The covert effort began under Trump and continued into Biden’s presidency, Reuters found. Health experts say it endangered lives for possible geopolitical gain.

  • Gorgritch_Umie_Killa@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    This helps in an unexpected way. I’ve been low level questioning why Marcos has received such a quiet western media response upon his families return to power.

    It seemed out of step with, you know, the US sphere’s “values” statement. This article got me a little further in understanding the US relationship with Duterte leading up to the event.

  • Nath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    While I can certainly believe the US would do this, the article is very light on evidence: a “senior official” is their source. Yes the bot accounts are evidence of a campaign, but not of who was behind them.

    It also doesn’t say whether studies showed the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine. All reports at the time (which could definitely be the result of propaganda) said it was nowhere near as effective as the big 2 (later 3) western vaccines. Was/is Sinovac comparable to the western vaccines?

    Then they chuck in Osama Bin Laden and the South China sea for some reason. Yes, the CIA stealing blood samples from Polio Vaccine recipients was oafish, but those were real vaccines. There was no propaganda comparison.

    I believe there is some truth to this story, I just expect a better level of investigative journalism from Reuters. And not a bunch of unrelated guff because it was the biggest vaccine story before 2019.

    • MHLoppy@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      While I can certainly believe the US would do this, the article is very light on evidence: a “senior official” is their source.

      The article says “In uncovering the secret U.S. military operation, Reuters interviewed more than two dozen current and former U.S officials, military contractors, social media analysts and academic researchers. Reporters also reviewed Facebook, X and Instagram posts, technical data and documents about a set of fake social media accounts used by the U.S. military. Some were active for more than five years.” which seems like it’s not just hinging everything on one person. I don’t think naming the military / government sources would be reasonable here, so I’m not sure what more burden of proof you’re after that they could actually provide.

      It also doesn’t say whether studies showed the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine. All reports at the time (which could definitely be the result of propaganda) said it was nowhere near as effective as the big 2 (later 3) western vaccines. Was/is Sinovac comparable to the western vaccines?

      Also in the article: “Although the Chinese vaccines were found to be less effective than the American-led shots by Pfizer and Moderna, all were approved by the World Health Organization.”, so no, not as effective, but:

      • “Social media posts decried the quality of face masks, test kits and the first vaccine that would become available in the Philippines – China’s Sinovac inoculation.”
      • "“COVID came from China and the VACCINE also came from China, don’t trust China!” one typical tweet from July 2020 read in Tagalog.
      • “Another post read: “From China – PPE, Face Mask, Vaccine: FAKE. But the Coronavirus is real.””
      • “Although the Chinese vaccines were still months from release, controversy roiled the Muslim world over whether the vaccines contained pork gelatin and could be considered “haram,” or forbidden under Islamic law. Sinovac has said that the vaccine was “ manufactured free of porcine materials.” Many Islamic religious authorities maintained that even if the vaccines did contain pork gelatin, they were still permissible since the treatments were being used to save human life. The Pentagon campaign sought to intensify fears about injecting a pig derivative.”

      These quotes I’ve copied are not simply campaigns of “Sinovac is less effective”.

      Then they chuck in Osama Bin Laden and the South China sea for some reason. Yes, the CIA stealing blood samples from Polio Vaccine recipients was oafish, but those were real vaccines. There was no propaganda comparison.

      In context, what’s there about Osama bin Laden feels fair to me. It’s saying don’t get… whatever this is (psyops?) and healthcare mixed up because it can damage the latter (i.e., “here’s one time where the two weren’t separated and it caused healthcare problems as a consequence”). It’s not about whether the hepatitis vaccination thing was a propaganda effort or not, or if the vaccines themselves were real or not – it still lead to worse health outcomes because people became distrustful as a result of it.

      The South China Sea part also seems not unreasonable in context. (paraphrased) “there was some existing distrust among Filipinos due to past actions by China, such as <recent action>” seems… on topic to say in a discussion about public trust?