> The worrying trend without a counter force is authorities like Big Tech and institutions masquerading imperfect science as truth.

I think it's a matter of triaging problems. The situation we are in is that thousands of potentially preventable deaths are happening every week because a significant portion of the public trusts polemicists and Facebook memes for medical information more than their own doctors (this isn't intended to be hyperbolic or to strawman that position, I believe that to be a fair assessment of the situation.)

Is so-called Big Tech really being too tough on misinformation? And even if it is, is that an issue we should prioritize ahead of other measurable harms caused by that same misinformation?

But should it really be big tech's responsibility to triage? If so, based on what information? The CDC? WHO? Then what happens if a doctor on the frontline wants to disagree with one particular aspect of the "authoritative source" information, posts their discoveries on Facebook/Youtube, and is censored because it was classified as misinformation? That would effectively mean the government is suppressing speech.

Sounds fine and dandy as long as you, the consumer of information, is aligned with the authoritative sources, but history has shown time in and time out that regimes change and that power is intoxicating and that those that want suppressed speech can eventually become the suppressed.

Nobody says this better IMO than Ira Glasser who led the ACLU from '78-2001 and defended the rights of Nazi's to march. Check out the documentary Mighty Ira.