Ancient laws applied to business


SEESworld is built upon the ancient laws of human nature - the laws that keep people, planet and profit in harmony with one another. These ancient laws dictate that selflessly serving others first (good old fashion service) are key steps in mastering business and personal lives.

Our web software and smartphone app promotes a new and emergent mental model which directs focus away from the ego self  - an intelligent way to make money.

SEESworld has spent the last 8 years observing and researching the discourse characterised by the current corporate model's influence upon an individual. Establishing the belief that people must love themselves first, blaming others for the fallout and the belief that the financially wealthy are infinitely wise ─ these are all the results of stunningly successful corporate campaigns. We have discovered tools delivered through Academia, Newspapers, Facebook, Google and Advertising to establish these beliefs and have noticed how viewpoints diverging from the status quo are framed as untrustworthy.

Empirical data, however, now points that this way of doing business is not as wise as previously thought, as it produces wealth carbon* which has disrupted the natural cooling of the globe. This is causing life support systems to start shutting down with some forests loosing 90% of their insects.

Good old fashion service, selflessly serving others first is emerging to be the smarter economic model. SEESworld has developed deep insights into how authenticity and empathy in business, real sustainability, can be very profitable.

The next generation face unknown fall-outs of a potentially 10 degree warmer planet by 2100.  Corporations can reverse the current fate of our youth if they meet their full social and environmental global warming financial liability.

SEESworld has conducted a relentless self-funded 10 year campaign against the type of advertising and news that keeps individuals and entire communities separated from one another. We have fought against the propagated message that distorts our relationship with nature.  Our painfull journey has, however, delivered gifts in the form of deep insights to how we can master our business and personal lives and restore ecosystems, while there is still time

*WEALTH CARBON: SEESworld's terminology for the economically powerful's huge carbon footprint through the promotion of unnecessary and unhealthy consumption that has disrupted the natural cooling of the globe. We want to incorporate artificial intelligence into our research methods to measure the exact amount of *wealth carbon individual corporations have contributed to the atmosphere: Parameters used will include a company's start trading date, profit declared, tax paid, philanthropy, established economic and social principles, emerging environmental imperical data, etc.


 Global income deciles and associated lifestyle consumption emissions Photograph: Oxfam



What do we define as "fake news", "advertising" and  "cognitively biased news"?

When fake news is spread on the internet (reporting untrue facts), we view it as a grave violation and moral transgression that completely discredits the party responsible for its instigation. However, advertising is not held to the same standards. Advertising spreads fake news unabatedly, but it is generally regarded acceptable to do so in the pursuit of profit. Before its removal in 1987, the American Fairness Doctrine was designed to ensure that the public is exposed to both sides and a diversity of viewpoints where controversial stories are concerned. The removal of this doctrine opened the floodgates to cognitively biased news. See our published examples here.

What are the three types of fake/biased news advertising SEESworld has identified?

The first kind is where someone in a position of power and that is trusted, such as a large corporation, makes a statement which is then accepted as the truth merely based on the fact that the source of the statement is trusted and revered.

Companies profit from not having the consumer's best interest at heart, but representing themselves as if they do. Fake news advertising is, in essence, the way in which corporations misrepresent their actual aim (profit maximisation) as being of value to the community. The food industry, as an example, pushes unhealthy products onto consumers in a way that completely deflects attention from the negative health risks involved, such as Coca Cola (a sugary drink) that has as its mantra "open happiness" and "enjoy life".

Supermarkets like to advertise themselves in terms of the value they bring in providing people with sustenance (Spar good for you), and in contributing to non for profit causes such as education (Woolworth's education initiative), poverty (Shoprite's food donations) and environmental protection ("supporting sustainable fishing"). Yet their nutrient-deficient crops and processed, sugar-laden items in the queuing aisle, products packed with chemicals (such as cosmetics and cleaning products) and misleading packaging are key to their profit. Analysing these dynamics makes their slogans seem empty, yet these slogans influence our perceptions, and ultimately our consumption behaviour, to a far greater extent than we are aware of.

The pharmaceutical industry exerts influence over the medical industry by pushing for the development of ever more effective drugs and promoting its prescription, at the cost of unearthing the real structural causes of the increase in illnesses such as mental disorders, autoimmune diseases and cancer. An example is the psychotropic medication industry that pushes new drugs onto patients at a much faster rate than investing in any societal preventative measures, such as nutrition, that could see a decrease in the number of patients who need to be medicated, nor does there seem to be any research into the long term impact of psychotropic medication on brains, veiling why mental patients remain ill and have to take medication indefinitely. Fake news advertising in this case is wrapped up in how such companies' real priorities (profit) are in contradiction to the way they are perceived by the public (to look after our health).

The second kind is often found online and relates to how the opinions of the everyday man on the street is trusted based on our assumption that he doesn't have any conflict of interest. Corporations know that word of mouth is gold and therefore pay bloggers to present them in a positive light. Readers are fooled by naively trusting the internet as a democratic platform where free speech is expressed, and corporations use this medium to their advantage.

The third kind merely has to do with the repetition of the same messages over and over again. No matter how blatantly false or absurd a message, claim or representation is, its mere repetition can cause people to accept it as the truth without them even realizing. Even the most self-assured individual will eventually buckle under the strain of continuous belittling, whereas a child raised in a home where he received repeated confirmation will have a much more stable foundation. The power of repetition should not be underestimated.

But isn't it consumers' responsibility to be smarter?

It is often argued that consumers can judge for themselves the difference between truth and lies. This point of view disregards two essential factors – the extent to which our subconscious is affected by advertising messages regardless of our media literacy, and the extent to which the discretion of a great proportion of the population is compromised by their socio-economic status, educational level, age and other vulnerabilities.

Fake news advertising creates cognitive fog (Segal et al) which keeps consumers away from their higher intelligence which would have enabled them to be mindful and make smart consumption choices. Inauthentic representatoin shifts our focus away from finding what is truly important for survival, such as nutrient-dense food, by constantly drawing our thoughts towards how we look on the outside instead of within, towards material gain instead of a healthy brain.

How does fake/biased news burden the health system via the food and medical industry?

The food industry is supposed to supply us with a nutrient-dense diet, rich in minerals. This is what our bodies need for our immune systems to work properly to eliminate our foes, the antigens. Interactions between our genes, our immune system, a nutrient dense-diet and the environment are how we evolved as a species. Whenever we ingest something, it is tested at a molecular level by our immune cells to determine if it is friend or foe (antigen).

The convenient foods made available to us these days, however, are not nutrient-dense, as maximum profit is the main agenda of supermarkets. They sell high volume pest-resistant fruit and vegetables, using genetic selection, pesticides, and chemical fertilisers that produce nice looking but nutrient-poor crops. Furthermore, food processing destroys around 70% of the vitamins and micronutrients in much of the day-to-day processed staple foods supplied to us, such as breakfast cereals, bread and pasta.

Cancer, heart disease, autoimmune disease and mental disorders were far less common when food supply was nutrient-dense. Our modern, nutrient-deficient diet, however, allows our foes, the antigens, to live within us. It stifles our ability to utilise our built-in genetic code which we inherited from our ancestors.

If the food industry were to be barred from shying away from or distorting the truth, if they were to actually prioritise human wellbeing, and if the agricultural industry were to respond by prioritising regenerative agricultural methods, only then could we aspire towards better nutrition, which in combination with our native genetic code, will allow all of us to live happy, abundant lives devoid of fear. This will make life better for the next generation instead of worse.

Companies profit from not having the consumer's best interest at heart, but advertise themselves as if they do. Repeated messages condition us into adopting an irrational, unhealthy and detrimental world view that is increasingly contributing to the mental illness epidemic (even recognizable as a physiological structure within our brains, academic research paper @ This, combined with consumption of mass produced food such as compromised fruit and vegetables, lead to ever increasing strain on health budgets, and stifle real GDP growth.

Pharmaceutical companies try to mask the damage of what is in essence a defective system by dispensing medications that offer relief at most, but not a cure. By treating corporate borne mental health disorders as a problem affecting individuals (via an over-emphasis on genetics as cause), as opposed to a structural problem, the multi-billion dollar psychotropic medication industry keeps growing. Profits are then invested into developing ever improved medications and vaccines. The real causes remain untreated so that mental disease increases its upward trend. Ultimately, fake news and nutrient deficient-food (not deficient genes) are responsible for the ever increasing health budget dilemma many governments are faced with.

What governments should actually be asking is what percentage of their health expenditure (such as the 4.8 trillion US$ spent in 2015) should be invoiced to the corporations that have in fact borne these diseases? (USA: 3.3 trillion, Europe: 1.5 trillion, Australia: 53 billion, SA: 14 billion) Mental illness, for instance, has already reached proportions that are too heavy for health insurance companies to bear.

How does fake/biased news contribute to inequality?

Interest payments are used like a sword by banks against the economically disenfranchised. The more economically vulnerable the individual, the higher the perceived risk to the bank's profit. Banks therefore demands higher interest payments from these clients without taking the impact on the community into account.

Airtime in South Africa is a product used by mobile phone operators to charge per minute for phone calls. The profit margins of these companies are in the billions whilst communication is kept short due to high costs. As it is often new traders who need to communicate most when trying to secure market share, small business growth is stifled by high mobile costs.

This results in startups and small business growth being stifled in the face of more established corporations who are better able to afford the "luxury" of communication and loans.


Major societal ailments, such as inequality, extremism, heart disease and obesity, autoimmune disease, and behavioural and mental problems, to name but a few, ultimately proliferate in a context where fake news advertising is endorsed. Suppressing the majority of the population's ability to connect with their higher intelligence and then feeding them nutrient-deficient food stifles billions of dollars in productivity which could translated into real GDP growth for entire countries.

Updated 7 April 2019.