are called “loaded” is because they can be weaponized to influence how something is perceived. Think about it. You see the term “conspiracy theory” and your mind immediately visualizes something like this:
It’s crazy fringe weirdos talking about lizard people and UFO cover-ups! People cringe when they see this term, more than likely write the story off and quickly walk the opposite way. But I wanted to understand more about WHY this story would be categorized in such a way. I mean, she had to have some level of ‘smarts’ to become a doctor, right? So what had she said or done to warrant this types of label?
Well as I said there wasn’t a lot to find in the articles lambasting Mikovits. So I had to dig a little deeper. Made much harder by the recent deluge of anti-Plandemic articles, I was able to retrieve an article from the Ventura County Star from November 2014:
There are at least two points worth noting from this article, which by the way is just an article, a feature of you will, but not a blog or some fringe keyboard warrior writing from his mother’s basement.
According to this article, Mikovits wasn’t a bartender when she was recruited to the Whittemore-Peterson Institute (WPI). “She served on a race committee at the Pierpont Bay Yacht Club, volunteering her services as a club bartender.” That’s a stark distinction from what some of the hit pieces out there claimed. This is a red flag for me. Either someone didn’t do their research well enough before spitting out their article, or they INTENTIONALLY mischaracterized her background. Why would someone do that?
The article goes on to say that “Harvey Whittemore, once Mikovits’ employer, was convicted of funneling $133,000 in illegal campaign contributions to his friend, Sen. Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader.” Mikovits’ has claimed corruption around her firing and arrest, and although Whittemore’s arrest is unrelated to her controversy, it seems to fit the narrative that her boss (who was a lobbyist with political ties) was corrupt. This again flies in the face of the narrative that she is some kind of a quack and huckster. Regardless, that is VERY interesting information. Why wouldn’t people include that I wonder?
There are many more articles and interviews with Mikovits that lay out in depth the events that she touches on in the Plandemic video, that would turn this post into a book. My point here is to illustrate the extreme imbalance in facts being reported in these anti-Plandemic articles.
5.) THE DANGER OF MISINFORMATION
The last point I’ll make here is in regards to this concept that information considered by some to be conspiracy theory is “dangerous”. The implication here is that people in general are too stupid to discern for themselves whether information is “good” or “bad”. Therefore we should only allow speech that is generated from “accredited” sources of the enlightened elite, or at least given the stamp of approval by them as acceptable to pass along to the masses. This is nonsense and about as close to facist thinking as I’ve ever heard of. (Remember it was the Nazis who burned books). It also promotes a lazy way of thinking. Why process through things on your own when the ‘experts’ can do your thinking for you? Thanks but I don’t want anyone to be doing my thinking for me. That’s part of what makes me feel alive.
The other false premise within this mindset is that people are somehow not responsible for their actions. Somehow dangerous speech is the culprit behind someone taking an improper action. Did it influence them? To be sure, but it did not force them to take such an action. There was a decision made somewhere within the person to prompt the action. Somewhere along the way, this concept has become lost in our culture.
At the end of the day, I’m still not sure what to make of Mikovits’ story. Maybe everyone is right and she is just a grifter looking to sell a book. Maybe she got railroaded by the system for nefarious reasons. Regardless, I firmly believe that each of us should be given the opportunity (if we so choose) to read through the stories and evidence and make up our own minds about what to believe. The world is a dangerous place, and we need every bit of our wits about us when navigating it. That is why we need as much information about the world around us as we can get. In the end, we have the power over our own minds and we should not give that up lightly. Indeed it would be lazy and dangerous to do so.
People Be Crazy 