Ben Shapiro WEF WFA GARM - 08-18-2023

There's a group of people who control what you are allowed to see the news you read, the videos, you watch, the posts you engage with. You haven't heard of them, you don't know their names, but they determine through methods both direct and indirect, whether you are allowed to be exposed to particular messages. Their decisions can bankrupt companies, silence voice is, and fundamentally shift cultural norms. Who are these people, and how do they do this? Well, at the top level, you have a network of global elites that has created a universal framework full of guidelines and ratings designed to enforce approved narratives and punish disapproved ones.

It sounds like a conspiracy theory, except it isn't a secret, and we're not guessing.

First, you have the World Economic Forum, WEF and their platform for shaping the future of media, entertainment, and culture. Second, you have the World Federation of Advertisers WFA, who represent megacorporations that control 90% of global advertising dollars. WFA members are a Who's Who of global business and include some of our recent Wokified favorites like Bud Light's parent company AB, InBev Hershey, Procter and Gamble, Lego and Disney. There is barely a billionaire, Fortune 500 CEO, heavyweight philanthropist, government, or woke nonprofit that isn't associated with the WEF or the WFA. In 2019, the WFA established the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, or Garm.

Within months, the WEF adopted Garm as part of its platform for shaping the future of media, entertainment, and culture. Garm is a cross industry alliance that brings these megacorporations, the advertisers, together with big tech companies like Metta, who owns Facebook and Instagram, google owned YouTube, the CCP's, TikTok, and even Snapchat and Pinterest. This unholy alliance created something they call the brand Safety Floor and suitability framework. Think of brand safety as a dog whistle for censorship. They say it themselves.

The brand safety floor means, quote, content not appropriate for any advertising support. In other words, if you publish content that violates these guidelines, you will be blacklisted from 90% of the advertising revenue in the marketplace. So what have these global elites decided to put in their censorship framework? It started with things we can almost universally agree on, like preventing the distribution of child pornography or the advocacy of graphic terrorist activity. But they don't draw the line at what is objectively criminal, abusive, or dangerous.

They continue expanding the guidelines to include far more subjective parameters. For example, the framework lists subjective terms like hate speech as a problem. It says that anything surrounding transgenderism that they decide is dehumanizing. Or discussing what they deem to be a debated social issue in an insensitive way is off limits. The framework is deliberately vague, allowing those in control to pick and choose how they enforce it and against whom.

So how exactly do the approved narratives set by these global entities get enforced all the way down to the daily content you consume, including, maybe, this video? Well, here's how we'll start with NewsGuard. NewsGuard is an organization that formulates ratings for American media. They rank news sites on a zero to 100 scale based on nine supposedly apolitical criteria. These criteria are anything but apolitical.

They often align with left wing positions. During the height of COVID NewsGuard, falsely labeled and downgraded 21 news sites, only well after the fact, admitting that they either mischaracterized the site's claims about the lab leak theory, referring to the lab leak theory as a conspiracy. Theory or wrongly grouped together unproven claims about the lab leak with the separate false claim that the COVID-19 virus was manmade without explaining that one claim was unsubstantiated and the other was false. NewsGuard apologizes for these errors. They said they have made the appropriate correction on each of the 21 labels.

And when you compare their ratings of left leaning news organizations to right leaning news organizations, you see the same bias appear. The Media Research Center, a free speech nonprofit, studied NewsGuard's ratings. Here are the average ratings afforded to left and left leaning outlets versus those on the right. The study found glaring examples of bias by NewsGuard. The left's BuzzFeed managed a 100 out of 100 perfect score despite its reporting on the Steele dossier and alleging collusion between Trump and Russia.

The study found that the Global Times, a Chinese propaganda government outlet, scored a 39.5. That is 27 points higher than the US. Based conservative outlet, the Federalists. Despite a scandal at USA Today revealing the publication of multiple fabricated sources in their stories and their own fact checking operation, misleading readers on the history of the Democratic Party and the KKK, USA Today maintained the 100 out of 100 rating by NewsGuard. NewsGuard is a trusted partner to Garm.

They help ensure that ad buyers and users looking for news can be in safe and suitable places. Now, I'm going to give you a practical example of what this means for this show. For example, if I didn't ad on this show, I would have to do it with a company that doesn't make ad buying decisions according to Garm standards. A company not associated with Garm or NewsGuard that we love doing business with is a company called Genucel. You've heard about genusell on my daily show?

Genuceell has great products. Like their dark spot. Corrector. See, we sell our ad space based on a certain number of projected views. But unfortunately, due to Garm and NewsGuard, we now sell them at a reduced rate.

As this is the very first episode of fact, we're betting we've got our projected view count right for the sake of deals with future advertisers. But either way, we're thankful to be working with Genucell, a company using cutting edge ingredients in products like their Ultra Retinal Moisturizer with a retinol alternative for safe use in the sun. If you go to Genucell.com slash Ben right now, you can get your Dark Spot Corrector and Ultra Retinal Moisturizer in the Genucell most popular package. That's genucell.com slash Bengenuicell.com. Slash Ben.

Go check them out right now. NewsGuard is also working with others to use AI technology to enforce brand safety standards at scale by identifying scalable, hoaxes and misinformation in order to streamline blanket removal. This means that the news you read, news that is supposed to be fair and objective, or at least diverse, must adhere to Gar, the WEF, the WFA, and their subjective and biased standards in order to be deemed monetizable. If you think this is only something big news corporations have to contend with, think again. Even the content you consume from independent content creators on social media platforms like the one on which you're watching this video, is subject to these globalist powers that be.

So, for example, my friend Matt Walsh, he was demonetized on YouTube. Why? Well, because he says that men are not women. The same was true on TikTok, another Garm member, where Daily Wire hosts are routinely hit with content strikes in various bands for saying things like men are not women. Meanwhile, Dylan Mulvaney shoots up the TikTok algorithms by insulting women, saying, day one of being a girl and I've already cried three times already.

Or for example, if you question the accepted wisdom on COVID. So for example, let's say you say that the vaccine's not great for kids, no evidence kids need them. Kids aren't dying from COVID If you say any of those things, Garm WEF, WFA, they will crack down on you with alacrity. In addition to looking at how companies and creators are punished for violating these standards, it's also important to look at what is considered brand safe. In other words, what narratives are 90% of advertising revenue dollars working to advance.

So, for example, advertisers like Procter and Gamble who advertise with Mulvaney consider Mulvaney safe, as opposed to the Daily Wire, which is not considered brand safe and thus would never be supported by the same advertiser. Brand safety regulations inform culture. In some ways, they actually fund culture, like Garm member Bud Light sending a personalized girlhood beer can to Dylan Mulvaney or Gar member Lego declaring gender is non binary and making trans themed Lego designs. Or Gar member Hershey's using a male and a women's chocolate ad. Or gar member p g's.

Razor brand Gillette, which pushed toxic masculinity narratives and taught dads how to shave their daughter's beards. These are all endeavors deemed to be brand safe for companies to engage in and not risk being either deprived of others advertising dollars or having their advertising dollars turned away. By contrast, Jeremy's Razors not a brand safe partner. Bud Light isn't going to be sending a flannel shirt to Matt Walsh. Matt is not brand safe.

Abigail Schreier can't advertise her book on Amazon. It contains objectionable content about sexual orientation, but Amazon will allow paid ads for things like chess binders and Pro trans books. So what does all this mean? Why should you care? Well, like any other business.

The news media. We have to be able to make money by producing the news. Fact checkers are now incentivizing media outlets to comply with the Wefgarm narratives by determining what is and what is not monetizable. The WEF garm, the WFA, they're all actively working with social media companies to censor what they consider to be misinformation, which very often is just good information with which they disagree. Finally, the WEF, the WFA, Garm, they're all aggressively pouring billions of dollars a year into news and content that drives their preferred narrative narratives that are often counterfactual at best and harmful at worst.

When you look at the news, you need to feel as though you're getting all the information. And even if one source isn't giving you all the information, you can check another source. And all those sources together will give you a broad view of the world. But the World Economic Forum, the World Federation of Advertisers, and the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, they don't want you to have a full view of the news. They want you to see what they want you to see.

And they will work to prevent anyone from disseminating information they don't pre approve. They are determining what you see, what you hear, what you watch. And that's dangerous.