Gov’t memo admits Canadians are shifting to independent news due to distrust of media, not Russian ‘bots’

A memo from Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs admits that the rise of ‘alternative’ news sources is not due to Russian interference, as some members of the Trudeau Cabinet have claimed, but likely reflects ‘decrease in trust among traditional outlets.’

The explosive growth of Canadians shifting to alternative non-legacy media to obtain their news is not due to Russian “bots,” as some in the government and left-wing media claim, but reflects people’s distrust of entrenched media outlets, at least one government agency admitted.

A memo titled Foreign Interference And Right Wing Politics: The Canadian Context from Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs said that the growth of so-called “alternative and far right ‘news sources’” is not due to Russian bots but is likely due to Canadians’ suspicion of “traditional outlets.”

Analysts put to rest claims made by some far-left media outlets that bots are somehow to blame for the rise of independent news media sites in Canada popular today, which include the Post Millennial, Rebel News, True North, LifeSiteNews, as well as a host of others.

According to foreign interference monitors at the Rapid Response Mechanism office, or RRM Canada, run by the department, “they tried and failed to corroborate allegations that conservative media in Canada were stoked by offshore agents,” according to Blacklock’s Reporter.

“RRM Canada observed no indication of false amplification and assesses the increased popularity of these sources is very likely both organic and domestic in nature,” read the memo.

The memo stated that the while the nature of the content is “domestic, the move away from traditional news sources may indicate a decrease in trust among traditional outlets among right leaning Canadians.”

“No such increased popularity has been observed among alternative or far left media outlets,” noted the memo.

The memo noted that sites such as the Rebel News Network had a larger social media footprint than established outlets such as the National Post or the Globe & Mail.

When looking to find claims that foreign agents were behind the rise of alternative media, the RRM analysts found no evidence that this is the case.

“While these stories are not necessarily inaccurate, Rapid Response Mechanism Canada notes foreign interference and covert influence campaigns exploit narratives from across the political spectrum.”

The memo of note was filed with counsel for Canada’s ongoing Commission on Foreign Interference.

Overall, the memo contradicted claims made by the cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Russian agents were the ones increasing messaging critical of the government.

In 2020, Canada’s then-Public Safety Minister and now-Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc quipped to reporters that “Trolls and bots are dispatched to stoke anxiety and in some cases inflame debate around sensitive issues,” saying, “Their main goal is chaos.”

“We have seen how hostile state and non-state actors use information technologies to manufacture reality,” he claimed, adding, “Fake news not only masquerades as the truth, it masquerades as legitimate political debate.”

Canadian figures who are critical of the Trudeau government have been accused of being bankrolled by Russia. As reported by LifeSiteNews, Dr. Jordan Peterson recently demanded an apology from Trudeau after the Canadian prime minister accused him of being funded by Russian state media.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, Trudeau claimed U.S. media personality Tucker Carlson and Peterson are being funded by the state media outlet Russia Today. He also blamed Russia for “amplifying the chaos” surrounding the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.

Trudeau made the claim last Wednesday under oath during testimony at the Foreign Interference Commission after he was asked about Russia’s alleged role in the Freedom Convoy.

The Foreign Interference Commission was convened to “examine and assess the interference by China, Russia, and other foreign states or non-state actors, including any potential impacts, to confirm the integrity of, and any impacts on, the 43rd and 44th general elections (2019 and 2021 elections) at the national and electoral district levels.”

Related Topics:#AnthonyMurdoch #LegacyMedia #LifeSiteNews #MediaTrust AlbertnativeNews IndependentNews NewsSources

Up Next

Taxpayers release Naughty and Nice List

Don't Miss

Canadian gov’t budget report targets charitable status of pro-life groups, churches

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

The Emptiness Inside: Why Large Language Models Can’t Think – and Never Will

Alberta / 11 hours ago

Emissions Reduction Alberta offering financial boost for the next transformative drilling idea

armed forces / 12 hours ago

Global Military Industrial Complex Has Never Had It So Good, New Report Finds

Artificial Intelligence

Google denies scanning users’ email and attachments with its AI software

Published on November 30, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Charles Richards

Google claims that multiple media reports are misleading and that nothing has changed with its service.

Tech giant Google is claiming that reports earlier this week released by multiple major media outlets are false and that it is not using emails and attachments to emails for its new Gemini AI software.

Fox News, Breitbart, and other outlets published stories this week instructing readers on how to “stop Google AI from scanning your Gmail.”

“Google shared a new update on Nov. 5, confirming that Gemini Deep Research can now use context from your Gmail, Drive and Chat,” Fox reported. “This allows the AI to pull information from your messages, attachments and stored files to support your research.”

Breitbart likewise said that “Google has quietly started accessing Gmail users’ private emails and attachments to train its AI models, requiring manual opt-out to avoid participation.”

Breitbart pointed to a press release issued by Malwarebytes that said the company made the changed without users knowing.

After the backlash, Google issued a response.

“These reports are misleading – we have not changed anyone’s settings. Gmail Smart Features have existed for many years, and we do not use your Gmail content for training our Gemini AI model. Lastly, we are always transparent and clear if we make changes to our terms of service and policies,” a company spokesman told ZDNET reporter Lance Whitney.

Malwarebytes has since updated its blog post to now say they “contributed to a perfect storm of misunderstanding” in their initial reporting, adding that their claim “doesn’t appear to be” true.

But the blog has also admitted that Google “does scan email content to power its own ‘smart features,’ such as spam filtering, categorization, and writing suggestions. But this is part of how Gmail normally works and isn’t the same as training Google’s generative AI models.”

“I think the most alarming thing that we saw was the regular organized stream of communication between the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the largest tech companies in the country,” journalist Matt Taibbi told the U.S. Congress in December 2023 during a hearing focused on how Twitter was working hand in glove with the agency to censor users and feed the government information.

If you use Google and would like to turn off your “smart features,” click here to visit the Malwarebytes blog to be guided through the process with images. Otherwise, you can follow these five steps courtesy of Unilad Tech.

Open Gmail on Desktop and press the cog icon in the top right to open the settings
Select the ‘Smart Features’ setting in the ‘General’ section
Turn off the ‘Turn on smart features in Gmail, Chat, and Meet’
Find the Google Workplace smart features section and opt to manage the smart feature settings
Switch off ‘Smart features in Google Workspace’ and ‘Smart features in other Google products’

On November 11, a class action lawsuit was filed against Google in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case alleges that Google violated the state’s Invasion of Privacy Act by discreetly activating Gemini AI to scan Gmail, Google Chat, and Google Meet messages in October 2025 without notifying users or seeking their consent.

Censorship Industrial Complex

UK Government “Resist” Program Monitors Citizens’ Online Posts

Published on November 24, 2025

Todayville

By Cam Wakefield

Bureaucrats once hired to spin the news are now tasked with scanning neighborhood Facebook pages for wrongthink.

Let’s begin with a simple question. What do you get when you cross a bloated PR department with a clipboard-wielding surveillance unit?

The answer, apparently, is the British Government Communications Service (GCS). Once a benign squad of slogan-crafting, policy-promoting clipboard enthusiasts, they’ve now evolved (or perhaps mutated) into what can only be described as a cross between MI5 and a neighborhood Reddit moderator with delusions of grandeur.

Yes, your friendly local bureaucrat is now scrolling through Facebook groups, lurking in comment sections, and watching your aunt’s status update about the “new hotel down the road filling up with strangers” like it’s a scene from Homeland. All in the name of “societal cohesion,” of course.

Once upon a time, the GCS churned out posters with perky slogans like Stay Alert or Get Boosted Now, like a government-powered BuzzFeed.

But now, under the updated “Resist” framework (yes, it’s actually called that), the GCS has been reprogrammed to patrol the internet for what they’re calling “high-risk narratives.”

Not terrorism. Not hacking. No, according to The Telegraph, the new public enemy is your neighbor questioning things like whether the council’s sudden housing development has anything to do with the 200 migrants housed in the local hotel.

It’s all in the manual: if your neighbor posts that “certain communities are getting priority housing while local families wait years,” this, apparently, is a red flag. An ideological IED. The sort of thing that could “deepen community divisions” and “create new tensions.”

This isn’t surveillance, we’re told. It’s “risk assessment.” Just a casual read-through of what that lady from your yoga class posted about a planning application. The framework warns of “local parental associations” and “concerned citizens” forming forums.

And why the sudden urgency? The new guidance came hot on the heels of a real incident, protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers, following the sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl by Hadush Kebatu, an Ethiopian migrant.

Now, instead of looking at how that tragedy happened or what policies allowed it, the government’s solution is to scan the reaction to it.

What we are witnessing is the rhetorical equivalent of chucking all dissent into a bin labelled “disinformation” and slamming the lid shut.

The original Resist framework was cooked up in 2019 as a European-funded toolkit to fight actual lies. Now, it equates perfectly rational community concerns about planning, safety, and who gets housed where with Russian bots and deepfakes. If you squint hard enough, everyone starts to look like a threat.

Local councils have even been drafted into the charade. New guidance urges them to follow online chatter about asylum seekers in hotels or the sudden closure of local businesses.

One case study even panics over a town hall meeting where residents clapped. That’s right. Four hundred people clapped in support of someone they hadn’t properly Googled first. This, we’re told, is dangerous.

So now councils are setting up “cohesion forums” and “prebunking” schemes to manage public anger. Prebunking. Like bunking, but done in advance, before you’ve even heard the thing you’re not meant to believe.

It’s the equivalent of a teacher telling you not to laugh before the joke’s even landed.

Naturally, this is all being wrapped in the cosy language of protecting democracy. A government spokesman insisted, with a straight face: “We are committed to protecting people online while upholding freedom of expression.”

Because let’s be real, this isn’t about illegal content or safeguarding children. It’s about managing perception. When you start labeling ordinary gripes and suspicions as “narratives” that need “countering,” what you’re really saying is: we don’t trust the public to think for themselves.