There is a low-carbon feature I'd like to see in any claimed low-carbon or broader-sustainability-oriented ETF that I could buy for my own portfolio. So far, I have not seen this feature offered anywhere on Earth. I'll spell it out here in the hope that a fund, index or ESG information product manager can look into it.

I suggest in constructing an investable equity product:

1. Screen for:

a) organizations (listed or otherwise) which serve as platforms for promulgation of disinformation on the most objectively provable points of information:

  i. Disinformation about climate change

 ii. 2020 US Presidential Election Integrity

iii. Pandemic and vaccine safety

b) elected officials and candidates who promulgate disinformation in these areas, and/or vote in a way that goes with the disinformation.

2. Identify listed companies which help financially support the promulgation of, and voting for, disinformation in the above areas. This support may take a few forms including direct press releases from the companies, but it also may take the form of the two areas above (advertising through the platforms, or support of elected officials).

3. Assess suitable portfolio penalties and actions against those financially supportive companies. Consider including these actions:

• reduced weighting

• outright removal

• short-selling

• retaining of shares but with concerted smart shareholder activism to install new management and effect change.

• full publication of the list of those companies found to be financially supporting climate and other disinformation through one of the channels above.

Yes, there are pitfalls to this sort of aggressive shareholder action plan, and to set up this sort of filter and do a really professional and thoughtful and nuanced job, and to keep it going over many quarters and years, would be very difficult and quite expensive. Yes, there would be issues of allowing for nuances (at least at first) and not over-penalizing companies. There would also immediately be an objection raised that support of politicians and advertising on a platform may not directly have a thing to do with trying to support disinformation.

Notwithstanding these points, the underlying emergencies that are at hand are so clearly in need of immediate attention, and the disinformation campaigns pertaining to these emergencies are doing so much damage (including fatalities), that I am suggesting that any support (however indirect and watered down) for this disinformation crosses a clear redline and should not be tolerated any longer than needed to mainstream the use of this sort of investment product filter.