Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine

GoFundMe Bans Anti-Vaccine Campaigns (slashgear.com) 171

Posted by EditorDavid from the stopped-by-GoFundMe dept.
An anonymous reader quotes SlashGear: Crowdfunding platform GoFundMe has banned campaigns that seek funds for spreading misinformation related to vaccines, the company has revealed. The platform has been used in the past by anti-vaxxers as part of their mission to promote conspiracy theories related to supposed health issues caused by vaccinations. Current campaigns in violation of this new rule will be removed.

GoFundMe has previously faced controversy for allowing anti-vax campaigns on the platform, including late last year when a mother sought funds for a custody battle allegedly intending to, in part, prevent her kids from being vaccinated. An increasing number of tech companies have cracked down on anti-vaccination content, including Facebook and Pinterest, and now GoFundMe is among them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GoFundMe Bans Anti-Vaccine Campaigns More

GoFundMe Bans Anti-Vaccine Campaigns

Comments Filter:

  • But my freespeech! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Seriously, these crazies think their precious free speech protects them from consequences of their stupid actions at endangering their kids' life.

    Autism has always been around, it was simply never diagnosed as such in the past. These days, every little thing a child does that is somewhat out of normal is considered to be somewhere on the autism scale. Let kids be kids damn it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 )

      Seriously, these crazies think their precious free speech protects them from consequences of their stupid actions at endangering their kids' life.

      Not as crazy as the people who think the solution to stupidity is to get rid of free speech.

      • Re:But my freespeech! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ilsaloving ( 1534307 ) on Monday March 25, 2019 @11:30AM (#58331230)

        Or people who don't have any understanding of what free speech actually means.

        Even if we completely disregard the details of what "Free Speech" actually means and go by the definition that you are employing, there is not one "freedom" that is unlimited. Not. A. Single. One.

        Last I checked, it's still illegal to scream "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, for example. Incitement to riot is another. Or libel laws.

        These anti-vaxxers are no different, IMO. They are deliberately spreading misinformation, and that misinformation is directly responsible for people either dying or the next best thing to it, from diseases that were declared eradicated for decades. If it was the anti-vaxxers themselves that were killing themselves off, then I'd have no problem with this. But they're not. They're injuring completely unrelated people.

        If you think it's acceptable for this to happen, then you must also agree that all existing laws that restrict any form of speech should not exist. People should be free to scream "Fire" in a crowded theatre. It should be legal to publicly and prominently lie about basically anything. Hell, It should be legal for companies to falsify their quarterly reports, because otherwise you'd be denying them the right to "free speech".

        But I'll say it again since you and presumably others seem unable to understand this basic concept:

        Free speech does exactly one thing: It protects you from criticizing the government. That's it. It does NOT give you a divine right to say whatever idiot thing pops into your head, without any repercussions from other people.

        Please don't make me pull out the XKCD reference.

  • Wrong move (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The problem with this is that to a conspiracy nut this is proof they're right. It's not going to win "hearts and minds". Make no mistake: What the anti-vaxxers are doing is waging an ideological guerrilla war. In a sense, they're infected with bad ideas. But how do you show them their ideas are bad? You typically don't, but you can take their fertile grounds for new convertees away. And that, this doesn't actually do. It makes it harder to spread their ideas, true, but at the same time it spurs them on, for

    • Just put all the non-vaccinated kids in the same class. Let biology work its magic.

      • The problem is while Darwin's selection is doing its work among the kids in the anti-vaxx classroom, there are risk of collateral damage in the neighbouring class, for the couple of kids whose parent aren't against vaccination but for some reason (e.g.: non-working immune system, other incompatibilites preventing vaccination, or simply hasn't been vaccinated yet, etc.) the kid isn't properly immunized.

        cf. Herd immunization.

        You wouldn't want to to hurt those.

        -----

        (And in practice, the firm anti-vaxx believer

    • Some historical documentaries about what life was right before vaccination came about, perhaps?

      Check out the book "The Cutter Incident", it covers this well.

    • The nuts have always been there. Ignore them. In a decade there will be a different conspiracy fad to occupy their time.

      So what's better, banning gofundme for anti-vacc purposes, or instead allowing them but putting up a disclaimer that says "idiots only"?

      • I'm for banning them, then setting them on fire.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pascoea ( 968200 )

        allowing them but putting up a disclaimer that says "idiots only"?

        This is the equivalent of putting up "no parking" signs. Normal people understand that they shouldn't park there. Idiots still park there, assuming that "no parking" means "no parking, unless I think my reason for parking here is sufficient justification." And then everybody is stuck dealing with the consequences of the idiot that is parked somewhere they shouldn't be, and in a delightful completion to that analogy: Maybe it's no parking because it's a fire line, and if there's a fire someone may get hur

    • Oddly. You act as if no conspiracy theorie never turned out to be true. They have. The other day I heard someone in my office going on and on about how some nut job had claimed that the US government had confiscated everyone gold. hell, that;s not even a conspiracy theory, thatâ(TM)s just a fact, but ruling-class-wannabe nut jobs can be just as bad as the paranoid. I mean, Iâ(TM)ve also hear that Big Pharma got Congress to hold them not-liable for any damages that vaccines do ___ even if they ar

      • A broken watch is right twice a day. It's still useless as a time keeping device. Likewise, just because one of the thousands of conspiracy theories somehow managed to actually describe something that was true isn't a good idea to just go and believe them all.

        It's like prophecies. If I spout utter nonsense 24/7, I am bound to be right at some point in time. Does that mean you should listen to me as the great harbinger of truth?

  • The people who give money to these campaigns will now no longer be able to. That means more money in their pockets but it won't change anybody's mind.

    • It will change many people's minds. It means people will learn that it will become increasingly hard to fund any type of 'unapproved' activism. As trust in the openness of the system disappears you'll find that paranoid theories have only just started.

    • Well, it takes away an incentive from people to start such sky-is-falling bullshit campaigns. Quacks and con artists of all times knew that it's easiest to part a fool from his money, not a person with a hint of knowledge.

      They'll have to find a new con job, I guess.

  • Legal activities should not be blocked (Score:4, Interesting)

    by magzteel ( 5013587 ) on Sunday March 24, 2019 @02:57PM (#58326086)

    I think anti-vaxers are misguided but being misguided is not illegal, and neither is their opinion.

    This new trend of blocking things some people disagree with is just wrong,

    • Re:Legal activities should not be blocked (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Patent Lover ( 779809 ) on Sunday March 24, 2019 @03:07PM (#58326138)

      Blocking shit that gets children killed is ok by me. If these idiots need money they should find their own site.

      • people use GoFundMe to pay for abortions, if GoFundMe tried to ban that it would be shut down itself

        • That is not children.
          Those are fetuses (fetusi?).

        • No, if GoFundMe banned abortion related campaigns it would still be legal and they would not be shut down. Stop believing all the political conspiracies.

      • Blocking shit that gets children killed is ok by me. If these idiots need money they should find their own site.

        Oh, It's about the children! What was I thinking.

        Just remember, that same argument is used to justify a lot of things you will disagree with.

        • This is a private company, they can block what they want. There isn't a universal block here. The company can ban porn on their forums if they like but that's not the same thing as banning porn everywhere.

    • This new trend of blocking things some people disagree with is just wrong.

      So you won't mind if I put my 10-foot tall sign saying you have anal sex with sheep on your front lawn?

      There is nothing wrong with blocking messages you disagree with. The world is not your toilet bowl. Government must not hinder speech (unless it breaks the law) but it's time you all learned the difference between public and private. Gofundme is not the government. They don't owe you a goddamn thing.

      And no, I don't care if some g

    • Re:Legal activities should not be blocked (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mhotchin ( 791085 ) <slashdot@NOSPam.hotchin.net> on Sunday March 24, 2019 @03:24PM (#58326232)

      They are *NOT* misguided. There is simply too much easily available, high quality information on the risks, the benefits and the working of vaccines.

      These people are *wilfully ignorant*, and their actions put *other people* in danger.

      If anti-vaxxers only risked themselves, no one would care. It would just be a particularly stupid pastime for them. Instead, anti-vaxxer *children* are first in harm's way, and right after that is basically "everyone with a compromised immune system".

      They can continue to spew their stupidity if they want, but the rest of us sane people are perfectly justified in pressuring companies to kick that shit off their sites.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by thomst ( 1640045 )

        mhotchin stated:

        These people are *wilfully ignorant*, and their actions put *other people* in danger.

        Would someone with points please mod the parent post +1 Insightful ... ?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This new trend of blocking things some people disagree with is just wrong

      Really?

      Can I stand on your lawn and lead a campaign rally for whatever candidate you opposed in the last election?

      No?

      Why not?

      Because you have the right to "block" me?

      Oh. I guess it's OK if you do it, just not if GoFundMe does it. Makes perfect sense. GFY.

    • This new trend of blocking things that reality disagrees with is just wrong,

      FTFY. If you are promoting information that is factually incorrect then it should be blocked for the benefit of society. Sorry, not sorry.

    • I agree. Censorship is the worst part about this.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Falos ( 2905315 )

      GFM has the legal right to block it. Moral is debatable. Private censorship gets more complicated.

      Some other posts question the yield of suppression, more than the morality. And they might have a point.

      Perhaps the message doesn't need to be directly silenced. By subjecting themselves to the terms of a private platform, these people sign off on letting GFM attach disclaimers. "This submission may contain misrepresented, deceptive, or even harmful health claims." etc, links to WHO or whatever.

    • "Legal activities should not be blocked"? I was unaware that GoFundMe was a government institution.

    • Wrong in what sense? Gofundme is not a government site, they can legally block whoever or whatever they want from their soapbox. It's dangerous speech so this ban could possibly pass muster in the courts even if the government did it. There has never been a right to say whatever you want in any forum and in any location. Banning this is perfectly moral and ethical.

      Anti-vaccers can create their own funding sites.

    • If they want to be misguided, let them stick with religion or similar nonsense. At least it doesn't endanger anyone else's children.

    • I agree. Screaming fire in a crowded theatre should not be illegal either, since the person may sincerely think that there was a fire.

      The fact that innocent people are suffering grievous injury or death as a direct result, is completely tangential to the issue.

  • This pro-vax vs anti-vax baloney needs to stop.

    The anti-vaxxers constantly come off as a bunch of wacky conspiracy theorists that are doing more damage to their cause than good with constant accusations that vaccines contains chemicals that have been removed for a while now to stoke fear.

    The pro-vaxxers constantly come off as a bunch of pharma shills that are actually ADDING to the ranks of the anti-vaxxers with their vitriolic rhetoric and constant claims that they are perfectly safe. If they were actuall

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      re: what you said about pro-vaxxers, the reason they're not over the counter is because while safe it doesn't mean any fool should be able to administer them any time either

      (btw being OTC has little bearing on overall safety, just take Tylenol, that stuff is basically poison)

      pro-pharma shills? I mean seriously, such profits as pharma makes from childhood vaccinations are so tiny as to be less than a rounding error. The total revenue, so before profits, world-wide, of childhood vaccinations is less than 1%

      • "btw being OTC has little bearing on overall safety"
        #1. This is a Strawman fallacy, I am not making the claim that OTC means it's perfectly safe, the claim I am making is that accusations of vaccines being perfectly safe are obviously bunk when they are not even over the counter, they also have special contraindications as well.
        #2. OTC does actually have a LOT of bearing on overall safety as well as why there are 7 schedules of drugs dealing with their safety and addiction attributes.

        Yes, even OTC drugs can

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Agreed, vax is peanuts for pharma. They are looking for the next 85 grand cure for HEP-C. I forget who had it, but that company had like 50% of revenue off one drug. I'd also point out the irony that India is in an aggressive campaign of immunization across the entire country while we in the much better country of the US are trying to allow people to not get vax'ed. Crazy times, flat earthers, anti-vaxer's etc. All on the interwebs, arguably a platform only available since science has come as far as it has.

    • The pro-vaxxers constantly come off as a bunch of pharma shills that are actually ADDING to the ranks of the anti-vaxxers with their vitriolic rhetoric and constant claims that they are perfectly safe.

      So you think everyone should lie and say they're not perfectly safe so they sound more believable? Or just make the claim less often so the anti-vaxxer crazies don't always have to listen to that terribly off-putting constant barrage of sense, insight, truth, logic and statistically, experimentally and theoretically provable science?

    • To quote a comedian, I could say it nicer that it's bullshit ... but I don't know why I should, it doesn't become any less of a pile of bullshit that way.

  • Topics like:
    The history of the Communist party in China?
    That Taiwan is the real China?
    German history?
    Catalonia?
    Do cults and faiths get to ban what they consider spreading blasphemy?
    Whistleblowers?
    DRM?
    Crypto?
    Movie reviews that are too political?
    Everyone will have a reason why a campaign should not be allowed about their faith, rules, laws, crypto, DRM, politics, nation, past, products ...

  • Please don't ban anti-vaxxers. You're hindering evolution.

    People stupid enough to get on board with that don't deserve to continue to contribute to the gene pool. Let them have their cake, and eat it too, right out of the gene pool.

    Censorship of stupidity will render the internet a blank page, ok?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Xtifr ( 1323 )

      Evolution doesn't work that way. And neither does intelligence. (Idiocracy was not a documentary.)

      If these idiots were hurting themselves, I'd be fine with it. But they're hurting innocent children. Children who, despite what bad pop science might have you believe, are likely to be as intelligent as the next random person.

      They're also hurting unrelated people who cannot, for legitimate medical reasons, get vaccinated.

      I don't care how libertarian you are, that doesn't pass the "your right to swing your fist

    • Sorry, we replaced evolution with civilization and would try to save their dying spawn. With my tax money, too.

  • Bitcoin [btcpayserver.org] will allow you to raise money for such campaigns.

Slashdot Top Deals

news: gotcha

Close