Censorship Industrial Complex
New WEF report suggests leveraging ESG scoring to enforce globalist ideas on online platforms
From LifeSiteNews
Unelected globalists like those at the World Economic Forum are attempting to associate ‘disinformation’ and ‘hate speech’ with human rights abuses to empower themselves and silence dissent online.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) says that environmental, social, and governance metrics (ESG) can prove valuable for evaluating platforms on their handling of disinformation, hate speech, and abuse material, in a new report.
Published on June 6, 2024, the WEF white paper, “Making a Difference: How to Measure Digital Safety Effectively to Reduce Risks Online,” says that, “In an increasingly interconnected world, it is essential to measure digital safety in order to understand risks, allocate resources and demonstrate compliance with regulations.”
If measuring digital safety is considered to be essential, what then are the actual online harms that would necessitate measuring digital safety?
The latest white paper only gives three examples: disinformation, hate speech, and abuse material – as if they were all equal under the banner of online harm.
“ESG metrics present another valuable perspective for evaluating online safety” — How to Measure Digital Safety Effectively to Reduce Risks Online, WEF, June 2024
One method for evaluating online safety described in the latest WEF white paper is to leverage ESG scoring, which is basically a social credit for companies to make them fall in line with unelected globalist ideologies, even when these ESG policies are detrimental to their bottom line.
“Within ESG investing, companies are assessed based on their environmental impact, social responsibility and corporate governance practices,” the report reads.
Similarly, online platforms could be evaluated based on their efforts to promote a safe and inclusive online environment, and the transparency of content moderation policies.
Online platforms can also be evaluated based on their processes, tools and rules designed to promote the ‘safe use’ of their services in a manner that mitigates harm to vulnerable non-user groups.
And who will be evaluating online platforms in this Orwellian dystopia? Why, the unelected globalists themselves, of course!
No need to put it to a vote. The people can’t be trusted to decide their own fate for themselves.
Best to leave these decisions and all the power to bureaucrats that have our best interests at heart for the greater, collectivist good.
“An increase in the speed of content removals may reflect proactive moderation efforts, but it could also hint at overzealous censorship that stifles free expression” — How to Measure Digital Safety Effectively to Reduce Risks Online, WEF, June 2024
The WEF considers disinformation, hate speech, and abuse material as all being online harms that need to be measured and rectified.
But why do they lump everything together under this vague, blanket term of digital safety?
It is so that unelected globalist NGOs like the WEF can have more power and influence over government regulators concerning what type of information people are allowed to access through their service providers.
According to the report:
Digital safety metrics reinforce accountability, empowering NGOs and regulators to oversee service providers effectively.
They also serve as benchmarks for compliance monitoring, enhancing user trust in platforms, provided they are balanced with privacy considerations and take into account differentiation among services.
For the unelected globalist bureaucrats, measuring digital safety is about empowering themselves and forcing people into compliance with unelected globalist ideologies (with the help of regulators), all while balancing privacy considerations that are antithetical to everything they’re trying to achieve with the great reset and the fourth industrial revolution.
In a leaked recording of a private WEF Young Global Leaders indoctrination session, Klaus Schwab promises new recruits that their "avatars" will continue to live on after they die, and that their brains "will be replicated through artificial intelligence and algorithms".
"You… pic.twitter.com/c8qEBctl15
— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) June 12, 2024
WEF founder Klaus Schwab has stated on numerous occasions that the so-called fourth industrial revolution will lead to the fusion of our physical, biological, and digital identities.
Schwab openly talks about a future where we will decode people’s brain activity to know how they’re feeling and what they are thinking and that people’s digital avatars will live on after death and their brains will be replicated using artificial intelligence.
How’s that for balancing privacy considerations in the digital world?
“Digital safety decisions must be rooted in international human rights frameworks” — Typology of Online Harms, WEF, August 2023
While the latest WEF white paper only lists disinformation, hate speech, and abuse material, it builds upon an August 2023 insight report entitled “Toolkit for Digital Safety Design Interventions and Innovations: Typology of Online Harms,” which expands the scope of what constitutes online harm into various categories:
- Threats to personal and community safety,
- Harm to health and well-being,
- Hate and discrimination,
- Violation of dignity,
- Invasion of privacy,
- Deception and manipulation.
Many of the harms listed in last year’s report have to do with heinous acts against people of all ages and identities, but there too in that list of online harms, the WEF highlights misinformation and disinformation without giving a single, solitary example of either one.
With misinformation and disinformation, the typology report states that “[b]oth can be used to manipulate public opinion, interfere with democratic processes such as elections or cause harm to individuals, particularly when it involves misleading health information.”
In the same report, the unelected globalists admit that it’s almost impossible “to define or categorize common types of harm.”
The authors say that “there are regional differences in how specific harms are defined in different jurisdictions and that there is no international consensus on how to define or categorize common types of harm.
“Considering the contextual nature of online harm, the typology does not aim to offer precise definitions that are universally applicable in all contexts.”
By not offering precise definitions, they are deliberately making “online harm” a vague concept that can be left wide open to just about any interpretation, which makes quashing dissent and obfuscating the truth even easier because these “online harms,” in their eyes, must be seen as human rights abuses:
By framing online harms through a human rights lens, this typology emphasizes the impacts on individual users and aims to provide a broad categorization of harms to support global policy development
Once again, the authors are deliberately putting misinformation, disinformation, and so-called hate speech in the same category as abuse, harassment, doxing, and criminal acts of violence under this “broad categorization of harms.”
That way, they can treat anyone they deem as a threat for speaking truth to power in the same manner as they would for people who commit the most egregious crimes known to humanity.
The title of the latest white paper suggests that it’s all about measuring digital safety, but the title can be misleading.
It’s like what lawmakers do when they introduce bills like the Inflation Reduction Act, which had nothing to do with reducing inflation and everything to do with advancing the green agenda, decarbonization, and net-zero policies.
Similarly, the WEF’s latest white paper may have little or nothing to do with reducing risks online, as the title suggests.
But it does have a lot to do with making sure that misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech are associated with human rights abuses and other acts of real criminality.
In doing so, the ESG proponents can swoop in and consolidate more power for their public-private partnerships – the fusion of corporation and state.
Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.
Censorship Industrial Complex
WEF ranks ‘disinformation’ as greater threat to world stability than ‘armed conflict’
From LifeSiteNews
Misinformation and disinformation, along with societal polarization, are catalysts that amplify all other global risks, including armed conflict and climate change, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF).
On Wednesday, the WEF published its annual Global Risks Report with very few changes from last year’s edition.
For the second year in a row, the number one global risk over the next two years is misinformation and disinformation, which have cascading effects on other leading risks, according to the WEF “Global Risks Report 2025”:
Similar to last year, Misinformation and disinformation and Societal polarization remain key current risks […] The high rankings of these two risks is not surprising considering the accelerating spread of false or misleading information, which amplifies the other leading risks we face, from State-based armed conflict to Extreme weather events
According to the Global Risks 2025 report, polarization “continues to fan the flames of misinformation and disinformation, which, for the second year running, is the top-ranked short- to medium-term concern across all risk categories.”
“Efforts to combat this risk are coming up against a formidable opponent in Generative AI-created false or misleading content that can be produced and distributed at scale,” which was the same assessment given in the 2024 report.
Apart from inflation and economic downturn, there isn’t much of a difference in global risks between 2024 and 2025.
Compare the top 10 short-term and long-term global risks from 2024 with those for 2025 in the images below.
WEF Top 10 Global Risks 2025
WEF Top 10 Global Risks 2024
Rising use of digital platforms and a growing volume of AI-generated content are making divisive misinformation and disinformation more ubiquitous. — WEF Global Risks Report 2025
The Global Risks Report 2025 says that misinformation, coupled with algorithmic bias, leads to a situation where you and I should accept giving up some of our privacy for convenience, which subsequently makes it easier for us to be monitored and controlled:
Despite the dangers related to false or misleading content, and the associated risks of algorithmic bias, citizens need to strike a balance between privacy on one hand and increased online personalization and convenience on the other hand.
While data governance and regulation vary worldwide, it is becoming easier for citizens to be monitored, enabling governments, technology companies and threat actors to reach deeper into people’s lives.
Those with access to rising computing power and the ability to leverage sophisticated AI/GenAI models could, if they choose to, exploit further the vulnerabilities provided by citizens’ online footprints.
What else can we blame on misinformation?
I know! Climate change:
The accelerating spread of false or misleading information […] amplifies the other leading risks we face, from State-based armed conflict to Extreme weather events.
WEF Global Risks 2025
While the term “climate change” is mentioned several times in the Global Risks Report 2025, it does not appear anywhere in the actual list of 33 global risks.
Instead of using the term “climate change,” the full list of global risks uses several climate-adjacent terms, such as:
- Extreme weather events
- Pollution
- Critical change to Earth systems
- Natural resource shortages
- Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse
- Involuntary migration or displacement
The unelected globalists are now lumping terms like the ones above to push their climate policies and agendas, and they even go so far as to claim that misinformation amplifies extreme weather events, which actually might be true, just not in the way they imagined:
For example, on Tuesday WEF president and CEO Børge Brende blamed the California fires, which we may consider to be examples of extreme weather events or biodiversity loss, to climate change while not addressing how the state cut funding to fight fires, how the Los Angeles fire chief said the city failed her agency, or the role of arsonists.
By blaming the fires on just climate change while ignoring the rest, could Brende himself be engaging in disinformation?
WEF President and CEO Børge Brende blames California fires on climate change. Says global cooperation is needed to tackle bird flu, climate, and cybercrime. https://t.co/0vN997sdY6 pic.twitter.com/wMkiJE60fe
— Tim Hinchliffe (@TimHinchliffe) January 14, 2025
Climate change is also an underlying driver of several other risks that rank high. For example, Involuntary migration or displacement is a leading concern. — WEF Global Risks Report 2025
The WEF Global Risks Report 2025 lumps many global risks together with the belief that they are all interconnected.
For example, it says that misinformation and polarization amplify armed conflict, extreme weather events, involuntary migration or displacement, and all the risks in-between.
It’s the same tactic the unelected globalists use when they conflate misinformation and disinformation with hate speech, so they can use one as an excuse to go after the other.
For the WEF and partners, global problems require global solutions with global governance through public-private partnerships – the merger of corporation and state, which is also known as fascism or corporatism.
In the end, the global risks report is just a survey, and the risks may or may not materialize.
In January 2023, the WEF announced the results of a survey of cyber leaders that said a “catastrophic cyber event” was likely to occur within the next two years.
Here we are exactly two years later and that never happened.
For the unelected globalists, misinformation and disinformation are words they throw out to try to crush narratives that don’t align with their own, and they will use any threat, whether real or perceived, to advance their agendas and policies.
Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Carbon tax tripping up Liberal leadership hopefuls
The Liberals and progressives everywhere were so close. At the height of their influence, no one, certainly anywhere in the English speaking world could make this claim: “Climate change IS NOT an existential threat to planet earth.” Those who did were immediately sidelined, ostracized by their cohorts, dismissed by corporate media and social media behemoths. Sure the battle still rages, but only in their information world where you still see phrases like “climate change denialist”.
You see their information world has not yet realized something new has happened. History writers will say Elon Musk stopped the progressives in their tracks by buying Twitter, releasing the Twitter files and eventually with Donald Trump, swinging the information world in the direction of X. If you have doubts just look at this picture. While the Twitter files reveal the new information world was under the, let’s say ‘secret influence’ of the White House, this photo shows those same tech power brokers are publicly, and happily celebrating the man they worked secretly to bring down. Or at least they’re not ashamed to publicly text their friends about it. The fact they’re not hiding probably reveals their eager support.
Sometimes we find it’s the people we look down our noses at who make all the difference. Like those overweight beer-guzzling hunter types who wear the red hats. (No not the Roman Cardinals, but the Appalachian trailer house occupants). These conspiracy theorists started to proclaim that the world would in fact not burn up by next weekend. Sure many of these seemed to be the same people who claim the world is flat and their neighbor is from another planet. But then more people stepped forward. Not about ‘pancake Earth’, but about the existential threat of climate change.
Family members and friends scorned and ridiculed them, and many still do. They were outraged that a regular citizen would dare to share information from a completely sane climate scientist or researcher who did not agree with the majority. They’d lose their marbles on those silly enough to cite a peer reviewed scientific paper. IF anyone was bold enough to take the time to read an entire report from NASA or Environment Canada, well you’d certainly hear someone say “You fool! You can’t do your own research!! You’re not a scientist!!”
Fortunately, funny man podcaster Jimmy Dore has the perfect comeback for these situations. Dore says when his own friends warned him only a Conspiracy Theorist would do his own research, he replied “You know before COVID doing your own research used to be called… reading”. It’s really worth two minutes to check this out. If you don’t find it funny, really funny, then I’m sorry. One day you will.
Jimmy Dore on the shaming of doing your own research and questioning the narrative during the Covid era…pic.twitter.com/PxCRVgklbj
— James Melville 🚜 (@JamesMelville) January 2, 2024
Speaking of reading, in the days before the printing press the Church and various wildly wealthy monarchs had a stranglehold on information sharing. Those who contradicted the party line could have their heads chopped off by a guillotine bought and paid for with their meagre tax offerings, or, they could expect to be publicly shamed and eternally condemned by their local preacher. Sure some of them probably deserved it but who am I to judge?
Then the printing press was invented. At first the Church leaders said, “Great now everyone can be educated, learn to read and even write themselves, and study the Bible on their own!” Eventually some of those same leaders said, “THIS IS A DISASTER! Everyone can be educated, learn to read and even write themselves, and study the Bible on their own!” After a few centuries the power structures in Europe completely changed. The Church divided into thousands of Protestant movements and the Catholic Church forever lost the political clout it never should have appreciated. Universities sprung up around libraries. Monarchs handed over power to early democratic governments. Books about science lead to scientific innovations. Average Joe’s eventually moved from underground mud huts to middle class condos in the sky.
Well the same thing is happening now with the internet. Except at breakneck speed. What took the printing press hundreds of years to accomplish, takes the internet a few months. The emergence and re-emergence of Trump Presidencies, revolutions against power structures, could not have been accomplished without the way we get information on the internet.
Sure there’s a lot of murky confusion as corporate media used to their powerful podiums of the printing press and cable tv are moving their content over to the new medium. But they’re being (sorry it’s all over, they have been) overtaken by the new form of information sharing. We’ve gone from headlines and ten second sound bites, to three hour long conversations with plenty of time for explaining and context. That’s something cable tv just didn’t have enough bandwidth to deliver.
So what does this mean for people trying to buy 1,200 square foot condos in Canada today?
Well we get to watch the power brokers struggle to retain their grip on / over our lives.
Those running to replace the son of … Hmm. Here’s a perfect example. Depending upon where you get your information from he’s either the son of Pierre, or he has an incomprehensively uncanny and impossibly accidental resemblance to a close personal family friend.
Those running to replace Liberal Leader Justin (let’s leave the last name out until the DNA results are back) definitely believe his father is Pierre. They believe Russians are our enemies. They think COVID vaccines saved the world. They think NATO is protecting Ukraine. And they certainly believe if we pay higher taxes in Canada we’ll save the world from the temperatures many of us pay thousands of dollars to escape to for a few days for six months of the year.
Carney, Gould, and Freeland don’t seem to realize everyday Canadians are simply done with the idea that a Carbon Tax in any form is going to save the world. Thanks to the internet, regular folks/voters have had time to do a little reading and listen to a few long conversations about this. Average people are understanding that CO2 makes up not 40% or 60% of the atmosphere, but .04%. Of that .04%, less than 4% is caused by humans. Mathematically it’s silly to think that paying more for food and groceries and everything else in Rosetown, Saskatchewan or Red Deer, Alberta is going to stop, slow down, or make any difference at all to global temperatures in 20 years.
It’s ironic that it’s the modern progressive movement who are stuck in the old information age. You’d think the slower thinking conservatives would hold on to the old ways and they’d be the ones trying to enforce restrictions on the new communication movement. Somehow the self proclaimed forward looking progressives are the ones trying to censor. Maybe it does make sense. Conservatives are more likely to read their history. They know the ones who censor are always trying to retain their failing grasp on power. New information consumers are ready, willing, and annoyingly attempting to debate. But there’s no debate for those who say “The science is settled.” I guess that means they’re all finished learning things.
Sorry to the Liberal Leadership hopefuls. They haven’t heard the news. Well actually they have and that’s the problem. Instead of paying attention to what’s really happening, they’re dismissing everything and everyone who doesn’t appear on the cable news channels.. other than to be ridiculed that is.
I leave you with this short video from Franco Terrazzano of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. Franco explains how those vying for control of the PMO are tripping over their new versions of an old and failed Carbon Tax. Pity them. They don’t realize voters have moved on.
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Biden Pardons His Brother Jim And Other Family Members Just Moments Before Trump’s Swearing-In
-
International2 days ago
Biden preemptively pardons Fauci, Cheney, Milley on way out
-
Business2 days ago
Carney says as PM he would replace the Carbon Tax with something ‘more effective’
-
International1 day ago
Trump orders U.S. withdrawal from World Health Organization
-
Business2 days ago
Freeland and Carney owe Canadians clear answer on carbon taxes
-
Business2 days ago
UK lawmaker threatens to use Online Safety Act to censor social media platforms
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump Takes Firm Stand, Exits Paris Agreement Again
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Trump to declare national emergency on border, issue executive orders