“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” is a phrase I adopted as a naïve youngster and pretty much lived by through my 20s.
I figured that people make up their own minds about things and live their lives accordingly.
I understood that once opinions have been formed, it’s virtually impossible to change those people’s minds.
It also relieved me of the burden of having to worry about what others thought of me, allowing me to live my life happily and freely.
But that has all changed.
Not so much around what people think of me personally, but rather what they think in general about things that affect me; or more accurately in this case, things that could infect me.
My latest concerns centre around both the conspiracy theorists publicising absurd statements on a daily basis, as well as ongoing news around those claiming that their right to freedom of speech is being stifled by mainstream and social media.
Now let’s just be clear that most of these people are either conservatives or thoroughly baked-through right-wingers.
The latest high-profile person to join the chorus is media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who owns America’s Fox News, which many accept is a loudhailer for conservatives and some right-wingers.
He recently slammed the mainstream media for what he termed “awful woke orthodoxy” for their determination to silence hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric.
And this is where things get a little murky, because as a journalist, I am by nature in favour of freedom of speech.
I support his statements, because I firmly believe that everyone should be allowed to speak their minds freely and let their audience judge them, either with support or ridicule.
But the truth is, it only works in an ideal world.
When freedom of speech is the cause of ongoing inequality, fresh global conflicts, renewed tribalism and dangerous rhetoric, then it is our duty to interrogate how far freedom of speech should be allowed to go.
Not because we want to muzzle anyone, but because some speech is designed to inflame masses of people, who have not been taught to recognise when they are being manipulated.
History has taught us painful lessons involving charismatic, eloquent men with evil intentions, using cheap logic to fire up disgruntled citizens via mass media.
And we have modern-day examples, where Facebook was used to incite genocide in Myanmar, just like radio was used to incite mass slaughter in Rwanda in 1994.
All under the banner of freedom of speech.
This is as true for politics as much as it is for conspiracy theories and the vaccine suspicions floating around the internet these days.
Because content is no longer exclusively being curated and filtered by skilled newspaper editors, but is available in raw form online, it falls on consumers to learn how to differentiate between fact and fiction.
But the peddlers of fake news rely on the fact that most consumers are unable or unwilling to verify stories, so they disseminate content that is deliberately designed to confuse and mislead.
Unfortunately those down the line, the ones who eagerly share the content with their followers, do so unconsciously, because they believe what they are seeing, and they want others to know.
And there is no way to convince them of their own ignorance and gullibility.
It all comes down to them not having been taught critical thinking skills at school and being unwilling to learn it as adults.
They refuse to believe that their ignorance serves the malicious agenda of leaders who use political theatre to hoodwink them.
They will take metaphors as fact and hyperbole as a call to action.
So while governments continue to fear missiles and atomic bombs, it is misinformation that is currently the biggest threat to social stability.
It’s the reason why hundreds (and possibly thousands) of people will refuse the Covid vaccine; and why millions will again vote for the angriest guy who shouts his empty promises the loudest.
Because these days, words do hurt, and they encourage people to use sticks and stones, to break one another’s bones.