Good point by Patrick C here.

Much progress made against political misinformation in recent years, momentum must be kept up.

But scope creep in "fight against misinformation" gets messy when it meets evolving questions of science and particularly public health https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1338681461746978817

Science is not settled on many basics in public health.

EG: there's more dispute about "official advice" on nutrition (the carb-heavy pyramid you see in an Irish hospital) than the authoritative chart would suggest....

Advice on sunscreen is or should be a debate in Northern Europe, and can't be settled via an RCT. Skin cancer is bad, so is vit D deficiency.

And fluoride - a hot button thing in Ireland, but do we want anti-fluoride posts taken down from Facebook?

( https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2748634)

Public health can't advance if Team A wins the debate at a gov't / WHO / institutional level, calls Team B "misinformation" and gets them booted off Facebook.

Platforms must be super tight in fighting against misinformation, but super careful in defining it.