Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Elon Musk’s X sues woke speech-censoring group out of existence

Published

4 minute read

Elon Musk-owned X has driven the speech-censoring arm of a major advertising group to shut down after suing the organization for allegedly leading a “massive advertiser boycott” against X that violated antitrust laws.

“I was shocked by the evidence uncovered by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee that a group of companies organized a systematic illegal boycott against X,” said X CEO Linda Yaccarino in a video statement on August 6, the day the lawsuit was filed.

“It is just wrong. And that is why we are taking action,” Yaccarino continued, announcing that the company had just filed “an antitrust lawsuit against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), four of its key members, and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA).”

X (formerly Twitter) accused GARM, a “brand safety” non-profit initiative of WFA, of “collectively withhold[ing] billions of dollars in advertising from Twitter” after Musk bought the social media platform in late 2022.

GARM claims to help ensure that businesses aren’t “tainted” by ad placement alongside illegal or “harmful” content, which they define as including “hate speech,” “misinformation,” or even certain “insensitive” treatment of social issues.

Shortly following X’s lawsuit, WFA announced that it would “discontinue” GARM’s activities, citing a drain on its resources.

Daily Wire commentator Ben Shapiro had testified before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee that if a media group does not align with the “preferred political narratives” of GARM, the company will not be deemed “brand safe,” and its “business will be throttled.”

Shapiro pointed out that GARM’s “brand safety standards” do not “draw the line at what is criminal, abusive, or dangerous,” but “also include restrictions on hate speech, harassment, misinformation, [and] insensitive, irresponsible and harmful treatment of debated sensitive social issues.”

“Those criteria are highly subjective in theory, and they are purely partisan in practice,” noted Shapiro, recounting how GARM standards led to YouTube’s demonetization of Daily Wire host Matt Walsh for “misgendering,” “which to GARM is to say that men are not women.”

A member of GroupM, which according to Shapiro is “the world’s largest media buying agency,” admitted in another email, “Daily Wire is on our Global High Risk exclusion list, categorized as Conspiracy Theories.”

The House Committee report also shows an email from Rob Rakowitz, GARM’s leader and co-founder, in which he complains about “extreme global interpretations of the US Constitution” regarding freedom of speech and asks why they are globally applying U.S. norms for free speech.

Shapiro further highlighted the fact that GARM’s “corporate giant” members “together account for 90% of global advertising dollars.”

In her August 6 video, Yaccarino lamented that the effort to “boycott X” “puts your global town square, the one place where you can express yourself freely, at long-term risk.”

“People are hurt when the marketplace of ideas is constricted. No small group of people should be able to monopolize what gets monetized.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Falling resource revenue fuels Alberta government’s red ink

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

According to this week’s fiscal update, amid falling oil prices, the Alberta government will run a projected $6.4 billion budget deficit in 2025/26—higher than the $5.2 billion deficit projected earlier this year and a massive swing from the $8.3 billion surplus recorded in 2024/25.

Overall, that’s a $14.8 billion deterioration in Alberta’s budgetary balance year over year. Resource revenue, including oil and gas royalties, comprises 44.5 per cent of that decline, falling by a projected $6.6 billion.

Albertans shouldn’t be surprised—the good times never last forever. It’s all part of the boom-and-bust cycle where the Alberta government enjoys budget surpluses when resource revenue is high, but inevitably falls back into deficits when resource revenue declines. Indeed, if resource revenue was at the same level as last year, Alberta’s budget would be balanced.

Instead, the Alberta government will return to a period of debt accumulation with projected net debt (total debt minus financial assets) reaching $42.0 billion this fiscal year. That comes with real costs for Albertans in the form of high debt interest payments ($3.0 billion) and potentially higher taxes in the future. That’s why Albertans need a new path forward. The key? Saving during good times to prepare for the bad.

The Smith government has made some strides in this direction by saving a share of budget surpluses, recorded over the last few years, in the Heritage Fund (Alberta’s long-term savings fund). But long-term savings is different than a designated rainy-day account to deal with short-term volatility.

Here’s how it’d work. The provincial government should determine a stable amount of resource revenue to be included in the budget annually. Any resource revenue above that amount would be automatically deposited in the rainy-day account to be withdrawn to support the budget (i.e. maintain that stable amount) in years when resource revenue falls below that set amount.

It wouldn’t be Alberta’s first rainy-day account. Back in 2003, the province established the Alberta Sustainability Fund (ASF), which was intended to operate this way. Unfortunately, it was based in statutory law, which meant the Alberta government could unilaterally change the rules governing the fund. Consequently, by 2007 nearly all resource revenue was used for annual spending. The rainy-day account was eventually drained and eliminated entirely in 2013. This time, the government should make the fund’s rules constitutional, which would make them much more difficult to change or ignore in the future.

According to this week’s fiscal update, the Alberta government’s resource revenue rollercoaster has turned from boom to bust. A rainy-day account would improve predictability and stability in the future by mitigating the impact of volatile resource revenue on the budget.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Business

Higher carbon taxes in pipeline MOU are a bad deal for taxpayers

Published on

By Franco Terrazzano

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing the Memorandum of Understanding between the federal and Alberta governments for including higher carbon taxes.

“Hidden carbon taxes will make it harder for Canadian businesses to compete and will push Canadian entrepreneurs to shift production south of the border,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Politicians should not be forcing carbon taxes on Canadians with the hope that maybe one day we will get a major project built.

“Politicians should be scrapping all carbon taxes.”

The federal and Alberta governments released a memorandum of understanding. It includes an agreement that the industrial carbon tax “will ramp up to a minimum effective credit price of $130/tonne.”

“It means more than a six times increase in the industrial price on carbon,” Prime Minister Mark Carney said while speaking to the press today.

Carney previously said that by “changing the carbon tax … We are making the large companies pay for everybody.”

Leger poll shows 70 per cent of Canadians believe businesses pass most or some of the cost of the industrial carbon tax on to consumers. Meanwhile, just nine per cent believe businesses pay most of the cost.

“It doesn’t matter what politicians label their carbon taxes, all carbon taxes make life more expensive and don’t work,” Terrazzano said. “Carbon taxes on refineries make gas more expensive, carbon taxes on utilities make home heating more expensive and carbon taxes on fertilizer plants increase costs for farmers and that makes groceries more expensive.

“The hidden carbon tax on business is the worst of all worlds: Higher prices and fewer Canadian jobs.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X