TWITTER FILES: Pfizer Pressured Twitter to Censor Questions About Vaccine

TWITTER FILES: Pfizer Pressured Twitter to Censor Questions About Vaccine

A new Twitter Files drop shows that the social media site was pressured by forces like Pfizer to suppress posts that questioned the efficacy of the Covid vaccine.

Journalist Alex Berenson dropped the files on Monday, which showed that members from the big pharma board pressured Twitter to censor posts.

An email from August 2021 from Pfizer Board Member Dr. Scott Gottlieb to Todd O’Boyle who serves as a Senior Manager of Public Policy at Twitter’s Washington, DC location, shows a clear discussion about suppressing tweets that questioned the narrative.

One tweet that was mentioned, by Dr. Brett Giroir, read: “It’s now clear that [Covid-19] natural immunity is superior to [vaccine] immunity, by ALOT. There’s no scientific justification for [vax proof] if a person had prior infection,” and said that President Joe Biden and the CDC “must follow the science. If no previous infection? Get vaccinated!”

A response from Gottlieb reads, “This is the kind of stuff that’s corrosive. Here he draws a sweeping conclusion off of a single retrospective study in Israel that hasn’t been peer-reviewed. But this tweet will end up going viral and driving news coverage.” The email was then forwarded to Twitter’s “Strategic Response” team. That team is responsible “for handling concerns from the company’s most important employees and users.”

In response to the drop, Twitter owner Elon Musk wrote, “Some conspiracies are actually true.”

Gottlieb also responded to the drop by saying, “In the past, I’ve raised concerns with Twitter related to the safety of me and others, and threats being made on the platform. This included direct as well as specific threats. Sometimes it included statements that I believed were purposely false and inflammatory.”

Gottlieb added that “The selective disclosure of my private communications with Twitter stokes the threat environment.”

“So does actions that empower people who’ve shown little restraint when it comes to purposeful vitriol. It instigates more menacing dialogue, with potentially serious consequences,” he continued.


Join the Newsletter