Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Molson Coors beer company walks back DEI policy after being exposed on X

Published

3 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

An internal memo from brewing giant Molson Coors Beverage Co. reveals that the company is abandoning its DEI hiring and promotion processes, meaning it will no longer be making decisions based on race, sexuality or other categories.

Brewing giant Molson Coors Beverage Co., a large Canadian-American multinational company, will be dropping its woke corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies after it received backlash online following an exposé by a popular conservative activist. 

A recently revealed internal memo says that the company’s DEI employee training process has been discontinued, and as such it will no longer have specific “representation goals” in how it hires new people.  

The company, as per a Canadian Press report, will also no longer be participating in the Human Rights Campaign ranking program. The Human Rights Campaign is an LGBT advocacy group that ranks companies based on how “inclusive” their workplaces are.  

According to Molson Coors, it will now follow its own internal metrics to develop a “strong workplace where everyone can thrive.” 

Robby Starbuck, a conservative activist and filmmaker, had earlier called out Molson Coors for its woke DEI policies, noting on X on September 3 that he recently “let them know that I planned to expose their woke policies.” 

“Today they’re preemptively making changes,” he wrote.  

Starbuck said that the coming changes include, “Ending participation in the @HRC’s woke Corporate Equality Index social credit system,” as well as “No more DEI based training programs.” 

Also gone will be donations to “divisive events.” There will also be no more “supplier diversity goals” as well as “executive/employee compensation tied to DEI hiring goals.” 

As reported by LifeSiteNews, over the past decade left-wing activists have used DEI dogma as well as “environmental, social, & governance” (ESG) standards to encourage major Canadian and U.S. corporations to take particular stands when it comes to both political and cultural issues, notably in promotion of homosexuality, transgenderism, race relations, the environment, and abortion.  

Business

Why should Liberal MPs defend the carbon tax now?

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s carbon tax should be tucked under his arm while he doesn’t let the door hit them on the way out.

And Liberal caucus members need to make sure that happens.

Those in doubt need to ask themselves two questions.

Practically, why should Canadians keep paying the carbon tax for another few months before the next election?

Politically, why should government MPs keep paying a price with voters because of the carbon tax?

The carbon tax can be slayed on Wednesday during the Liberal party’s emergency caucus meeting.

Caucus finally rose up and finally forced the prime minister to face the reality that he can’t get re-elected.

But that’s only half of the job.

The problem isn’t just one person. It’s the policies. And Trudeau’s trademark carbon tax is one of his biggest failures. Replacing the PM while keeping the carbon tax is like switching the blackjack dealer while still facing a stacked deck.

And the Liberal caucus knows this.

Those Liberal MPs have been yelled at by their constituents about the carbon tax for years.

Hardworking people have been telling these MPs they can’t afford the carbon tax and it’s unfair to be punished for driving to work, heating their homes and buying food.

Those MPs have seen their constituents’ heating bills, the costs of their commutes and the invoices for their businesses.

They know the carbon tax adds about $13 to the cost of filling a minivan and about $20 extra to fill a pickup. They know the carbon tax is costing long haul truckers about $2 billion this year and they know it will cost farmers $1 billion in the next five years.

They know Canada misses its emissions targets, even with the carbon tax.

And here’s the big one: these MPs know the carbon tax is getting hiked on April 1.

The timeline has to be terrifying for Liberals seeking re-election.

March 24, the House of Commons reconvenes.

The government presents its Throne speech and immediately starts facing confidence votes with all opposition parties promising to vote against the government.

Then, on April 1, the government raises the carbon tax again.

Imagine door knocking after losing a confidence vote and raising the carbon tax.

Imagine being an MP from southern Ontario and a greenhouse tomato grower walks into your office with a chart showing his carbon tax costs.

Imagine trying to tell that farmer that he “gets more back” than he pays in the carbon tax.

Picture being an MP from Halifax and telling your constituents they need to buy an electric heat pump as their sole source of winter warmth before the carbon tax slaps them again.

Nova Scotia has charming weather events such as ice fog which seeps into a house like a ghost from a Dickens novel. So, most Maritime folks still need a furnace and Trudeau’s carbon tax punishes them.

These MPs have all been hollered at by their constituents who have been wounded by the carbon tax.

No matter how much the MPs may have pleaded with Trudeau behind closed doors, he kept the carbon tax and forced his MPs to defend it.

Trudeau tied this millstone to the necks of his MPs and didn’t care how much it ground them down.

But he’s leaving now.

And these Liberal MPs have the opportunity to cut the rope and free themselves from Trudeau’s carbon tax.

The Liberal caucus is holding an emergency meeting on Parliament Hill on Wednesday, and those members of Parliament need to demand an end to carbon tax then and there.

Why should they force Canadians to keep muttering profanities when they fill up their cars or pay the carbon tax charges on their heating bills?

Why should Liberal MPs face day after day of berating phone calls from constituents who don’t buy PMO talking points about the carbon tax?

The least they can do is spare Canadians the cost of the carbon tax right now and try to do the right thing in the end.

On Wednesday, Liberal MPs have to demand an end to the carbon tax.

Continue Reading

Business

Mark Zuckerberg promises end to fact-checkers, says Facebook censorship has ‘gone too far’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

In a surprise early morning post, Mark Zuckerberg took to Instagram to announce that Meta – the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads – will be taking steps to “dramatically reduce the amount of censorship on our platforms,” while seemingly placing a large share of the blame for past extreme censorship measures on pressure from the Biden administration and legacy media.

“The recent elections feel like a cultural tipping point towards once again prioritizing speech,” noted Zuckerberg, who met with president-elect Donald Trump shortly after his decisive election victory.  

Zuckerberg said that while he started building social media “to give people a voice,” “governments and legacy media have pushed to censor more and more.” 

“A lot of this is clearly political,” he noted.  

He explained that Meta’s complex systems for guarding against harmful content such as drugs, terrorism, and child exploitation have been prone to make mistakes: “It’s just too many mistakes, and too much censorship.” 

 

Following X/Twitter’s lead, Meta platforms will replace “fact-checkers” with “community notes.”

“After Trump first got elected in 2016, the legacy media wrote nonstop about how misinformation was a threat to democracy,” said Zuckerberg, but Meta’s fact checkers have been “too politically biased, and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created.” 

Meta will also move its trust and safety and content moderation teams out of California, and its U.S.-based content review will soon be based in Texas.  

“We’re going to simplify our content policies and get rid of a bunch of restrictions on topics like immigration and gender that are just out of touch with mainstream discourse,” said Zuckerberg. “It’s gone too far.” 

‘It feels like a new era now’ 

“We’re bringing back civic content,” said Zuckerberg. “For a while, the community asked to see less politics because it was making people stressed. So we stopped recommending these posts. But it feels like we’re in a new era now, and we’re starting to get feedback that people want to see this content again.” 

“We’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more,” said the social media titan.  

“The U.S. has the strongest constitutional protections for free expression in the world,” but other countries continue to exert substantial force to limit free speech on the internet. 

Zuckerberg explained: 

  • Europe has an ever-increasing number of laws institutionalizing censorship and making it difficult to build anything innovative there.    
  • Latin American countries have secret courts that can order companies to quietly take things down.  
  • China has censored our apps from even working in the country.

“The only way that we can push back on this global trend is with the support of the U.S. government,” he insisted. “And that’s why it’s been so difficult over the past four years when even the U.S. government has pushed for censorship.”  

“By going after us and other American companies, it has emboldened other governments to go even further,” he continued. “But now we have the opportunity to restore free expression and I am excited to take it.”  

‘Humility’ to now play a role in Meta’s management of its platforms 

In his 2019 speech at Georgetown University that portended social media’s crackdown on free speech, especially those expressing thoughts at odds with woke ideology, Zuckerberg claimed, “Some people believe giving more people a voice is driving division rather than bringing us together. More people across the spectrum believe that achieving the political outcomes they think matter is more important than every person having a voice. I think that’s dangerous.”  

The changes that were announced by Zuckerberg this morning are an attempt to return to the commitment to free expression he set out in his Georgetown speech, according to Joel Kaplan, Meta’s Chief Global Affairs Officer.  

“That means being vigilant about the impact our policies and systems are having on people’s ability to make their voices heard, and having the humility to change our approach when we know we’re getting things wrong.” 

However, Facebook has long faced criticism for its harsh censorship regime, including for deplatforming conservative users and censoring speech critical of COVID mandates and the LGBT agenda, in addition to facilitating child sex trafficking. 

In 2020, Zuckerberg spent more than $400 million to influence the presidential race that year, which election integrity advocates have credited with likely handing the White House to Joe Biden. 

X/Twitter and Facebook headed in opposite directions? 

Just as Mark Zuckerberg announced a new era of free speech on Meta’s Facebook, Instagram and Threads, Elon Musk and his social media giant, X (formerly Twitter) seemed to be headed in the opposite direction, toward increased censorship and suppression.

Musk and X were slammed on X over the weekend after new restrictions and punitive measures were revealed for posts critical of X, those that are deemed to be too negative, and even those that “critique or challenge other users or public figures in a way that’s perceived as harsh or personal rather than constructive.” 

Continue Reading

Trending

X