Obama drinks Flint water

First of all -- it was clearly a stunt. The question from the reporter where he "drinks" some water[1] happened after he asked for water in the middle of a speech[2] -- the moment in his speech was so obviously staged that it's not worth elaborating past including the link to the video. With that in mind, it's pretty clear that his answer to the reporter's (probably genuine) question was just doubling-down on the point he'd made with his earlier stunt -- that it's safe to drink. But ignoring all of that -- why is it a good thing that he said the water was safe? The water wasn't safe to drink, and the video of the President sipping water from Flint means that the entire country collectively agreed that the situation was fixed. But it wasn't fixed -- the water in Flint is still contaminated with lead today . [1]: [VIDEO] [2]: [LINK]

What if politicians do stunts and tell you to drink water poisoned with lead like in Flint, Michigan? [VIDEO] Should we censor them? Or perhaps just put up a warning sign that not everything on the Internet - like the physical world - is worth believing? Where do the guardrails end and censorship begin?

Flint is a great example because it only gained attention because residents started complaining on social media and in public forums[0][1]. Despite widespread protest and refusal to drink the water, and mass sickness, official sources maintained that the water was safe to drink[2]. National news media picked up the story almost 2 years after the switch in water treatment systems[3]. Even still EPA officials refused to acknowledge issues with Flint water, with Obama drinking Flint water at a press conference to convince people it was safe[4]. It wasn't until 2017 , 2 and a half years after the switch, that media and official consensus was that Flint constituted an emergency. So yeah, keep your pitchforks out people! [0] - [LINK] [1] - [LINK] [2] - [LINK] [3] - [LINK] [4] - [VIDEO]