The EU Commission wants to intensify the fight against disinformation with a “European Action Plan for Democracy”.
Last but not least, the coronavirus pandemic has shown how much misinformation can shape public opinion, explained Věra Jourová, Vice President of the EU Commissionfor Values and Transparency, on Wednesday. The Commission now wants to counter this with an action plan.
from the Greek press
New guidelines planned
In 2018, social networks and search engines such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter agreed to the commission to sign a code of conduct against disinformation.
Now the commission wants to “go over to co-regulation”, announced Jourová. To this end, new guidelines are to be created by spring 2021 that can be enforced by national regulatory authorities.
The planned Digital Services Act would create “horizontal rules” for the platforms, explained the Commissioner. These would then have to specifically reduce the risk of spreading disinformation.
It is not about having controversial content deleted from the right or left, but there must be clear guidelines for everyone.
Jourová advocated observing actors over a longer period of time in order to find those who spread systematic disinformation.
The perpetrators could be charged costs, for example by advertisers no longer placing banners on some portals. Sanctions against “malicious actors”, for example in Russia or China, based on the “Cyber Diplomacy Toolbox” model, would also come into question. Such actors could also be publicly denounced.
Fight against manipulation
“Our societies must not be manipulated through organized activities,” said the Commissioner. It must be possible, for example, to use vaccines efficiently against the coronavirus pandemic.
They have already notified Google and Facebook that “we want to promote vaccination strategies” (!!!)
The platforms would also have to take stronger action against manipulation by social bots and fake accounts and make their algorithms more transparent, especially for news feeds. It is also important to cooperate better and more systematically with fact-checkers and to take stronger action against hate speech.
For the coming year, the Commission also announced revised rules on the transparency of political advertising and party funding. The EU no longer wants to tolerate “dirty methods” as in the cases of Cambridge Analytica and the Brexit referendum (!!!)
Political marketing should no longer abuse privileged access, for example by researchers, to private data. With the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), EU citizens are somewhat better protected (!!!)
The required consent is a comparatively weak instrument.
“Overall social task”
Achim Berg, President of the IT industry association Bitkom, described the fight against disinformation on the Internet as “a task for society as a whole”.
Educational institutions, the media, governments, civil society “and of course online platforms are responsible”.
Politicians have to act with “a particularly good sense of proportion”: “In many cases, there is no clear right or wrong, and what is still valid today may be untrue tomorrow”.
Interventions in social media posts, for example, should “be restricted to particularly serious cases”.
And I mean…At the time of the translation of this article (which, by the way, has appeared on conventional media), there have been 334 comments.
Of course, I couldn’t read all of them.
I particularly liked some of them, and I’ll add them here:
It is time to accept that the EU is a thoroughbred dictatorship
… There is no more to be said.
……………………………………………………
“And above the entrance, it says: Truth sets you free (Explanation: Above the entrance of the Auschwitz concentration camp it says: “Work makes you free”)
Well finally! Then it may not be long before the headline reads: EU Commission wants to train disinformers
It is best to spend the disinformers in a place where they can better “concentrate” on the training content, ie the truth, and are not as distracted as in normal life. Germany has a certain amount of expertise when it comes to warehouse management, transport logistics, and location selection, and above the entrance, it says: Truth sets you free”!
……………………………………………………….
“Who decides what the truth is? Quote from the article: “Anyone who systematically spreads false information, for example about elections or Covid-19, should be pilloried and sanctioned.”
Has anyone noticed that it is nowhere mentioned WHO is allowed to tag information as “wrong”? So I think these regulations are excellent if I am allowed to be that person. I’m really good at it too.
I’ve ALWAYS been right in my entire life until now !! Honest!!
Then I think the pillory is ok too. And when people have gotten used to the pillory, we can then also introduce the shooting and a few years later legal shooting. Uhmmm, didn’t we have all of this before …..?”
My comment now! By the way, we are sliding from the hygiene dictatorship to the digital dictatorship.
And all of this, says the EU, just for our protection!
Instead of developing surveillance systems to eliminate other opinions, the EU should rather deal with surveillance in slaughterhouses, animal transports, and animal farms.
And finally getting active there where it is urgently needed.
Today we congratulate Captain Peter Hammarstedt on his 36th birthday.
He has spent almost half of his life onboard our ships. Today, as Sea Shepherd’s campaign director, he leads our missions against illegal, unregulated, and undocumented fishing. And if his time permits, he leads the BOB BARKER as captain.
We wish Peter good luck, health, and strength so that he can continue to fight so passionately for our oceans. ⚓💙
Today, leave your congratulations to Peter Hammarstedt in the comments.
We wish Captain Peter Hammarstedt many more healthy years.
And we are sure, the inhabitants of the sea too
Reptiles smuggled from Mexico found at German airport stitched inside dolls
German airport customs officers have found 26 rare reptiles – 10 of them dead – smuggled inside parcels of toys and sweets from Mexico.
Some of the dead animals had suffocated as they had been stitched inside cloth dolls, a statement from Cologne Bonn airport customs said.
The endangered horned lizards, alligator lizards and box turtles were destined for private buyers in Germany.
They are among many species that the global Cites accord seeks to protect.
German officials are now trying to trace the origin of the reptiles, using DNA samples.
It is not yet clear if they came from the wild or from captive breeding programmes. They were in two packages seized on 30 October and 8 November.
The customs service is collaborating with Mexican authorities and with zoologists at the Alexander Koenig Research Museum (ZFMK) in Bonn. The smugglers could be fined, if the police can identify them.
The 16 surviving reptiles might be returned to their Mexican habitat.
ZFMK’s work with customs mostly focuses on illegal goods made from poached endangered species, such as snakeskin handbags or furs.
Video footage released by French animal welfare group L214 appears to show pig cannibalism, dead animals in pens, and pigs in overcrowded conditions. Photograph: Courtesy of L214
Undercover footage at French farm shows ‘deplorable’ conditions for pigs
The animals are supplied to frankfurter brand Herta and sold in supermarkets including Waitrose, which has pulled the products pending investigation
Undercover footage published on Thursday appears to show pig cannibalism and other serious issues at a supplier for a Nestlé-owned brand of frankfurter sold by most major supermarkets.
Waitrose has suspended the pork products by bestselling French brand Herta while it investigates.
Herta is being sued by campaigners for animal mistreatment and misleading consumers. The brand, which is sold in UK supermarkets, is 60% owned by Spanish food company Casa Tarradellas and 40% by Nestlé.
The video footage published by French animal welfare group, L214, appears to show pig cannibalism, dead animals lying in pens, and pigs in overcrowded pens climbing over one other. In one section a sow, which appears to be struggling to stand in a narrow farrowing crate with no bedding, slips and squashes at least one piglet.
L214 has now begun legal action against Herta in France, based on the undercover videos which it said it filmed in June and September this year. The case, according to L214, will centre on Herta’s animal mistreatment and the way it misled the consumer with promises of better welfare.
In its press release L214 said: “Contrary to the commitments made by the brand, the images show deplorable conditions for the pigs that do not comply with regulatory requirements. L214 is filing a complaint for mistreatment of the animals against Herta, the most purchased brand in France, and for misleading the consumer.”
More than 20 pharmaceutical products are shown in the video, including a “last resort” antibiotic called colistin. Colistin is widely used in the pig industry, often to prevent or treat a piglet sickness known as post-weaning diarrhoea.
Waitrose has said it does not permit suppliers to use colistin. It told the Guardian: “We pride ourselves on our high animal welfare standards and our standards around the use of antibiotics. We have therefore taken the decision to suspend all pork products from this brand while we urgently investigate the video footage.”
The World Health Organization has recommended that colistin’s preventive use in healthy animals be halted to preserve the antibiotic as one of the “essential … last-resort treatments for multidrug-resistant infections in humans”.
EU funding from the common agricultural policy for the Herta pig supplier farm, which grows crops and keeps other livestock, totalled about €150,000 (£135,000) in 2018 and 2019, according to the French government website, Telepac.
The pigs in the video appear to have had their tails docked, a practice outlawed in the EU, other than in exceptional circumstances. No straw or other bedding is seen and the sheds do not appear to have any natural light. The pigs and piglets appear to be covered in faeces. Additional footage by L214 seen by the Guardian appears to show a pig chewing after biting a dead pig’s stomach.
EU law governing pig welfare stipulates they “must have permanent access to” rooting materials “such as straw, hay, wood, sawdust, mushroom compost, peat or a mixture of such … ”
A worker loading the pigs for slaughter appears to use an electrical prod and to hit pigs’ backs with a plastic panel. One half-escaped sow is trapped by her hips in the bars of her crate. A piglet appears to have its foot trapped in the slatted floor.
In an email, L214 co-founder Sébastien Arsac accused Herta of “lying” to consumers about pig welfare, and described the pig housing conditions as “squalid … [where] animals spend a life of suffering”.
In an email to the Guardian a spokesperson for Herta said almost 350 French breeders hold a filière préférence contract that commits them to “a continuous improvement process based on animal welfare criteria such as the use of antibiotics, animals restraining conditions or better housing conditions”.
It also said: “Herta has a rigorous purchasing policy with its 40 meat suppliers in Europe. These partners are regularly audited by the company. These companies are, themselves, in contractual links with various groups of European breeders who have the obligation to respect European legislation.”
In 2019, it said: “More than 120 farm audits were carried out by Herta teams in France. A Herta farm audit includes 42 control points and 17 are specifically dedicated to animal welfare.”
Casa Tarradellas referred the Guardian to Nestlé for comment. Nestlé said: “We strongly condemn any mistreatment of farm animals. Consumers trust us to hold our suppliers to high standards. Nestlé is a minority shareholder in the Herta joint venture.” The company stated that an audit has been carried out which found no issues at the farm in question. This confirmed the findings from a previous audit earlier in the year. “Herta will now send additional investigators to the farm and continue to follow up these allegations to determine if the images were taken there.”
Nestlé added: “We will ensure Herta reviews its audit process to identify necessary improvements. Nestlé is strongly committed to improving animal welfare in its supply chain.”
The Guardian approached one of the owners of the farm but he did not wish to comment.
• Footnote added 3 December 2020. On 3 December 2020, after this article was published, Nestlé announced that supply from the farm to Herta had been suspended pending an investigation to determine the appropriate next steps.
The current rules aimed at protecting animal welfare in transport are derived from directly applicable EU law, Council Regulation No 1/2005. The Regulation sets out the requirements that anyone transporting animals in connection with an economic activity must comply with. There are growing concerns that the current requirements for the transport of animals do not reflect the latest scientific evidence on how best to protect animal welfare during transport.
We are consulting in England and Wales on ending live animal exports for slaughter and fattening that begin in or transit through England or Wales, and further improvements to animal welfare in transport.
Why we are consulting
The Government is committed to the welfare of all animals and to making further improvements to animal welfare in transport and has a manifesto commitment to end excessively long journeys for slaughter and fattening. Now that the UK has left the EU, the Government can explore alternative options to better protect animal welfare during transport. As part of changing the current regulatory regime that sets the standards for animals in transport, it is right that we should gather the views of all interested parties.
The Farm Animal Welfare Committee (FAWC, now known as the Animal Welfare Committee) have reported to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the welfare of animals during transport. This report took into account the responses to the 2018 Call for Evidence on controlling live exports for slaughter and improving animal welfare during transport, and the scientific systematic review conducted by the Scotland’s Rural College and the University of Edinburgh on the welfare of animals during transport and at markets.
The Government has reviewed the FAWC report and is now consulting to seek views on ending the export of livestock and horses (this will not apply to poultry) for slaughter and fattening in England and Wales, where the journeys begin in or transit through either country, in addition to introducing further improvements to animal welfare in transport more generally.
——————————–
WAV Comment:
Take part in the online consultation by clicking on the following link:
Note – we are currently unsure if (only) UK residents can undertake this; but we encourage folk outside of the UK, who are anti live export, to try ! – apologies if you are unable; as we say; may be UK residents only.
These are the consultation questions which you will need to respond to. Hopefully; this advanced insight will give you a feeling of what (the questions asked) is required.
IMPORTANT – We (WAV) do not expect everyone to provide answers to every question.
Some questions are really directed at transport operators – livestock hauliers etc – Questions 19 – 19 for example. You do not have to respond to anything like this – only the questions for which you can do a response. Your input to the consultation will still be considered even if you doo not answer everything. The main point to remember is that you are on the animals side and want to get live exports stopped regardless of the animal species. This is what needs to be reflected (included) in your responses when you do them. This is the real point – we need to make it clear that we want this sordid trade stopped from the UK.
Best wishes with your responses; the fact that you are taking part is a big bonus.
And remember – you have until the end of January 2021 to respond. Note that you can complete part of the consultation; save; and then return at a later date. It does not all have to be done in one session. Please see the consultation pages to enable you to save and return later.
Personally; this is a big thing for me and many other campaigners – brilliant Jane; brilliant Liza, wonderful Trudi; and all the others who a too many to mention – just brill !. Many who have now passed and are not here to hear the news of this. I personally have done live export campaigns and investigations from the UK for the last 30 years. Been there, seen it; heard it and smelled it you could say; horses, pigs, calves, sheep and more. They do not deserve to be treated as they currently are during transport – it is time for it to stop.
Above – A Dutch ‘Wetering’ horse transporter exits the port – Photo Mark
I did a big investigation report (5 undercover trails) with several other EU investigation groups on the trade back in 2010; presented to the EU and UK parliament, (with regard the EU) who threw it back in our faces and basically trashed the whole 120 page thing. You can read one of the 5 undercover trail reports by going to About Us. | Serbian Animals Voice (SAV) and scrolling down to all the livestock transporter / calf pictures are where you will find a link to the report. Alternatively, go direct to Microsoft Word – JH.04.03.2010_REPORT on NON-COMPLIANCE with RESTING TIMES in relation to CONTROL POST at F-HEAUVILLE.doc (wordpress.com) to read just one of the five investigations into live calves being shipped from Ireland to France. It makes bad reading. The failures to comply with rest times etc (as defined in EU ‘legislation’ !) for example justifies why we need to get this disgusting trade stopped asap. Your involvement in the consultation can help this.
Well that’s it from me;
Do what you can; for those in transport;
Regards Mark (WAV)
Kent; England.
In memory of great campaigner friends now departed – including the great Mike from London – we shared some fantastic times:
The following is the basic outline of all the questions which are asked in the consultation.
(Your) Name and e mail.
Organisation if you represent one. Note – individual citizens can also take part – you DO NOT have to represent an organisation.
Live Animal Exports
4. Do you agree that livestock and horse export journeys for slaughter and fattening are unnecessary? Please explain your views.
5. Do you agree that in order to prohibit livestock and horse export journeys for fattening where the animal will be slaughtered soon after arrival, these export journeys where animals are slaughtered within 6 months of arrival should be prohibited? Please explain your views.
6. Do you agree that the only exceptions to prohibiting live export journeys should be for poultry live exports, and animals going for breeding or production that will not be slaughtered within 6 months of arrival? Please explain your views.
7. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of no longer being able to export livestock or horses for slaughter or fattening? Please explain any impacts provided.
8. What alternatives would your business or organisation explore if it was not able to export livestock or horses for slaughter or fattening?
Maximum Journey Times
9. Do you agree with the proposed maximum journey times as outlined in Table 1? Please explain your views and highlight any potential regional impacts that your business or organisation might experience.
10. Do you see a need for any exceptions to the maximum journey times and, if so, why? Please provide evidence.
11. In the case of such exceptions, what requirements should be put in place to ensure animal welfare is protected?
12. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation due to new maximum journey times being implemented? Please explain any impacts provided.
13. Including loading, unloading and stops, how long is your average journey for the livestock, poultry or horses that your business or organisation manage?
14. Do you agree that a new journey should not start until a minimum of 48 hours have elapsed after the previous journey? Please explain your views.
15. Do you agree that there should be a minimum 7-day rest period for cattle? Please explain your views.
Thermal Conditions and Ventilation
16. Do you agree that we should prohibit both short and long poultry journeys when the external temperature is outside of a temperature range of 5-25oC, unless the vehicle is able to regulate the internal temperature within this range for the duration of the journey by means of a thermo-regulation system, and that this temperature range should be 5-25oC? Please explain your views.
17. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting both short and long poultry journeys when the external temperature range is outside of 5-25oC? Please explain any impacts provided.
18. Do you agree that we should prohibit both short and long livestock and horse journeys when the external temperature is outside of a temperature range of 5-30oC, unless the vehicle is able to regulate the internal temperature within this range for the duration of the journey by means of a thermo-regulation system, and that this temperature range should be 5-30oC? Please explain your views.
19. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting both short and long livestock and horse journeys when the external temperature range is outside of 5-30oC? Please explain any impacts provided.
20. Do you think that there are other species that should be considered as vulnerable and have a smaller external temperature range applied, outside of which journeys cannot take place? Please provide evidence.
21. What proportion of your current transportation vehicles have the facility to regulate temperature and provide ventilation?
22. For your vehicles which do not have the facility to regulate temperature and provide ventilation, what would be the cost of retrofitting to enable them to regulate temperature and provide ventilation?
23. Are there any other steps that can be taken to ensure animal welfare can be maintained in extreme weather? Please provide evidence.
Space Allowances
24. Do you agree that we should use allometric principles as a basis for future space allowance calculations? Please explain your views.
25. Do you think that reforms to space allowances based on allometric principles should apply to both short and long journeys? Please explain your views.
Headroom Allowances
26. Do you agree with the proposed species-specific headroom requirements?
27. Do you think that the proposed species-specific headroom requirements should apply to both short and long journeys? Please explain your views.
28. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of the proposed headroom requirements for both short and long journeys? Please explain any impacts provided.
Sea Transport
29. Do you agree that we should prevent animals from being transported in rough weather at sea and that animals should not be transported during Beaufort Wind Force 6 or above? Please explain your views.
30. What would be the financial impact to your business or organisation of prohibiting transport during Beaufort Wind Force of 6 or above
Exceptions
31. Do you think that there should be any exceptions to the previously mentioned proposals alongside the specific exceptions already outlined, excluding the proposal to prohibit live exports for slaughter and fattening? Please provide evidence.
32. What conditions should be met in order to ensure animal welfare is protected in the case of other exceptions?
33. Do you think that it should be possible to obtain permission to use an exception on an ongoing basis to avoid the need for transporters to apply before every applicable journey?
This completes the consultation. Submit your answers in accordance with the site instructions.
How do we know the temperature for 2020 when the year isn’t over yet?
To work out the annual rise in temperatures for their State of the Climate report, the WMO uses information from five different global datasets.
They then compare modern readings to temperatures taken between 1850-1900. This baseline figure is sometimes referred to as pre-industrial levels.
With data available from January to October this year, the WMO says 2020 is set to be around 1.2C above the baseline, but with a margin of error of 0.1C.
All five datasets currently have 2020 as the second warmest, behind 2016 and ahead of 2019, based on comparisons with similar periods in previous years.
However the expectation from scientists is that the temperature data from November and December will likely see enough cooling to push 2020 into third spot.
Despite this, the WMO is certain that 2020 will remain one of the warmest three.
“Record warm years have usually coincided with a strong El Niño event, as was the case in 2016,” said Prof Petteri Taalas, WMO Secretary General.
“We are now experiencing a La Niña, which has a cooling effect on global temperatures, but has not been sufficient to put a brake on this year’s heat.”
Are these small temperature differences important?
These relatively similar global temperature figure recorded over the past few years hide considerable differences at local level.
In 2020, Siberia saw temperatures around 5C above average, which culminated in a reading of 38C at Verkhoyansk on the 20th June, which is provisionally the highest known temperature recorded anywhere north of the Arctic Circle.
January to October was also the warmest such period on record in Europe.
But some places were below average including parts of Canada, Brazil, India and Australia.
Overall though the 2020 figure reinforces the view that climate warming, driven by human activities is persisting. The decade from 2011 to 2020 is the warmest yet recorded.
Where 2020’s heat went
The majority of the excess heat generated from warming gases in the atmosphere ends up in the oceans.
This is putting added strain on the seas, with around 80% of global waters experiencing at least one marine heatwave this year. These events, similar to heatwaves on land, see prolonged exposure to high temperatures which can have devastating impacts on marine creatures and ecosystems.
A long-running heatwave off the coast of California, known as “the blob”, was said to have killed up to a million seabirds in 2015-16.
Researchers say that these events have become more than 20 times more frequent over the past 40 years.
“About 90% of the heat accumulating within the climate system from anthropogenic climate change is stored in the ocean,” said Prof John Church from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia.
“This latest update from WMO clearly shows the oceans are continuing to warm, and at an accelerating rate, contributing to sea-level rise. This means climate change has significant momentum committing us to further change over the coming decades.”
Ongoing warming
The WMO says that warming continues to drive melting in many parts of the world, including Greenland where around 152 billion tonnes of ice was lost from the ice sheet in the year to August 2020.
There were 30 named storms during the North Atlantic hurricane season, breaking the record for the number of such events. As well as record numbers, new evidence suggested that hurricanes get stronger when they hit land because of rising temperatures.
Other impacts noted by the WMO this year included wildfires in Siberia, Australia and along the US West Coast and South America, which saw plumes of smoke circumnavigate the globe.
Floods in Africa and South East Asia displaced large numbers of people and undermined food security for millions.
What has been the reaction to this report?
The findings of the WMO report won’t come as a surprise to most observers.
“The state of the global climate? Parlous,” said Prof Dave Reay from University of Edinburgh, UK.
“These annual updates of deteriorating planetary health always make for bleak reading; this year’s is a full red alert. Surging heat, intensifying droughts and rampant wildfires all speak of the acute impacts of climate change in 2020. They also warn of the chronic undermining of global carbon sinks – the oceans, trees and soils around the world – that is underway.
“Throw yet more emissions and warming at them and they will rip the Paris climate goals from our grasp forever. The year ahead will be defined by our recovery from Covid-19, the centuries ahead will be defined by how green that recovery actually is.”
Environmental campaigners say the report adds urgency to calls for the recovery, post-Covid, to focus on climate change and the environment.
“Although the pandemic will have been the biggest concern to many people in the developed world in 2020, for millions in climate vulnerable places the climate emergency remains the biggest threat and sadly there is no simple vaccine to fix the climate. But keeping fossil fuels in the ground would be a good start,” said Dr Kat Kramer, from Christian Aid.
“These findings show just how important it is to ensure the government’s economic recovery measures don’t entrench the fossil fuel economy but act to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon world.”
Impact on nature
According to a new report from the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), climate change is now the biggest threat to the most important world heritage sites.
The IUCN says that 83 such sites are now threatened by rising temperatures, including the Great Barrier Reef where ocean warming, acidification and extreme weather have all contributed to a dramatic decline.
It has been rated as having a “critical” outlook for the first time.
from the Greek press
World Animals Voice 