Report recommends government surveillance to monitor “disinformation”

The Hogue Report recommends the creation of a government surveillance department to monitor Canadians for online disinformation.

TDF is troubled by comments in the Hogue Report that “disinformation” is an “existential threat” to Canadian democracy. Disturbingly, the Report recommends that the government consider creating a separate entity to “monitor the domestic open-source online information environment for misinformation and disinformation that might impact Canadian democratic processes.”

Problematically, while the report claims that “disinformation is difficult to detect,” the report does not sufficiently define “disinformation.” It assumes that there exists people in government capable of infallibly discerning truth from falsehood.

No government has been able to defend or articulate its claim 1) to a superior theory of knowledge or 2) that government agents have extraordinary truth-seeking cognitive skills. In fact, history demonstrates that governments are often the biggest purveyors of falsehood. TDF lawyers have repeatedly raised this issue, particularly during a 2023 meeting with UNESCO representatives.

Additionally, the Hogue Report claims that “information manipulation (whether foreign or not) poses the single biggest risk to our democracy.” It even acknowledges that online disinformation campaigns could be used to create conflict and amplify division.

However, the Liberal government’s Bill C-63 would require social media companies to create a system whereby anyone in Canada can flag and report “harmful content.” As outlined in TDF’s Online Harms Brief this would, unwittingly, allow for mass reporting of content by bad faith actors, human or AI, domestic or foreign (through a domestic proxy). Rather than strengthen the information environment against manipulation, Bill C-63 would weaken it. It is a contradiction for the government to complain about the manipulation of the information environment while simultaneously pushing a law that makes it easier to do so.

Litigation Director Mark Joseph said: “The Report laments that Canadians are exposed to disinformation, as if this is something new: people have always been exposed to ambiguous or false claims. Canadians have simply used basic human discernment to differentiate between truth and falsehood. It is perilous for citizens to surrender their role as final arbiters of civil, political and moral truths to the government since government censors have no special claim to truth-seeking or infallibility.”

About The Democracy Fund:

Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education, and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education and supports access-to-justice initiatives for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.

Up Next

Mark Carney’s carbon tax plan hurts farmers

Don't Miss

Will Mexico Face A Hot Shooting War With The Cartels?

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Russia & U.S. mull joint Arctic energy projects

armed forces / 27 mins ago

Canada is not a sovereign nation

armed forces / 2 hours ago

SecDef Hegseth picks investigators to examine botched Afghanistan withdrawal

Censorship Industrial Complex

Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”

Published on February 17, 2025

Todayville

By Cindy Harper

A shocking discussion on CBS News’ 60 Minutes has highlighted the stark limits of online speech in Germany, where oppressive scenes once thought to be relegated to history and dystopian fiction, show law enforcement has been conducting pre-dawn raids and confiscating electronics from individuals accused of posting content deemed as “hate speech.”

In typical Orwellian fashion, despite these speech raids, officials insist that free speech still exists.

More: Politicians vs Memes Sparks Free Speech Crisis in Germany

Dr. Matthäus Fink joined host Sharyn Alfonsi to explain how these laws operate and how those targeted by authorities typically react. According to Fink, most individuals are initially shocked when police confront them over online posts.

60 Minutes followed armed police on early morning raids, confiscating devices of people accused of online “hate speech.”

“They say — in Germany we say, ‘Das wird man ja wohl noch sagen dürfen,’”(You should still be allowed to say that) Fink remarked, illustrating the disbelief many express when they realize their statements can result in legal action. He noted that many Germans assume they are protected by free speech laws but learn too late that specific kinds of speech are punishable.

Alfonsi delved deeper, questioning the scope of these restrictions. Beyond banning swastika imagery and Holocaust denial, Fink pointed out that publicly insulting someone is also a criminal offense.

“And it’s a crime to insult them online as well?” Alfonsi asked.

Fink affirmed that online insults carry even steeper penalties than face-to-face insults. “The fine could be even higher if you insult someone in the internet,” he elaborated. “Because in internet, it stays there. If we are talking face to face, you insult me, I insult you, OK. Finish. But if you’re in the internet, if I insult you or a politician…”

Watch the video here.

The segment aired shortly after Vice President JD Vance spoke in Munich, warning about the dangers of European nations suppressing free speech. Vance emphasized that democracy cannot function without the fundamental right to express opinions.

“Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There’s no room for firewalls,” Vance argued. “You either uphold the principle or you don’t.”

In response to the 60 Minutes feature, Vance posted: “Insulting someone is not a crime, and criminalizing speech is going to put real strain on European-US relationships.” He added: “This is Orwellian, and everyone in Europe and the US must reject this lunacy.”

Reclaim The Net needs your help

You subscribe to Reclaim The Net because you value free speech and privacy. Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.

Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.

Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.

Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.

Thank you.

Make a one-time donation

Censorship Industrial Complex

US Lawmakers Condemn UK’s Secret Encryption Backdoor Order to Apple

Published on February 16, 2025

Todayville

logo

By Didi Rankovic

The UK Labour government’s secret order to Apple for an iCloud encryption backdoor ignites US-UK tensions as lawmakers demand action.

The Labour government’s reported decision to issue a secret order to Apple to build an encryption backdoor into iCloud is turning into a major political issue between the UK and the US, just as the move is criticized by more than 100 civil society groups, companies, and security experts at home.

The fact that this serious undermining of security and privacy affects users globally, including Americans, has prompted a strong reaction from two US legislators – Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat, and Congressman Andy Biggs, a Republican.

In a letter to National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, the pair slammed the order as “effectively a foreign cyber attack waged through political means.”

Wyden and Biggs – who sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, respectively – want Gabbard to act decisively to prevent any damage to US citizens and government from what they call the UK’s “dangerous, shortsighted efforts.”

The letter urges Gabbard to issue what the US legislators themselves refer to as an ultimatum to the UK: “Back down from this dangerous attack on US cybersecurity, or face serious consequences.”

Unless this happens immediately, Wyden and Biggs want Gabbard to “reevaluate US-UK cybersecurity arrangements and programs as well as US intelligence sharing with the UK.”

They add that the relationship between the two countries must be built on trust – but, if London is moving to “secretly undermine one of the foundations of US cybersecurity, that trust has been profoundly breached.”

The letter points out that the order appears to prohibit Apple from acknowledging it has even received it, under threat of criminal penalties – meaning that the UK is forcing a US company to keep the public and Congress in the dark about this serious issue.

In the UK, well-known privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch agreed with what the group’s Advocacy Manager Matthew Feeney said were “damning comments” made by Wyden and Biggs.

Feeney said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s “draconian order” to Apple was in effect a cyber attack on that company, and that the letter penned by the US legislators is “wholly justified” – and comes amid “a shameful chapter in the history of UK-US relations.”

“Cooper’s draconian order is not only a disaster for civil liberties, it is also a globally humiliating move that threatens one of the UK’s most important relationships,” he warned, calling on the home secretary to rescind it.

The same is being asked of Cooper by over 100 civil society organizations, companies, and cybersecurity experts – an initiative led by the Global Encryption Coalition (GEC).

SPEECH CONTROL

UK Refuses to Weaken Online Censorship Laws Despite US Pressure

The UK government has firmly stated that its online censorship laws will not be softened to appease US President Donald Trump or to facilitate trade negotiations with the United States. Technology Minister Peter Kyle repeated Britain’s stance on maintaining strict digital speech regulations, shutting down any speculation of a shift in policy toward American AI firms.

During the Paris AI summit, Kyle dismissed claims that Downing Street was considering relaxing sections of the Online Safety Act in discussions with the US. Refuting a report from The Daily Telegraph, he asserted: “Safety is not up for negotiation. There are no plans to weaken any of our online safety legislation.”

The Online Safety Act, one of the strictest online speech crackdowns in a democratic nation, which is set to come into force this year.

Industry moguls such as Elon Musk have voiced hopes that a Trump-led administration might resist global regulatory pressures on US-based tech companies.

Despite these concerns, Kyle expressed confidence that Trump would not obstruct Labour’s forthcoming AI legislation, which mandates that leading AI firms undergo “safety” evaluations before rolling out new software. He confirmed that voluntary safety pledges would now be replaced with enforceable mandates, ensuring strict compliance.