The world is a complex enough place without spreading speculation and opinion as facts, as well as information that is just flat out incorrect as truth. Regardless on where you fall when it comes to world wide conspiracies, the one phrase we can all agree on is "Do your own research".
That said, researching is exhausting. The research I did for this post (which stretched out to three days for an article I thought would take an afternoon to write) was nearly enough for me to say this is all too hard when I could more easily bang out another movie review piece in less than an hour.
Social Media is Not Research
Alternatively, why do any research when social media will bombard you with stuff that affirms all your interests and view points from reputable sources right?
Platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, excel at feeding you information that their algorithm's think you 'may also like'. If you click on even one conspiracy video, article, or image, almost right away the algorithm will begin feeding you more of that type of content.
If you want to see that in action. Find a topic that you would never usually be interested in, search for information about it on your preferred social media platform, then see how fast your suggested media/articles/videos start to become saturated with that topic the more you follow it down the rabbit hole.
Social media is so good at this, you rarely get users denouncing it as 'thought control' by 'big tech'. Yet, every day, I have to tear myself away from Facebook because I enjoy mindlessly scrolling through things that interest me too much to uninstall or block the platform completely from my life.
Sharing content is a big part of social media. Sharing helps the algorithm determine what is most likely to interest you. The more something is shared among people with your interests, the more likely you will find that information interesting too. This is great until misinformation gains traction.
Misinformation Sometimes Just Evolves
Misinformation is not necessarily a direct attempt to deceive you with things that aren't true. In fact your source may genuinely believe that article they're sharing is true and factual - particularly if they're the author (like this article you're reading right now - though I'm not claiming this article is all facts. It's very much an opinion piece).
Often when stories are shared, particularly if they are re-communicated through a new retelling of the original information, context can be lost. Things that were initially opinion or speculation are reinterpreted as facts - not unlike a very complex game of Chinese Whispers where the original phrase is very different to the final interpretation.
Demonizing Universal Basic Income
To illustrate this, watch the video below, The Case Against Universal Basic Income (UBI), by Sorelle Amore of the Youtube channel Sorelle Amore Finance. Sorelle points out at the beginning of the video, on the surface UBI is something the majority of people would say 'Yes' to (free regular payments every month, no strings attached - you'd say 'Yes' right?). Watch how she demonizes the idea from a 'credible' source by a contributor to an organization she clearly doesn't trust, The World Economic Forum (WEF) a not for profit, global organization.
To preface my thoughts on this video, I subscribed to Sorelle's Youtube channel not long after she first started it and have watched every video. I'm still a subscriber and I receive her 'raved about' newsletter written by her partner, Leon.
I think Sorelle always presents interesting ideas that come across as being well researched, extremely considered and thoughtful. For the most part I think her videos achieve their intention of encouraging people to think more deeply about the world, the people in powerful positions, and things that may or may not be happening in plain sight.
However, the more I watch (and read their newsletters) the more I get the impression that Sorelle and her partner Leon are more sophisticated doomsday preppers with a mild dose of conspiracy theorist thrown in. They're both very anti-government and anti-corporation. Which is not to discount them as 'crazies' but to say they do have an agenda that isn't exactly impartial.
Start with a Bond Villain
Sorelle's video introduces UBI, and then follows the backstory of how we're getting to the point where a guaranteed basic income may be necessary due to robots and job automation.
Within that backstory Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, is introduced as someone Sorelle would most likely nominate as a real life Bond villain with no context for why? Sure it's the WEF suggesting a 4th Industrial revolution is imminent, with machines replacing much of the workforce and even making decisions for us, but that isn't something the WEF is solely responsible for creating or crafting.
Some of its partners are working on the technology for this kind of change but if you're crediting the WEF with this master plan then you need to credit them with the invention of the internet, smart phones, Social media, GPS satellites, driverless cars, robots etc. etc. Anything and everything that leads to 'automation' and 'globalization'.
Who Are the Authors of Your Data?
If you want to be spooked by a global company may I nominate McKinsey & Company, a private global management consulting firm, founded in 1926 (predating the WEF who were founded in 1971), and trusted advisor to businesses, governments, and institutions. Some consider them to be the most prestigious of the big three management firms in the world... I only nominate them because many of their Alumni go on to work in global businesses, governments, and institutions. (I'm just sayin' there's opportunities there for easier collusion in shaping the future by a private company. An assertation based on no evidence or research).
I mention McKinsey & Co because their company name shows prominently in Sorelle's video where she's quoting statistics for projected job losses by 2030. I wondered who they were? Interestingly all their research data is available to you completely free in the McKinsey Global Institute.
Add Conspiracy Theorist's Rogues Gallery
Getting back on track. Evil Bond villain aside Sorelle's explanation of UBI, who supports it, and acknowledgement of trials that have been done, is all great and relatively well balanced (though I notice her named supporters of UBI are all polarizing leaders conspiracy theorists love to call out as 'shady' - to put it nicely).
The article is pure speculation based on current trends and research observed by Ida, and is a response to a question by the WEF who asked contributors to the forum to describe what the world might look like in 2030. Essentially it's the same as futurist artist, Syd Mead, designing what 2020 might look like for the 1982 movie Blade Runner (look how right he got it).
Despite this Sorelle describes Forbes as a 'credible source', and I don't disagree, but the article quoted is opinion and speculation, not facts, by a contributor to the WEF who is a member of one of their Global Future Councils. What's more, none of the article is the opinion of the WEF yet conspiracy theorists often present it as such. Read this Reuters Fact Check: The World Economic Forum does not have a stated goal to have people own nothing by 2030.
Is That Really 'The Future' or Just an Average Day in the Present?
Even worse the quote (below), which sound ominous, but isn't really in the context of the modern world (public security cameras, QR code check ins, Phone GPS, Credit Card tracking, posting your lunch on Instagram etc, etc), Sorelle ramps up the hyperbole by using words like 'terrifies'...
Once in a while I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. Nowhere I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.
From this statement Sorelle extrapolates an almost unprecedented level of government control that could see the UBI being used as leverage for all sorts of nefarious reasons like who you vote for, what food you can eat, what things you buy, who you can associate with, and even what you can say.
Almost unprecedented because Sorelle points out some real world examples where governments have tried to influence its citizens buying power and control what they can do and say (like this is something new - World War II anyone? Russia virtually every time they've claimed the Ukraine as their own territory since 1654 - probably? Let's get some thoughts from the citizens of North Korea... no?).
A little disingenuously Sorelle finishes by mentioning something along the lines of small sustainable communities as a possible alternative to UBI. Which may be one way to go, but she doesn't reference this solution was also mentioned in the same article she pulled her 'terrifying' quote from.
Does the Author Have an Agenda?
Sorelle and her partner Leon do have something of an agenda, selling their course to help you learn how to be financially independent and less subservient to individual government ideology. Many of their videos and newsletters push the anti-government, anti-super-rich narrative with 'fear' (or at least negative) language.
As someone who consumes their content, much of it, in my opinion, is very reasonable, sound advice, with plenty of credibility, based on their own experience of living what they preach.
The problem is, if you don't do your own research (or at the very least read the Forbes article), your takeaway from Sorelle's video is likely to be that the WEF is 'evil' and UBI is the dawn of thought control by governments (to be honest we're way past dawn on thought control in some countries right now).
Opinion Becomes Fact
If that's your take. The next time you're in a discussion that mentions the WEF or UBI there's a high chance you're going to be very negative toward both even though all you know about either is what you saw in Sorelle's video and maybe others on social media that have fallen into your newsfeed by people who watched Sorelle's video as if it's all factual.
Do Your Own Research
Regardless, even Sorelle would agree that you should 'Do your own research'. Follow where people are getting their information from, and follow up on the source of that information. Try to be objective and draw your own conclusions. Make sure you're not just seeking out information that confirms what you suspect or believe.
Particularly look at opposing viewpoints. Where are they coming from and what information sources are they using. Research is actually a lot more interesting when you're trying to decipher how someone could possibly reach an opposing viewpoint because it opens up ideas you may not have considered.
Universal Basic Income the Case For and Against
To finish up, if you've found the idea of UBI compelling but would like a less Orwellian take on the topic, I'd like to recommend the video, Universal Basic Income (UBI) - Life After Automation by Dagogo Altraide (also an Australian like Sorelle) of the Youtube channel, ColdFusion.
Dagogo tends to look at multiple sides of any issue he researches and, while this video is a few years old now, the sources that are referenced are of about the same vintage as Sorelle's Forbes article. That said, he doesn't cover every angle either. The issue of government using UBI as leverage is not something he mentions at all.
Do I Have an Agenda?
Absolutely yes I do. I want to make sure I never have to live in a small, self-sustaining community (that to me sounds like a dystopian future where humans lost). Seriously though. I just want people to do objective research before they share all their conspiracy theory articles all over social media faster than they could possibly double check the content. Conspiracy theorists aren't immune to being 'sheeple' either.
Even more importantly I want to people to understand the difference between opinions, facts, and independent reporting. Here's a hint, Independence Australia isn't Independent reporting. Just like mainstream media, it has a biased agenda. More 'terrifying' is I could be a contributor based on their submission guidelines - which should be a red flag right there.
T he one thing I like about James Gunn as a comic book movie director is that he leans into the comic book nature of the world and the characters. He's not trying to do a realistic take on any of the characters. He's simply bringing the comics to life. It's still his take on the characters, but he doesn't shy away from their comic book origins. James Gunn's Superman is very much a comic book movie in every sense. Nothing is off the table because it's too 'comic-booky' and might look silly in a live action film. To me that's incredibly liberating. It lets James actually tell a proper Superman story that isn't hamstrung by reality, or tip toeing into the fantastical just enough to allow Superman to exist in the real world. Superman begins in the middle of a battle. Metropolis is under attack by a super powered being known as 'Hammer of Boravia', however everything is not as it seems, and Superman (David Corenswet) must work with other s...
B efore James Gunn's Superman Movie was released there was a whole rumor going around that the movie would feature monkeys on computers trolling Superman's social media, sparking much outrage. #supersh*t. I didn't know this was even a thing until just prior to writing this article. I did a search to see if anyone had posted a clip of the monkeys scene from the movie and got pages of discourse featuring videos and articles prior to the film. Most of it from Gunn detractors (let's say) seeing it as some kind of childish swipe at them... well not them specifically but, you know, those other people who have every right to hate on anything sight unseen. Anyway, I'm not going to give even one such example a link or air because it's kind of sad watching someone devote so much commentary to a throw away gag that is absolutely a nod to James Gunn's Superman trolls. The whole reason this post exists, is to say I loved the joke, because fourteen years ago, and I...
D iscombobulated. Is a word that I think someone rediscovered about three or four years ago (maybe more because the pandemic years have thrown out my sense of time) and now I hear it a lot. It's not a new word by any means, but when I started hearing multiple celebrities using it in everyday sentences, I actively had to look up what it meant. Define it with as many synonyms as you like but essentially it's just another word meaning 'confused'. Seinfeld Quotes: Quotes.net The words are pretty much interchangeable. He was discombobulated by too many choices. He was confused by too many choices. My confusion is the length of the word. It's unnecessarily long with too many syllables. There are many other words that mean confused, and therefore also mean discombobulated. Most of them are shorter and easier to say. So why not just say 'confused'? Perhaps discombobulated sounds more intelligent, maybe? Hawaii Five-0 Quotes: Quotes.net I've noticed it gets us...
How special am I to have finally come of age (53 years young) and am now eligible to participate in building the world alongside other members of the Illuminati Brotherhood... Yes I've received the call by way of an email, which I'm sure is real because I had to translate it from the Dutch language and it was personally written by Hiltom Rothschild, one of the non-existent members of the Rothschild family (or perhaps deep undercover because Google has never heard of them?). A Transcript of the email below: To: etourist From: Illuminati Brotherhood Subject: Illuminati Broederschap (Illuminati Brotherhood) I am Hiltom Rothschild, a member of the Rothschild family, one of the 13 families of the Illuminati brotherhood. I'm here to let you know that you've come of age and are eligible to participate in building the 🌎 world. It is a calling and a privilege to honor him with pride and gratitude as not everyone will ever be chosen by the LIGHT, many are called but few are ch...
Anthony Albanese Victory by ChatGPT and TET. W hen I started writing about the 2025 Federal election the polls were suggesting the world's most boring government was crusing to a defeat . As it turns out, boring is good, and Australia wants more of it, handing the current government a landslide win with a majority vote. Anthony Albanese became the first PM since John Howard to win a consecutive term, and the first Labor PM since Bob Hawke to do so. Some of that comes down to the leadership revolving door both major parties had through the mid 2000s. Although Anthony is my preferred PM over Dutton the irony is Dutton sounds more like a leader with a fairly commanding voice and an ability to speak well, without sounding like he's waffling and dodging questions, even if he is. Anthony, on the other hand, does have the ability (and speech writer) to say a lot of inspiring things but it gets lost in the delivery. He doesn't seem to know when to emphasise a point for effect. In h...
T he final two episodes of my ten part YouTube series documenting my process of learning the first seven basic skateboard tricks from Braille Skateboarding's, Skateboarding Made Simple. These are the links to Episode One , Episode Two , Three to Five , and Six to Eight , should you feel the need to see where I started or you want a bit more background on my personal skateboarding journey that began in 1988. I won't ramble on in this final introduction to my last two sessions, other that to say, episode ten is the highlight in terms of getting a direct comparison from episode 1 with side by side footage. Episode 9 - Frontside Pop Shuv-it Revelation The only episode not filmed on the second Sunday, thankfully due to the weather raining Sunday out and not my lack of willingness to continue. Monday was also very rainy but I managed to fit my session in during a small window of no rain late in the day. It was a little bit of a difficult session in that I could only uti...
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated by an actual human (me, TET) and may not publish right away. I do read all comments and only reject those not directly related to the post or are spam/scams (I'm looking at you Illuminati recruiters... I mean scammers. Stop commenting on my Illuminati post!).