…this post was updated, see below…
On October 14, 2020, a letter of 15 EU countries, concerning disinformation about 5G, was sent to the EU. The initiator of the letter was the government of Poland. Support for the initiative was provided by 14 EU countries and, including Poland, 15 countries penned the letter: Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, and Sweden.
The letter speaks about disinformation, so here are few terms to compare disinformation with misinformation.
- Misinformation: false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive.
- Disinformation: false information which is intended to mislead, especially propaganda issued by a government organization to a rival power or the media.
- Misinformation vs. Disinformation: Disinformation is false information that is deliberately spread to mislead others. While disinformation may result in chaos, it’s anything but arbitrary. Misinformation, on the other hand, can be a result of disinformation. It refers to inaccurate information or content that is unintentionally or mistakenly shared.
EU consists of 27 countries. It is puzzling why the Government of Poland, in its initiator’s capacity, didn’t contact all of the EU Member States. Here are the EU countries that were not involved in the letter: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, and Spain. I am not going to speculate, but just wonder, why the largest EU Member States, such as Germany, France, Spain or Italy, were not included.
An update: according to the Polish government sources, Denmark has joined the 15 EU countries in their action of asking EU to act against disinformation on 5G.
Signatories of the letter are complaining about disinformation but don’t clearly specify whom they have in mind, solely the anti-5G activist movement or others, like ICNIRP and telecoms too.
Anti-5G movement has become very active and, surprise/no-surprise, social media based on the internet infrastructure, are enabling spread of information, misinformation and disinformation.
Signatories also are condemning the actions of illegally damaging infrastructure, taken by some activists. It is obvious that such illegal actions should be condemned, and also I have done it in my writings.
Signatories present a list of measures that EU should take.
- The first proposed measure is prevention of spread of disinformation on the effects of EMF and, especially, of the 5G. Here, the Signatories ask for assistance from EU.
- The second proposed measure is calling for more scientific research, for an awareness campaign and for all-inclusive debate with citizens of the EU.
- The third measure the Signatories offer assistance from own experts.
- The fourth, and last, measure is the recognition of the concerns that EU citizens have in respect of EMF and 5G. The Signatories intention is for the EU-wide campaign to increase trust of EU citizens in the information provided on EMF and on 5G.
All of these measures are obvious and all are correct. There is a need for correct information, for scientific research, for interaction between EU bodies and states in providing correct information and, finally, for activities that would increase trust of citizens in the information provided by EU bodies and Member States.
However, how these measures will be executed is what will be of the paramount importance.
The disinformation is being disseminated not only by anti-5G activists. It is also disseminated by ICNIRP, telecoms and Member States radiation protection organizations.
ICNIRP claims safety is assured by using ICNIRP safety guidelines but it is not so straightforward and there are many questions about ICNIRP that need answers before full trust can be achieved. I have written an Open Message to ICNIRP’s Eric van Rongen and Rodney Croft, asking for clarifications for the several stances that ICNIRP has taken when preparing 2020 Safety Guidelines (An Open Message to ICNIRP’s Eric van Rongen and Rodney Croft). I am hoping to receive answer some day.
Telecoms claim that the safety is assured by using ICNIRP safety guidelines. Telecoms have increased their “presence” in the news media and numerous articles complaining about anti-5G activists were written. The problem is that apart of some correct information, these articles contain also incorrect information. It is that telecoms fight activists misinformation with own, telecom’s misinformation. Telecoms have an upper hand here because the news media provide for them an easy forum to disseminate telecom’s misinformation as commonly accepted “truths”.
The same goes for the radiation protection institutions of EU States. These organizations follow science interpretation and recommendations of ICNIRP and, in this way, disseminate partly correct and partly incorrect information.
The issues of continuation of scientific research and help that can be provided by experts from EU Member States is an obvious proposition. However, it requires funding (for research) and requires “guts” to support initiative that would potentially omit/ignore ICNIRP and provide a more reliable expert organization with clear no-conflict-of-interests membership and with diverse opinions on science and its interpretation.
It will be interesting to see what will happen and how EU will address the issue of disinformation on EMF and 5G. The anti-5G activists are not the sole guilty party. Will EU dare to counter ICNIRP monopoly on “correct” science interpretation? Will EU address the disinformation spread not only by activists but also by ICNIRP and telecoms and radiation protection organizations?
If the goal of the letter, by the 15 EU countries, and of the EU will be restoration of trust, then they should address the problems of disinformation by activists, by, ICNIRP, by radiation protection organizations and by telecoms.
I hope it will not be what I envisioned in my tweet: “what the authors of this letter have in mind is the full approval for the scientific and technological dictate from telecoms and ICNIRP. Anyone questioning telecoms or ICNIRP will be condemned… ICNIRP has monopoly for “truth” as “approved” by telecoms.”
How the measures listed in the letter will be executed by the EU will determine whether trust will be restored and correct information will be provided.
By the same logic we should not refer to scientists as a group or to industry executives because they also represent variety of opinions within the group. Scientists are diverse group. Industry executives are diverse group. And anti-5G activists are diverse group. And so on and on…
Putting together 5G activists as a whole is also a process of disinformation. There are in the world from strange characters, anti-vaccines, supporters of a world conspiracy and people of the extreme right to a large part of honest people who maintain their criticism of 5G, based on the weight of the available scientific evidence and the principle of caution.
It would be wise not to put all anti-5G activists in the same bag. This is also a disinformation mechanism (in some cases, used by mobile phone operators and lobbies)
Pingback: The 5th International Conference: The development of mobile communications networks in the era of disinformation | BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place
ICNIRP is one of the parties that disinform. And the letter is genuine, as provided by the link in POLITICO Europe. Nice try to disinform.
Although this version of the letter does not appear authentic, it clearly states who is meant by “disinformants”. In any case, it is not ICNIRP.
Using Google Translate and “macron amish et lampes à huile” I found:
“Yes France will take the turn of 5G” launched Emmanuel Macron in front of a hundred entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs of “French Tech” gathered in the village hall of the Elysee, Monday, September 14. “I hear many voices rising to explain to us that we should take up the complexity of contemporary problems by going back to the oil lamp! I do not believe that the Amish model allows to solve the challenges of contemporary ecology” explained the president.
Can you provide the exact quote about Amish and oil lamps?
Video link works well but… van Rongen English answer is completely covered by French language lector. Could you provide written text what van Rongen said in English (exactly) so I could refer to it?
Unfortunately, I think it is cleary a charge against voices that criticize 5G deploiement…
In France, we succeeded I think, to bring 5G as a real issue to debate for environmental and health on the media, because we bring it to State Court, because of position of Citizen Convention for Climate and because of demands for moratories in newly elected big towns. Conversely, our french government is very very very 5G industry friendly.
E Macron raised a huge polemic because he has treated anti-5G (i e, mayors asking for moratory) as “amish people” and “oil lamp model”…
Industry and numeric ministers claim that there is 28000 studies that never showed any effects !!
I’d like to inform you about this RTBF reportage that show Eric Van Rongen saying that he can not affirm that no health problem will occur if ICNIRP’s standards are applied.
at the beginning and at 24’40
He also says that no cancer increase is observed…