《数智赋能正能量生产传播态势报告》[Report on the Trends in the Digital and Intelligent Empowerment of the Production and Dissemination of Positive Energy]

 

Pix credit generated by  ChapGPT

 

All States and other actors are fussing with the construction of their own cognitive cages within which it is possible to elaborate some form or other of "control" of tech based innovation, especially as it appears to permit automated decision making (that affects humans anyway) or that is self-contained and self-reflexive to some extent (broadly artificial intelligence (AI), though there is hardly anything artificial about it and its intelligence ought not to be measured against that of humans).  

Still, tech based innovation is hard to resist, whatever cognitive cage human collectives build and the premises and reality rationalizing framework these purport to elaborate. In the face of this contradiction, hum ans will tend to dfo what humans always do--they compartmentalize and then feign surprise when the contradictions that they thereby create come back top bite them in inconvenient places and at inconvenient times. But there is no help for it. Collectives MUST have their cake and eat it too! The point is to engage in both development without regard to consequences as one develops increasingly elaborate textual frameworks for identifying, addressing, suppressing, or controlling those consequences. If one is lucky (collectively) the two trajectories do not meet until long after its architects have departed from the scene, leaving it to others to clean up the mess. 

Pix credit here

 But even better when the two trajectories appear to align. That bring one to 《数智赋能正能量生产传播态势报告》[Report on the Trends in the Digital and Intelligent Empowerment of the Production and Dissemination of Positive Energy].

The "Report on the Trends in Digitally and Intelligently Empowered Production and Dissemination of Positive Energy" systematically reviews and analyzes the practical results and developmental trends of how digital and intelligent technologies empower the production and dissemination of "positive energy" content, identifying and summarizing eight key trends. [《数智赋能正能量生产传播态势报告》系统梳理分析了数智技术赋能正能量内容生产传播的实践成效与发展趋势，并总结出八个态势特点。] 

One is speaking here of psychic energy; or perhaps better put, of the high quality production of cultural and social objects that enhance the State's ability to engage with the masses in a positive way, grounded in the fundamental obligation to guide the masses, through dialectic, toward their own comprehensive development, and in this way engage more efficiently in the process of "all around" socialist modernization. In other words, here one is engaging in the high quality production of m,ass line objects and processes. 

The article provides a summary but not the text of the Report itself (a common practice in official Chinese miscommunications). But for our purposes here the summary is revealing enough. It points to eight key measures that suggest the current state of the objectification of positive energy:

 (1) 一是“从粗放到精细：高质量语料库建设提速”。[First: "From Extensive to Refined: Accelerating the Construction of High-Quality Energy Production Corpus" ]. The object here is to build a "high quality trusted corpus of data"  Its manifestation suggests its object:  "Corpus construction is gradually shifting toward the refined curation of data quality, driving a re-evaluation of content value, a restructuring of dissemination logic, and a reshaping of value-oriented guidance. " [语料库建设逐步向数据质量精细炼化，推动内容价值重估、传播逻辑重构和价值引领重塑。]. But its goal is the more important object of data, one directed to online producers of content ((corpus):--to "consciously prioritize the promotion of mainstream values, striving to serve as a vital, continuous source and a "high-confidence reference source" for these high-quality data (corpus)  [网络内容生产者要自觉把弘扬主流价值置于突出位置，努力成为高质量语料库的源头活水和“高置信参考源”。]

 (2) 二是“从人机协作到人机共生：‘超级创作者’崛起引领生产变革”。[Second: "From Human-Machine Collaboration to Human-Machine Symbiosis: The Rise of 'Super Creators' Driving Production Transformation." ] The realities of diffusion of capacity requires a re-orientaiotn of the human machiner interface aligned with the realities of (1) technology andf the (2) imperative of vangiard Party guidancer and leadership. "As the barriers to entry and operational costs for applying these technologies plummet, the paradigm that "a single individual constitutes an entire team" is emerging, giving rise to a new generation of "super creators" [技术应用门槛和技术使用成本急速降低，“一个人就是一支团队”，将催生“超级创作者”崛起。]. One imagines here a virtual neutral network of individuals and small collectives driven from the core of human political leadership in the production of a data corpus that reflects and builds on the preferred narrative line that then involves all in the construction and elaboration of the approved political cognitive cage now virtually enhanced and elaborated. 

Pix credit here

 (3) 三是“从静态到互动：文化‘两创’迈向新阶段”。数智技术让收藏在博物馆里的文物、陈列在广阔大地上的遗产、书写在古籍里的文字活起来，使其从静态符号变为具备互动能力的“文化伙伴”，推动构建文化创作、文化传播、文化体验的新生态。[Third: "From Static to Interactive: Cultural 'Creative Transformation and Innovative Development' Enters a New Stage." This one provides an extraordinary semiotic moment; the idea of virtually activation cultural objects. "Digital and intelligent technologies breathe life into artifacts housed in museums, heritage sites scattered across the vast landscape, and texts inscribed in ancient manuscripts—transforming them from static symbols into interactive "cultural companions," and thereby fostering the development of a new ecosystem for cultural creation, dissemination, and engagement." [数智技术让收藏在博物馆里的文物、陈列在广阔大地上的遗产、书写在古籍里的文字活起来，使其从静态符号变为具备互动能力的“文化伙伴”，推动构建文化创作、文化传播、文化体验的新生态。].  That activation ("breathing life into an object) suggests the fetish natire of cultural objects--when inactive they are nothing; bringing them to "life" requires an engagement between object and its (re)constructed history which is then projected forward virtually in culturally relevant contemporary ways. The object is  not reverence but invocation; not understanding of historical objects in history but as its potency in contemporary forms. This also helps better understand the notion of "data corpus" not as objects, but as objects appropriately activated and so activated projected into mass dialectics.

 (4) 四是“从快消到精品：微短剧探索主流价值叙事”。数智技术推动微短剧、漫剧向技术密集型转型，实现成本重构和产能爆发。[Fourth: "From Fast-Moving Content to Premium Works: Micro-Dramas Explore Mainstream Value Narratives." ]. The focus is on what works now, and to move it both forward in development and to utilize it as a vessel for the insertion of proper narrative lines and social teaching--one where exploitation produces a win-win for all parties. In this case the focus is on what is not HOT: micro-dramas and comic-based dramas. "数智技术推动微短剧、漫剧向技术密集型转型，实现成本重构和产能爆发。题材多元化、内容精品化、作品IP化正成为行业发展共识"  [Digital and intelligent technologies are driving the transformation of short-form dramas and comic-based series toward a technology-intensive model, enabling a restructuring of costs and an explosive surge in production capacity. Diversification of themes, refinement of content quality, and the development of works into intellectual property (IP) are rapidly becoming the consensus for industry development.].

 (5) 五是“从算法到价值：向上向善嵌入平台分发体系”。[Fifth: "From Algorithms to Values: Embedding 'Upward and Benevolent' Principles into Platform Distribution Systems." ]. Aqll of this requires assessment systems that have built in systems of punishment and rewards. Essentially the next generation in social credit systems now focused on the production and management of cultural artifacts with a significant political/moral element. 

"Online platforms are proactively embedding metrics such as mainstream values, content quality, and social impact into their recommendation algorithm models, steering these mechanisms toward greater transparency and benevolence. Consequently, the logic of content distribution is shifting toward value-driven guidance, the precision of online dissemination is being further enhanced, and algorithmic incentives are now driving the creation of high-value content" [网络平台正主动将主流价值、内容质量、社会效益等指标嵌入推荐算法模型，推动算法机制走向透明向善——内容分发逻辑转向价值引领，网络传播精度进一步提升，算法激励驱动价值创作。].

Pix credit here

(6)  六是“从有限场景到泛在延伸：全场景传播新场域不断涌现”。[]Sixth: "From Limited Scenarios to Ubiquitous Extension: New Arenas for All-Scenario Communication Are Constantly Emerging." And the purpose, of course, is not what it seems but what it does. This is storytelling at its most traditional--the combination of entertainment with educaiton, and the4 oversight of education by the leadership of a collective whose fundamental political line commits it to the education of the masses as a critical element of socialist mode4rnization moving the masses forward along the socialist path at the same rate of speed ind and in the same direction and economic modernization. 

可交互、可感知的传播新场域，并被广泛应用于时政报道、文博展览、红色教育等领域，把抽象理论和宏大叙事转化为可感知、可参与、可共情的生动情境，有效提升主流价值传播的感染力和穿透力。[It establishes a new communicative landscape characterized by interactivity and sensory engagement, finding widespread application in fields such as current affairs reporting, cultural and museum exhibitions, and "Red" education. By transforming abstract theories and grand narratives into vivid scenarios that are perceptible, participatory, and emotionally resonant, it effectively enhances both the persuasive appeal and the penetrative power of mainstream value dissemination.]

 (7)  七是“从话语转换到生态共建：文化出海拓宽新路径”。[Seventh: "From Discourse Transformation to Ecosystem Co-building: Broadening New Pathways for the Global Outreach of Culture." ]. This is not, however, Cultural Revolution handicrafts. It is instead a means of instrumentalizing tech, including programs in generative intelligence to higher forms of now cultural production of objects that are themselves heavily signified within collective orthodoxies. and to public ends under the guidance of the vanguard CPC.  These technologies morph "'production tool' into a fundamental 'infrastructure'; it promises to deliver more powerful toolkits, more precise cognitive insights, and deeper layers of cultural translation, thereby becoming the core driving force behind the future global dissemination of culture" [人工智能正从“生产工具”向“基础设施”进化，将提供更强大的工具套件、更精准的认知洞察、更深层的文化转译，成为未来文化出海的核心驱动力].  This integration and cultural production, like porcelains in the 18th century, are also meant for export. 

推动中华文化以更适配海外语境、更贴合Z世代受众的形式“走出去”，实现从“内容搬运”到“生态共建”的跃迁。数智技术大幅提升跨文化传播的精准性和适配度，数字文化产品出海形态进一步创新拓展。[We are driving the global outreach of Chinese culture by adopting forms that are better tailored to overseas contexts and more resonant with Gen Z audiences, thereby achieving a transformative leap from mere "content transfer" to "collaborative ecosystem building." Digital and intelligent technologies have significantly enhanced the precision and adaptability of cross-cultural communication, while the modalities through which digital cultural products expand into global markets continue to undergo innovative development.]

 (8) 八是“从量化到精准：传播效果评估迎来新契机”。[Eighth: "From Quantification to Precision: New Opportunities for Evaluating Communication Effectiveness." ]. And best of all, tech based and well managed/projected cultural (re)production makes it much easier, it is hoped, to manage and ditret both production and consumption. The  Re`prt appèars to make much of platforms. Yet what one experiences are platform ecologies, that is of interpenetrating connections between platforms of consumers and producers  whose structural coupling is the critical element to the archeology of cultural objects, their activation ad projection in modern form to the masses in China and elsewhere who will in its consumption be (re)educated in ways that align with the policies and fundamental political line of te vanguard party in the current era of historical development. 

The evaluation paradigm is shifting from a focus on mere "effects" to a focus on overall "efficacy," establishing a holistic, dynamic feedback loop. This shift propels the evaluation of positive communication outcomes beyond simple "post-mortem reviews" toward "forward-looking forecasting" and "real-time process adjustment." Furthermore, driven by advancements in large language models, multi-agent simulations, and autonomous interaction capabilities, the "Digital Communication Sandbox" is emerging as a pivotal framework for measuring and optimizing communication effectiveness. [评估范式由“效果”转向“效能”，形成全息动态评估闭环，推动正能量传播效果评估从“事后复盘”向“前瞻预测”和“过程调整”演进。随着大语言模型发展、多智能体仿真和自主交互能力提升，“数字传播沙盒”将成为衡量和优化效果评估的重要形态，]

This is a very different approach from the risk obsessed frameworks of liberal democratic states and their techno-bureaucracies. It is also different in emphasis--not on the production of objects but the production of people in which popular formation is techno-virtually enhanced, if not driven at least in its micro-applications. There is still a human involved--but not in the middle--at the top. And this reflects the hierarchical ordering of democratic centralism as a core element of human Leninist organization, one directed toward a certain vision of human fulfillment, joy, happiness and completion. 

 None of this is unique to China. Its expression is contextually relevant, certainly, but the values and impulses, the approach and rejection of risk aversion framing for one that is precisly directed toward the reactivation of objects--cultural, economic, social, etc.--into something that can be made both virtually objective and signified in contemporary terms, stripped of its unnecessary historical baggage and repurposed for contemporary ends, is coming with great speed, to the4 rest of the world as well. It s in this, more than in the verbiage produced by academics and intellectuals, that the core approach to AI and tech will emerge from out of the risk based administrative  baggage of the 20th century, now (re)purposed and activated for the contemporary history era. 

The text of  《数智赋能正能量生产传播态势报告》[Report on the Trends in the Digital and Intelligent Empowerment of the Production and Dissemination of Positive Energy] follows in both the original Chinese and in an English translation. 

 

President Trump Issues Executive Order "Paying Our Great Transportation Security Administration Officers and Employees"

 

Pix Credit ABC Houston

“I am going to sign an Order instructing the Secretary of Homeland Security, Markwayne Mullin, to immediately pay our TSA Agents in order to address this Emergency Situation, and to quickly stop the Democrat Chaos at the Airports,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “It is not an easy thing to do, but I am going to do it! I want to thank our hardworking TSA Agents and also, ICE, for the incredible help they have given us at the Airports,” he said. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told The Hill Trump would sign the executive order “as soon as it’s ready. A senior administration official said the money provided by President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act will be used to pay TSA officials. (here)

All of this came about after months of stalemate in Congress over the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. And that was possible in the aftermath of the violence in Minnesota (especially) that culminated in tragic deaths that created an atmosphere of disapproval against which the Trump Administration could offer little that proved effective. The immediate predicate was action in the Senate that included Republican Senators that was rejected in the House. 

House Republicans voted Friday evening to pass a short-term funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security that has no viable path in the Senate and is likely to extend the shutdown stalemate on Capitol Hill. The vote of 213-203 came after Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., rejected the Senate-passed bill, which would fund all of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection. Funding for DHS lapsed in mid-February. He called the Senate measure “a joke,” placing full blame for it on Democrats, even though Republicans control the Senate and the bill passed by unanimous consent early Friday morning. (NBC News)

The gist of the Executive Order is this:

Accordingly, I hereby direct the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to TSA operations to provide TSA employees with the compensation and benefits that would have accrued to them if not for the Democrat-led DHS shutdown, consistent with applicable law, including 31 U.S.C. 1301(a).

A few brief thoughts:

1. The spiral of political strategies that had, at its center, the violent events of ICE agents in Minnesota, has proven that in the U.S. old formulas no longer guarantee the sort of popular responses that can be harvested as political action. 

You may not have noticed, but we are currently under a partial government shutdown. In an effort to use whatever shards of power they hold to rein in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Democrats in Congress have refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) unless the Trump administration agrees to changes in how the immigration agency operates, including a ban on masks, body camera requirements, a use-of-force code, and others. (Brennan Center)

As much as the situation in Minneapolis was both tragic and explosive, it has proven impossible to turn it into a "George Floyd" moment or momentum for change. That either suggests the inability of Democrats and their allies to capitalize discursively (at least) on those events, or that the events did not lend themselves to that sort of mass mobilization (at least in sentiment). . . . or both. "Five years after the 2020 racial justice movement prompted a wave of cultural changes and then an enduring political backlash, many Democrats are signaling that they now recognize how skillful Republicans can be in using scenes of unrest — whether limited or widespread, accurate or not — to cast liberal lawmakers as tolerant of lawlessness." (New York Times)

2. The Democrats are not the only collective that embraces repetition without analysis. Republicans well knew that petty meanness is a "bad look" and is significantly unaligned with American values. It is likely that the meanness of of the election of President Trump's policies during the first term contributed to the election results in 2020.  I noted this in "As the Trump Administration Fades into the Shadows of History (and Myth) Lessons Left Unlearned" (November 2020). 

2. Cruelty never pays. The temptation to be cruel runs deep in American politics--of both the left and the right. The Trump Administration gave in to the temptation of cruelty. It is hard to conjecture the reasons (though in the construction of Mr. Trump as the Prince of Demons it will likely be ascribed to some sort of immoral lust, which is appropriate for demons in general, and suitable for the much larger appetites of princes among demons). The approach to the important issue of migration proved a lasting case in point, and especially the policy toward migrant children. There were others. But a reputation for cruelty will be remembered. But its temptations are also easily adopted by those hear their own demon-song as the singing of the choir of angels. The left enjoys ruining individuals on the basis of accusation related to deviations from their strategically advanced orthodoxies. And they have found willing accomplices in business (not an obvious ally) but there is a business case to be made for serving as the instrument of orthodoxy when, like the inquisition in medieval Europe, its effects tends to fall on individuals and the victims tend to be in the way of the ambitions of others. ("As the Trump Administration Fades into the Shadows of History (and Myth) Lessons Left Unlearned" )

This was a crisis of the Administration's own making, one that got in the way of the fulfillment of its own migration policy goals.  

3. Playing "chicken" is indeed a high stales political gambit. It was never clear who was going to be blamed for the inconvenience caused by the defunding strategies over the Department of Homeland Security. Part of the problem was the misalignment between TSA and some of them motivating foundations of the strategy (migration policy tactics). It is around the risk-reward calculus of chicken that one might be able to understand the last set of actions in the Senate and the House. As the picture that starts this post suggests, the misalignment between the source of the funding  issue (ICE) and its effects (TSA) has not worked to the advantage of Democrats. At the same time the Trump Administration has moved just enough to take the edge of  tactics and actions that crossed the line into cruelty. 

4. The Executive Order changes the calculus and chicken. There is a risk that if the Executive Order is challenged (in courts), both the protagonists and the courts may be "blamed" for the consequences (airport chaos).  This may be one of those actions where a expected challenge to the authority of the President to act via Executive Order may be more politically dangerous than inaction--certainly in the short run (eg the planned great retaking of Congress by the Democratic Party in the midterm elections in 2026). In the long run trajectories my suggest another direction, at least for those seeking either to curb Presidential authority or the protection of the role of Congress. Left unchallenged it suggests a further creep toward a distinct "style" of Presidential government, one that gives the appearance of ruling by decree but which ought to amount to no more than the memorialization of Presidential discretionary choices  now serving as its own public narrative. 

5. And that brings one back to the starting point of all of this--something that can be easily forgotten after so many months--migration policy, or more accurately, the need for a hard look at the way that migration policy is operationalized in communities--and the way in which public authorities ought to respond to citizen reaction (both within and outside the boundaries of the law). Here again each side scripts these performances on the basis of a calculus that is meant to use bodies for the purpose of agit prop (here, here, here): to write grand narratives and advance political/normative positions on the strategic use of bodies whose consumption in the theater of action and reaction is meant to invoke the great social archetypes through which effective and penetrating stories can be crafted and cognitive cages opened into which target audiences may be invited.  

Pix Credit White House Press Release on Migration

 And here the clashing narratives, and its theater remains raw and not yet closer to consensus, thugh muchmore transparent in its irreconcilable starting and end points.

6. Yet, even with all this potential, now perhaps squandered,  events may have overtaken the issue of ICE tactics, and more generally President Trump's migration  policy as it is manifested within the U.S.

The Text of the President's Order follows. 

 

 

Trump Administration Announces New Mobile App: "New White House App Delivers Unparalleled Access to the Trump Administration"

 

It is usually the small things that escape notice; and yet many times they open profoundly important windows on how collectives change and how that change is reflected in elite behaviors, AND how that elite behavior looks suspiciously like the re-imagining of ancient patterns now updated.

In a global context in which one might be tempted to think that everyone has become the leader of their own propaganda department, and that personal propaganda departments--generators of narrative in real time over any number of platforms--now generate data not merely for consumption by others but also for projection onto other propaganda platforms, especially those of collectives.   

Propaganda, today, is usually treated as a pejorative It is a species of the conveyance or production of narrative that contains, within it distortions or falsehoods, biases, or misleading bits that moves it from the usual effort to manage knowledge within acceptable bounds, to such management that violates the core premises of narrative contest. But even that us a weirdly unsatisfactory way of understanding propaganda. Its etymology provides a better window on meaning. Originally the term wasn't a general form of expression by a reference to a specific organ of foreign relations and evangelization of the 18th century European Catholic Church hierarchy--the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (Congregaiton for the Propagation of the Faith, established in 1622 (Inscrutabili Divinae Providentiae). 

The Church on earth, as the Decree Ad Gentes of the Second Vatican Council states, is missionary by nature, but in the self consciousness of Its being and Its mission there has been an increase, led by the Holy Spirit. An important moment in this "growth" was the foundation of the Congregation "de Propaganda Fide". The Church, starting from its summit, the Pope, realizes his inalienable call, to proclaim Christ, the only Saviour of the world and therefore having to drive, encourage, and organize all the forces available so that this saving proclamation reaches all nations. (Congregatio de Propaganda Fide)

Thus, at its root, the tern focuses on evangelization--on witnessing the truth of the "good news" of the ideas and premises around which one might better and more usefully interpret the word around them. "By 1790 the term had been generalized to include "any movement or organization to propagate some practice or ideology" . . .  The modern political sense ("dissemination of information intended to promote a political point of view") dates from World War I, originally not pejorative or implying bias or deliberate deception. Meaning "material or information propagated to advance a cause, etc." is from 1929" (etymology). And from this it is an easy leap to the pejorative--the truth of one cognitive cage, grounded in its faith would be lies and untruths, manipulations, fake news and manipulative strategies to another. 

And the yet older meaning draws greater power in the virtual worlds populated by platforms in which the autonomous evangels become parts of herd or communal evangelization in which the joy of the truth of one's own construct is an essential element of the communication within and between evangelizing communities. So here we are, despite the Enlightenment's efforts to "free" us of religion, it has merely fractured and reconstituted the faith of individuals and their communities. Faith--that is the object; faith, that is the significs; faith that provides the certainty of the cognitive cages within it is possible to develop a language, a narrative, that permits one to live one's faith and invite others within it. "He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation." (Mark 16:15); "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen (Matt 28:19-20). 

And this is what President Trump appears to want to do--to preach the work of his presidency in the way that organs and leaders everywhere, and influencers, individuals, and collectives--are each striving to do.  For the unbelievers, of course, this is propaganda. For others, an expression of faith expressed in the jubilation over the Word. And in the expression of faith, the truth of its expression, and more importantly, the truth of its oppositions, becomes a matter of the cognitive cages of faith from out of which they emerge. 

March 2026 Academe Newsletter--Faculty and AI

 

 

The March Academe newsletter includes a selection of articles about how faculty members are grappling with artificial intelligence—at the bargaining table, in shared governance, and through organizing. Additional articles on AI and other topics will appear in the spring issue, to be published in full in early May.

 The table of contents with links follows below. 

Money on a Chain: From OMFIF--DMI Journal, March 2026 (The journey to move bank money on chain)

 

I am delighted to pass along the OMFIF's announcement of the publication of its DMI Journal, March 2026.

 

The journey to move bank money on chain

‘Tokenisation’ has been the word on everyone’s lips for a few years now. Referring to the representation of assets on blockchains, it promises instant, cheaper settlement, greater efficiency and improved liquidity management.

But while the process of tokenising assets is well underway, the market has yet to come to a consensus on the appropriate payment instrument. Reaping the full benefits of tokenisation requires a way to represent cash on chain. While stablecoins can fill this role, they are not yet fully accepted by institutional market participants and, since they represent a novel form of money, it requires some adjustment to get used to a new type of risk.

Bank money is a much more familiar payment instrument and banks, eager to protect their role in payments, are adapting to the challenges of bringing their own money onto the new generation of financial market infrastructure.

This edition of the Digital Monetary Institute Journal looks at the changing landscape of tokenisation and the potential for commercial bank money in particular to move on chain. Featuring contributions from banks, blockchain services providers and industry experts, it explores the opportunities, risks and challenges that come with this form of digital money.

Enter your details on the right to access the report.

This edition of the DMI journal includes key contributions from our members and partners including:

David Anderson, Circle 
Isadora Arredondo, Hedera 
Vivian Clavel Díaz, Minsait (Indra Group) 
Andrew Forson, DeFi Technologies 
Dom T. Ghazan, Global Trade Finance 
Nick Kerigan, Swift 
Ousmène Mandeng, Economics Advisory 
Lee McNabb, Natwest 
Wee Kee Toh, JP Morgan 

 

Califonia Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (COPRAC) CAll for Coments on "Advisory Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) Hallucinations"

 

Pix credit here

 

Happy to pass along this announcement from the State Bar of California Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (COPRAC) Call for Comments on "Advisory Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) Hallucinations": 

COPRAC Advisory Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) Hallucinations

Due to the increased usage of artificial intelligence (AI) in the legal profession, the Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (COPRAC) continues to provide guidance on relevant ethical and practical considerations that arise from the use of these technologies. Generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT and Perplexity) are computer applications that can create text, images, or other content in response to user prompts. In the legal context, they may be used for tasks such as brainstorming, research, drafting, or summarizing information.

While these tools can be helpful in streamlining some aspects of legal work, attorneys must use them in a manner consistent with their duty of competence (rule 1.1), diligence (rule 1.3), and responsibilities as managerial and supervisory lawyers (rule 5.1). Competent use of such technology requires understanding its limitations, including the risk of fake or “hallucinated” content, outdated or incomplete legal authorities, and the inadvertent disclosure of confidential client information through prompts.

Courts have sanctioned attorneys for submitting AI-generated filings containing false or fabricated authorities, and an attorney’s lack of awareness of the risk of “hallucinated” content does not relieve the attorney of responsibility for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of any work product submitted. Attorneys must independently verify any AI-assisted work product before relying on it in any context. Diligent representation requires that attorneys not delegate their professional judgment to AI, but instead review, edit, and take responsibility for the substance and timing of all filings, communications, and advice.

Attorneys with managerial or supervisory authority must also implement reasonable policies, training, and oversight to ensure that any use of generative AI by attorneys does not compromise client confidentiality or replace appropriate legal analysis, supervision, or quality control. Ultimately, licensees should evaluate these tools thoughtfully, balancing their potential benefits while understanding the potential pitfalls. COPRAC is actively working on revisions and updates to its practical guidanceregarding AI. The updated practical guidance will be presented at the May 14–15, 2026, Board of Trustees meeting for approval. In addition, proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct are currently out for public comment. Licensees and members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments on the proposed amendments.

The proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Explanation and call for comments follow. The proposed  changes including redlined version may be accessed here. 

Rule 1.1 would add new Comment [2] 

[2] When using technology, including artificial intelligence, a lawyer must independently review, verify, and exercise professional judgment regarding any output generated by the technology that is used in connection with representing a client. 

Rule 1.4 would add new Comment [5] 

 [5] When a lawyer’s use of technology, including artificial intelligence, presents a significant
risk or materially affects the scope, cost, manner, or decision-making process of representation, the lawyer must communicate sufficient information regarding the use of technology to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation. A lawyer must evaluate their communication obligations throughout the representation based on the facts and circumstances, including the novelty of the technology, risks associated with the use of the technology, scope of the representation, and sophistication of the client.

Rule 1.6 adds new Comment 2:

 [2] For purposes of this rule, “reveal” includes exposing confidential information to
technological systems, including artificial intelligence tools, where such exposure creates a
material risk that the information may be accessed, retained, or used, whether by the
technological system or another user of that technological system, in a manner inconsistent
with the lawyer’s duty of confidentiality.

Rule 3.3 adds new Comment 3:

[3] A lawyer’s duty of candor towards the tribunal includes the obligation to verify the
accuracy and existence of cited authorities, including ensuring no cited authority is fabricated,
misstated, or taken out of context, before submission to a tribunal, including any cited
authorities generated or assisted by artificial intelligence or other technological tools.

Rule 5.1 adds a clause at the end of Comment 1:

 [1] Paragraph (a) requires lawyers with managerial authority within a law firm* to make
reasonable* efforts to establish internal policies and procedures designed, for example, to
detect and resolve conflicts of interest, identify dates by which actions must be taken in
pending matters, account for client funds and property, and ensure that inexperienced lawyers
are properly supervised, and govern the use of artificial intelligence, in accordance with the
Rules of Professional Conduct.

Rule 5.3 adds language to the Comment 

Lawyers often utilize nonlawyer personnel, including secretaries, investigators, law student
interns, and paraprofessionals. Such assistants, whether employees or independent
contractors, act for the lawyer in rendition of the lawyer’s professional services. A lawyer must give such assistants appropriate instruction and supervision concerning all ethical aspects of their employment, including the use of technology in the provision of legal services, such as artificial intelligence. The measures employed in instructing and supervising nonlawyers should take account of the fact that they might not have legal training. 

These go to duty of care, duty of candor, training, supervisory expectations, and client involvement in the decision to use (and price) AI tech assistance. Duties of candor extent to client and court, but not to opposing counsel. They do not speak to general expectations among lawyers and indeed suggest that the Rules of Professional Responsibility ought to follow rather than lead as expectations and common practices evolve among the bench and bar. This appears to be the case especially with respect to inverting key terms with meaning. 

These are fairly conservative additions. Comments must be submitted by 45 May 2026. Those interested in submitting comments should use the online Public Comment Form.    

The Semiotics of Resignation: A Brief Reflection on Joe Kent, former director of the National Counterterrorism Center,

 

Pix credit here

The New York Times reported it this way: "Joe Kent, a top U.S. counterterrorism official who had been a contentious choice for the post because of his promotion of conspiracy theories, resigned on Tuesday, citing his opposition to the Iran war. Here is his resignation letter in full." (Read Joe Kent's Resignation Letter). Mr, Kent's announcement of hisd resignaiton, as is now the c ustom among members of the political lclass, was, in part distributed through X (Twitter):

After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. It has been an honor serving under  @POTUS and  @DNIGabbard and leading the professionals at NCTC. (here)

The President, of course, was more than willing to play. He had this to say:

In response, Trump said Tuesday he "always thought" Kent was a nice guy but also "was weak on security, very weak on security." "I didn't know him well, but I thought he seemed like a pretty nice guy, but when I read his statement, I realized that it's a good thing that he's out because he said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat to every country," Trump said during an Oval Office event. (here)

I generally do not bother with the details of the harem politics that tend to mark the inter-personal relations and the politics of high level government organs, whatever the political ideology within which those organs operate.  This case would have been no different though it does appear to provide a nice story lines that crisscross the current strategic positions on President Trumps  engagement with Iran. (eg here).

But I did take the New York Times up on its invitation to read the letter, which, with thanks to the NYT is also reproduced below. Mt reflections, which follow focus on the semiotics of resignation. 

1. Mr. Kent's resignation brought back memories of another resignation, which like this one, was mean t to provide fodder for politics--that of Mr. Bolton during Mr. Trump's first Administration. I wrote reflections about that here:  Ruminations 91: Very Brief Reflections on John Bolton's "Secret History" of Mr. Trump, and the Art of Political Burlesque. Much of its starting points might well apply here:

The Bolton "Secret History," salaciously (well, we all "Gotta Have a Gimmick") titled "The Room Where it Happened"will be published in late June 2020 by Simon and Schuster, subject of course, to legal action on the Trump Administration's claims that the work contains materials which may not be published (Trump administration sues Bolton over book dispute). Like the Procopius work, it is brimming with accusation and demonization. His former master is not fit for office (ABC News video); and that he sacrificed national interest to further is own career. There is more. Like Procopius, the material is meant to incite political maneuverings--in early Byzantine imperial politics centered on the Hippodrome factions (Blues and Greens); in the United States among political parties and disaffected but powerful elements of the elite shut out of office with the loss of the 2016 election. All of this, of course, is fair play given the mores, the morally binding customs of a particular group (in this case of the high functionaries), of early 21st century America, And perhaps it augurs, like much of what is happening in 2020, the start of a new era, the character of which is still up for grabs. The brief Ruminations are . . . not focused on the "truth" of the allegations made--as saucy as many of them are. Instead it considers Mr. Bolton's "Secret History" in the context of the type to which it relates. It is an act of revenge, and betrayal as a payback for a perceived betrayal or thwarting of ambition, and is built on the believability of its demonizing revisionism the most potent element of which is its power to scandalize.The power of Secret Histories lie in the invitation for the target's enemies to treat as fact the interpretations of the disloyal author.

 That appears to be the point here--the object is not the act but rather the act provides the opportunity to engage in the sort of politics "outside" that were rejected "inside." Betrayal is a bloody business and it is passionate. And here one encounters the sort of passion that, in some instances, usually erupt on the streets, and so erupted sometimes are successful and sometimes serve as a blood sacrifice. 

2. What, though, is resignation. The word itself provides a space nest into which the words of that act may be nested. Its etymology suggests the central element of meaning of the term: "late 14c., resignacioun, "abdication, act of resigning" (an office, claim, etc.), from Old French resignation, resignacion (14c.) and directly from Medieval Latin resignationem (nominative resignatio), noun of action from past-participle stem of Latin resignare "annul, cancel, give back, resign" " Yet there is more to it than this. That etymology also suggests this: "From c. 1500 ("Imitation of Christ") as "surrender to God, resignation to God." The non-spiritual meaning "quiet submission, unresisting acquiescence" is from 1640s." This notion is emphasized in the verb form of the word "resign"--"late 14c., "give up (something), surrender, abandon, submit; relinquish (an office, position, right, claim)." And it is in this latter sense that one might best approach the lamentation that is the letter projected put from Mr. Kent to the nation, and the world. It is, however, a submission not to the President, but to a higher power. And in the process it suggests that this surrender, this abandonment is a natural product of himself being abandoned by his superior. That, indeed, it is not Mr. Kent that is resigning, or relinquishing his principles and moral stances--it is the President who has betrayed his, and in that betrayal  puts Mr. Kent's immortal (political) soul at risk of external damnation. The religious element of this performance ought not to be under estimated. The essence of the semiotics of this resignation. The betrayal that is itself prompted by betrayal produces the sort of semiotic "pong" that constructs object/significance from the object/significance that is both it and the oppositye of it, but at the same time that reflect it and between which the field of play is produced. In this case within MAGA, with bleed over effect beyond it b y those who would feed on the detritus of this match. 

3. The reciprocating betrayal produces a sort of interesting semiotic resonance. The key, and much quoted line is this: 

"I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby." (Kent Resignation Letter, below). 

Marvelous. . . from a semiotic perspective. It is object--the grand normative vision, the faith, that compels both judgment (the President as betrayer of the community of the faithful) and action (the "surrender to a (higher) God. 

Still it is worth taking these short but rich sentences apart for their semiotic presumptions. First, the "can not." Mr. Kent's "cannot" is a physical manifestation of the incarnation of ritual of rejection. The question isn't focused on inability; it is instead focused on unwillingness; and that unwillingness in turn is focused on Mr. Kent's construction of his own faith universe, the betrayal of which produces the inevitable "cannot." That cannot, then is a function of his "good conscience. HIS good conscience, a conscience which Mr. Kent is willing to export onto the belief and preferences of his faith community. In that sense, it is not his conscience, but rather his projection  of that expression of a conscience of a community of the faithful outward to that community that is of interest. In the absence of that projection that is no semiotic corporeality to his conscience, something that he might have, in his own good conscience, kept to himself.

Second, the "support." Mr. Kent's "support"is apparently an important element, but also a specifically directed one--"support the ongoing war in Iran." That support is personal to Mr. Kent. That was made clear by Mr. Kent's "cannot"--though the personal assumes semiotic significance only is a relflection of a communal "cannot"--one which Mr. Kent presupposes. What he cannot support is "war." Yet the term "war" has lost all general significance. The concept of war as a construct of law, of mythology, of prior practice, of tradition, of habit, etc. are all now in flux--not a flux created by the Trump Administration, but one whose contradictions  proved ready to be blown up at this time. To assume that the situaiton is a war is to presuppose the basis on which the term is used, and more importance, its semiotic interpretive significance. Some would disagree that the term is the correct one, or for that matter that the term has any value except as propaganda and as an instrument of legal warfare. That "war" is not just any "war" but a specific instance of bellicose behavior--that directed toward Iran. Apparently, there is no problem with the wars against bandits and law breakers in Venezuela, even if one purports to be the sitting president of that place. It is just Iran. 

Third, it is not immediately clear why "war" in Iran, as he might define it, is special to Mr. Kent. But then clarity is provided--this is a war of the Jews. It is a war of the Jews into which the U.S. was "pressured"--and it was pressured by a lobby the power and breadth of which reduces the rest of the political  landscape of the United States to insignificance. That is what separates blowing things up elsewhere and attacking the peace loving government of Iran, one apparently happy to live pacifically among its neighbors without any projection of power or ambitions beyond its borders (etc.), and one that "posed no imminent threat to our nation". . . except for the Jews. (and their "lobby"). One encounters here not a semiotics of war but of Jews. A semiotics that conflates war-Iran-Jews in a way that then necessarily excludes the US.

Here one constructs two object/significs--the first is Iran, and the second is that now useful stand-in for world Jewry (does one still use that term; probably less so but in this context the old words have punch), Israel. With respect to the first Mr. Kent draws on the customary efforts over the last several generations to rebuild, and legalize, what might be termed the "spirit of Pearl Harbor"--that is that until one has a significant amount of people and thing blown up on national soil, then one is hardly in a position to declare an other nation's actions as "imminently threatening." Closely tied to that is the notion of proportionality--that is an enemy state blows up some thing, one has the "right" only to blow up an equivalent amount of things (and people presumably) but no more. In this case, unless Iran would have blown up a substantial part of the United States there was no "imminent" threat to the national heartland. That makes sense semiotically is one is willing to invest the word "imminent" and "threat" with specific meanings drawn from a cognitive cage that starts from the presumption that war is to be avoided even at the cost of life and property. That might have made sense for that briefest of moments between 1989 and 2010. One wonders, though, whether its presumptions, and indeed its pretensions, are worthy subjects of debate.  And, indeed, they are. And perhaps that debate has moved from significs to objects which signify, that is from the signification of meaning through law/policy text, to law/policy constructed on the ground, producing a set of data that itself may be aggregated into meaning. That suggests a movement from deductive to inductive cognition that is already evident in tech based systems. What one encounters now are centers of belief, and belief communities; orthodoxy is ascribed to text but that is hardly plausible where text becomes more and more the symbols of interpretive opportunity.

Semiotically, then, Mr. Kent's fine paragraph might be signified this way: it embraces objects--faith, war, lobbies, Israel, threat, Iran--and invests them with a specific significs which are then valued, and interpreted in ways that are meant to reach out to a community of believers who together might produce a vision of the world, and the values against which actions are assessed, that for the orthodoxies embedded in the way that Mr. Kent has chosen to absorb and judge the world, justifies this quite operatic performance, a performance that is meant to signal solidarity with a community from which. it would seem, President Trump is meant to be declared heretic and excommunicated. Fair enough, b it that is politics, even if it is clothed in the language and sensibilities of faith; and it is semiotics in the way on which Mr. Kent fights for a specific significs to key terms and ideas which he presumes his readers will either agree or accept.

4. And speaking of Jews and discomfort around Jewish "machinations," one is known by the company one keeps. And in this case Mr. Kent appears to enjoy the company of Tucker Carlson (see eg here, "'Key decision makers were not allowed to express their opinions. There wasn't a robust debate,' Kent told Tucker Carlson on Wednesday."). I have nothing else to say about this--except this: semiotic transposition suggests that the site in which one produces objects and gives them significance provides the structural/normative framework within which that significance can be situated within a larger cognitive framework. In this case that is the larger cognitive framework of the reality spheres ion which Mr. Carlson operates. Mr. Kent's presentation of his faith performance within the territories of the collective semiotic rationalizations of the world of Mr. Carlson then suggests that Mr. Kent's words and idea must be mediated against and through those of Mr. Carlson. To perform with Mr. Carlson is to become a party of Mr. Carlson's semiotic universe. That is also something Vice President Vance might consider.

5. Betrayal begets betrayal. Mr. Kent then pleads; he pleads for President Trump to abandon his current heresies, and the control of the Jews, and return top the values on which he was perceived--or semiotically which have been reconstructed out of time as the meaning universe he offered his community of the faithful up until 2026. To that end, Mr. Kent offers a nice Catholic opportunity--to confess, to show contrition, to do penance and to seek absolution among the community of the faithful he has abandoned. . . but; Mr. Kent has not. At the center of this is the signification of "never ending wars." Mr. Kent suggests that the proper construction, the proper signification of that concept is the occasional missile aimed at a leading figure or two from time to time. That, of course, leaves open the question of imminent threat which appears not to apply when one is merely blowing up the occasional personality that is irritating and that might have caused harm and might in the future cause more--like Iran, perhaps in the mind ofg the President, but things are easier to evaluate against a  "no endless war standard" when what one does is the periodic assassination.  All of this suggest a peculiar application of abstraction ("no endless wars") which, when combined with the "no Jewish wars" abstractions,  might provide the semiosis of the protection of what is by implication assumed to be a peace loving enough Iranian regime (or peace loving enough when it comes to the US) in the context in which the current hostilities arose. All of this makes sense only as and to the extent that Mr. Kent's faith in his own semiosis remains relevant to him, and then, by projection of that resignation, also as an object of evangelization meant to convert others to or invite them into the communion of his like minded fellows. 

6. The rest suggest the semiosis of self-construction, and the power of marginalization in driving an acolyte to apostasy. What makes it interesting from a semiotic perspective is the way that the letter reframes apostasy--it is not Mr. Kent's apostasy but rather that of President Trump that requires Mr. Kent to preserve his immortal soul by a rupture with the offending person.  Mr. Kent sought to project his views but was denied; he might have been excluded, he might have been rejected (or his  views anyway). He speaks of echo chambers managed by the Jews but longs for the echo chambers of an orthodoxy from which Mr. Trump strayed. Thus it is not the echo chamber itself that is bad--it is the echo chamber of infidels, heretics and Jews that is distasteful. His echo chamber, on the other hand is one that approaches the purity in which semiotically at least a proper system of self referencing objectification of signification of things and actions can be undertaken inc ways in which that signification reinforces the premises of interpretation on which the community of the faithful build their world views, and then measures its attainment by the measures they themselves great through meaning measures--the no endless war theme for instance. Not that is is bad; just that this is semiotic performance that is powerful precisely because it establishes a structure inside of which the entirety of the world can be captured and understood--and from which everything else can be understood as corrupt or just wrong. It is appropriate, then, that Mr. Kent calls President Trump back from the abyss of heresy before heresy becomes apostasy. For that evangelization and faith are needed; and both are much in abundance here.

 7. And that is the fundmental character of the letter--not its politics, but its faith in its politics; not its policy choices, but the belief in policy choices as the way one lives one's faith in policy as the lived expression of a faithful community; not marginalization of his voice but the sin of refusing to hear the word preached. Mr. Kent has produced a marvelous semiosis of faith, the expression of which is politics. This is nic e old fashioned stuff, the stuff with which the politic al community of Iran is also built--at least in its current form. Perhaps that explains the affinity--two semiotic communities the building blocks, the foundational objectification of its community is faith in belief, that is in objects imbued with signification that transcends argument and requires the resignation of faith, the "surrender to God, resignation to God." expressed in the faith objectification of politics as the "quiet submission, unresisting acquiescence"to the cognitive universe of the faith community, in communion with which political solidarity serves as its evangelizing expression:

(1) object (semiotic "firstness"--faith, internalized as conscience, but an individual conscience that is itself merely a singular expression of a collective conscience among the faithful expressed in OTHER objects (policy) and action), (2) signification (semiotic "secondness" the structured meaningfulness of policy and action that reinforces faith as object/action by fusing faith and and in action that expresses each other; a thing is important as a matter of faith--faith is signified by its expression), and (3) communal interpretation (semiotic "thirdness" the communion of the faithful made stronger by its catechism, the language and vocabulary of belief, the values of which must be collectively infused into objects and actions around political objects, such as the precise interpretation of forever war and imminent threat, not as policy but as expression of faith (object) evangelized) 

build to the triumphalism of the surrender to the faithfulness of the community of believers that is the ultimate sacrifice of Mr. Kent. Against this Mr. Kent draws on the semiosis of the Great Satan into whose traps and deceit President Trump has fallen. And that leads inevitably to sacrifice--Mr. Kent's as a prelude to the sacrifice of the great man fallen into sin who must either be brought back from heresy or consumed in the fires reserved for the torment of sinners.

And, of course, by failing to take any of this into account, by providing analysis detached from meaning, most of the coverage of this spectacle will tend to "get it" right only from their own perspectives and reflecting only their own needs. That, too, is the politics of cognition. 

 

Pix credit here

Jürgen Habermas (18 June 1929 – 14 March 2026)

 

 Jügen Habermas, one the giants of 20th century thought died 14 March 2026. Many will write excellent obituaries of a mind that was, in its own way, fearlessly honest, even if it meant displeasing an audience that from time to time assumed that he "belonged" to them or to the orthodoxies their praxis appeared to define as inevitable.  Among my favorite was his confrontation of  elements of the student movement--the "left fascists"("linken Faschismus" and the APO (Außerparlamentarische Opposition) in the late 1960s, then radical, now perhaps (or at least some of them) grown into something quite different.  (See here).

I celebrate his life with a snippet from a work that I have always found a source of inspiration: Knowledge & Human Interest, 1968, publ. Polity Press, 1987. 

Marx, however, conceives the moral totality as a society in which men produce in order to reproduce their own life through the appropriation of an external nature. Morality is an institutional framework constructed out of cultural tradition; but it is a framework for processes of production. Marx takes the dialectic of the moral life, which operates on the basis of social labour, as the law of motion of a defined conflict between definite parties. The conflict is always about the organisation of the appropriation of socially created products, while the conflicting parties are determined by their position in the process of production, that is as classes. As the movement of class antagonism, the dialectic of the moral life is linked to the development of the system of social labour. The overcoming of abstraction, that is the critical revolutionary reconciliation of the estranged parties, succeeds only relative to the level of development of the forces of production. The institutional framework also incorporates the constraint Of external nature, which expresses itself in the degree of mastery Of nature, the extent of socially necessary labour, and in the relation of available rewards to socially developed demands. Through the repression of needs and wishes, it translates this constraint into a compulsion of internal nature, in other words into the constraint of social norms. That is why the relative destruction of the moral relation can be measured only by the difference between the actual degree of institutionally demanded repression and the degree of repression that is necessary at a given level of the forces of production. This difference is a measure of objectively superfluous domination. It is those who establish such domination and defend positions of power of this sort who set in motion the causality of fate, divide society into social classes, suppress justified interests, call forth the reactions of suppressed life, and finally experience their just fate in revolution. They are compelled by the revolutionary class to recognise themselves in it and thereby to overcome the alienation of the existence of both classes. s long as the constraint of external nature persists in the form of economic scarcity, every revolutionary class is induced, after its victory to a new “injustice,” namely the establishment of a new class rule. Therefore the dialectic of the moral life must repeat itself until the materialist spell that is cast upon the reproduction of social life, the Biblical curse of necessary labour, is broken technologically. (Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory).

It, like its author, speaks both to itself and to the structures within which it is possible to construct that self and then elaborate worlds around the construct.  It points as much to the foundations of triumphant left orthodoxy from liberal lite liberal democratic theory to the most formalized expression of Marxist Leninist theory. But it also points to the cognitive structures of systems most interesting explored by Niklas Luhmann, and to the coming construction of the digitalized simulacra of human struggle formed through the digitized transformation of the struggle of the human, now reconstituted as a simulation of itself, at the heart of some of Habermas' thought developed in complex ways over a lifetime. And that is the fundamental insight of a lifetime--to overthrow a system is to create it anew. What is revealed at the end of a system is. . .  a system. 

 

Los Principios Rectores de las Naciones Unidas y la evolución del gobierno corporativo/The UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights and the Evolution of Corporate Governance

 

 La gobernanza global está evolucionando y, en buena medida, ello responde a cambios regulatorios en materia de responsabilidad social empresarial. En un contexto en el que estos desarrollos tienen un carácter crecientemente transnacional, nos complace anunciar el primer evento con invitado internacional del del Semillero de Derecho Societario de la Universidad Icesi.

El profesor Larry Catá Backer, de Penn State Dickinson Law, ofrecerá la conferencia “Empresas y derechos humanos en la práctica: los Principios Rectores de las Naciones Unidas y la evolución del gobierno corporativo”.

La conferencia abordará el papel que los Principios Rectores sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas han tenido en la transformación de las discusiones contemporáneas sobre gobierno corporativo, responsabilidad y propósito empresarial.

Este espacio busca reunir a estudiantes, académicos y profesionales interesados en reflexionar sobre los desafíos actuales que enfrentan las empresas en la integración de estándares de derechos humanos en su actividad económica.

📅 Jueves, 19 de marzo de 2026
🕔 5:00 p.m.
📍 Auditorio Delima, Universidad Icesi

El evento será principalmente por invitación, con un número limitado de inscripciones abiertas en el siguiente enlace: https://lnkd.in/ekYGrCu4

¡Los esperamos!

 Global governance is evolving and, to a large extent, this is due to regulatory changes in corporate social responsibility. In a context in which these developments are increasingly transnational in nature, we are pleased to announce the first international guest event of the Corporate Law Incubator of the Icesi University.

Professor Larry Catá Backer, from Penn State Dickinson Law, will give the lecture "Business and Human Rights in Practice: The United Nations Guiding Principles and the Evolution of Corporate Governance".

The conference will address the role that the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights have played in transforming contemporary discussions on corporate governance, responsibility and business purpose.

This space seeks to bring together students, academics, and professionals interested in reflecting on the current challenges faced by companies in integrating human rights standards into their economic activity.

📅 Thursday, March 19, 2026
🕔 5:00 p.m.
📍 Delima Auditorium, Icesi University

The event will be primarily by invitation, with a limited number of registrations open at the following link: https://lnkd.in/ekYGrCu4

We hope you can join us!