Monoliths such as Blgr, WP, Apple, Ggl, might put in place "community guidelines" and their definition of that, judging by their form letter to me each time they take down a post, is that the "Official Advice", meaning Whitty and Ferguson in this country, Fauci in the States, is "Gospel".
The NHS then follows the CMO line.
A case can therefore, on that basis, be made for their removal of my posts but they are, like any bureaucracy, utterly unable to switch to a true position quickly.
Therefore, when this happens:
... and it's a highly regarded organ of the MSM which says it, The Telegraph, which quotes the Minister, and the Minister is reflecting the changed govt line, then what do the bureaucratic monoliths do? Their crack response teams are super-instant in their cracking down on "recalcitrant" bloggers ... can said bloggers expect the same instant response in restoring said posts?
Now this is asked in all seriousness and I'll leave out the demands, for now, such as those IYE called attention to. There is no crowing in this, nor "told you so", there is really just the one question of, say, Blgr.
Just what does Blgr do when its definition of "misleading" is found, Officially, to be "misleading"? How do they then make amends?
Furthermore - where does that leave the NHS and what it's done to people?
Penultimately - we pundits who have at all times been searching for the actuality, searching for what is, this being our blog's raison d'etre and our mission statement - is it remotely possible that if we were right on this point, we might conceivably be right on others as well? Across the world this weekend just gone, for example?
Or at least it be open to debate, not "Settled", "Official" Science?
And finally - we get to the real victims of erroneous policy, do we not? Those who have lost loved ones, jobs, who have been subject to abuse ... on the strength of a fiction.