But it appears Reuters may have a vested interest in protecting Pfizer’s credibility. The chairman for the Thomson Reuters Foundation Board of Trustees, James Smith, just happens to sit on Pfizer’s board. Reuters did not disclose the glaring conflict of interest in its pro-Pfizer write-up at all. The Thomson Reuters Foundation is the corporate foundation for Reuters. The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics clearly states that journalists should “[a]void conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.”
But Reuters wasn’t the only one to omit context about a conflict of interest while accusing Twitter users of “missing context.” Twitter plastered a big notice on its platform that Bourla’s comments were taken “out of context,” and cited Reuters as one of its sources. Twitter did not reveal that Smith was on Pfizer’s board and also left out important context. Bourla specifically said that “two doses of the vaccine offer very limited protection, if any,” which suggests that there could be no protection at all against Omicron from two doses of the Pfizer vaccination. [Emphasis added.]
Twitter left the “if any” part out of its summarization of Bourla’s comments in what appears to be an attempt to cushion the impact of what he said:Bourla said that three doses of the Pfizer vaccine offer reasonable protection against hospitalization and death due to the Omicron variant of COVID-19, and that two doses offer only limited protection from specifically the Omicron variant. His comments were misrepresented and circulated online, according to Reuters and Snopes.Read more at: NewsBusters.org
New study on Ivermectin ‘should convince any naysayer’: Dr. Pierre Kory
By News Editors // Share
Democrat Rep calls for quarantine to observe those refusing vaccines
By News Editors // Share
Miscarriages and cancer up 300%, neurological problems up 1,000% due to covid “vaccines”
By Ethan Huff // Share