On May 13, Georgian homeopath Tina Topuria published a post, according to which the U.S. federal court demanded to prohibit Facebook and YouTube from blocking vaccination-related information. The post is accompanied by the article published by Childrenshealthdefense.org with an identical headline. On May 15, Facebook account “სუვერენული სახელმწიფო” (Sovereign State) also published an identical post.
The claims voiced by Tina Topuria and “Sovereign State” as if the U.S. federal court demanded to prohibit Facebook and YouTube from blocking vaccination-related information are false. In fact, the article is about a motion filed by the Rutherford Institute requesting leave to file an amicus brief in support of the lawsuit lodged by Children’s Health Defense; the court, however, denied the motion as inadmissible.
The article shared by Tina Topuria and “Sovereign State” notes that the Rutherford Institute expressed support to the lawsuit lodged by Children’s Health Defense. The latter demanded that Facebook stopped warning users about fake news related to COVID-19 vaccines as well as labeling misinformation posts. The organization accused Facebook and its partner fact-checking organizations of censorship. In August 2020, it filed a lawsuit against Facebook and some of its partner organizations (Science Feedback, Poynter Institute, PolitiFact).
To support the lawsuit, on May 5, 2021, the Rutherford Institute attorneys filed a motion to California District Court requesting leave to file an amicus brief. The article published by Children’s Health Defense that was later spread by Georgian social media networks is just covering this issue. The headline of the article is misleading and leaves an impression that the court ruled to prohibit Facebook from labeling the content posted on its platform. The same position was outlined in the article spread by Georgian users. However, according to the text of the article, it is about the Rutherford Institute’s support for the lawsuit, not the court ruling.
It is worth noting that the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled on May 7, 2021 to deny the Rutherford Institute’s motion to file an amicus brief, because the court found that the proposed amicus brief did not address new and useful issues. The court dispute between Children’s Health Defense and Facebook is still underway.
- About Children’s Health Defense
Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine advocacy group, is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, a lawyer and nephew of former U.S. president John F. Kennedy. According to the recent report “The Disinformation Dozen” released by the Center for Counting Digital Hate, Robert Kennedy is second among those twelve people, who are responsible for up to 65% of antivaccine content spread on Facebook and Twitter from February 1, 2021 to March 16, 2021.
The same report reads that Kennedy’s organization is one of the main sources of spreading false claims about COVID-19 vaccines. On February 8, Instagram blocked Kennedy’s account.
Prior to spreading disinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines, Kennedy was actively promoting an opinion that childhood vaccines cause autism. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and American Academy of Pediatrics have confirmed on multiple occasions that such claims are false and that vaccines are not linked to increased autism risk. According to the study published in the Vaccine journal in 2019, 54% of anti-vaccine ads on Facebook were financed by two main groups with one of them being led by Robert Kennedy. The latter also chaired the organization the World Mercury Project in that period. In May 2019, Kennedy was criticized by his family members. Kennedy’s sister and brother, as well as his niece published a letter, noting that although they loved him, Robert Kennedy was part of a misinformation campaign that was having “heartbreaking and deadly consequences.”
- Facebook’s partnership with third-party fact-checking organizations
The decision to rate and label false claims posted by Children’s Health Defense on Facebook is the key reason why the organization sues Facebook, PolitFact, Science Feedback and Poynter Institute.
In 2016, Facebook launched a third-party fact-checking program in collaboration with independent fact-checking organizations to improve the accuracy of information posted on its platform. Due to this collaboration, Facebook users have an opportunity to learn whether a particular claim is true. After identifying content that contains potentially incorrect information on Facebook, the fact-checking organizations participating in the program evaluate and label the dubious content through the Facebook rating system. The rated content is not removed but rather labeled and users receive information that the fact has been checked, thus enabling them to read the material prepared by fact-checkers and make an informed choice based on various sources. Facebook’s partner fact-checking organizations are verified members of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) of the Poynter Institute.
In September 2020, Facebook expanded the program to Georgia, under which Myth Detector became its local partner.
The article has been written in the framework of Facebook’s fact-checking program. You can read more about the restrictions that Facebook may impose based on this article via this link. You can find information about appealing or editing our assessment via this link.
Read detailed instructions for editing the article.
Read detailed appeal instructions.
