Internet
Gov’t memo admits Canadians are shifting to independent news due to distrust of media, not Russian ‘bots’
From LifeSiteNews
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.
“Articles in The National Observer and Press Progress have made claims that conservative political discussions on social media are driven by inauthentic automated accounts, i.e. bots,” read the memo.
“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.”
Censorship Industrial Complex
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
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.
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.”
|
|
|
|
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.
|
From LifeSiteNews
The decision was otherwise roundly condemned on X as “horrific,” “horrendous,” the hallmark of a “dictatorship,” and even “the biggest breach of privacy Western civilization has ever seen.”
Apple Store on New York’s Fifth Avenue.
Apple pulled its highest-level security feature in the U.K. after the government ordered the company to give it access to user data.
The U.K. government demanded “blanket access” to all user accounts around the world rather than to specific ones, a move unprecedented in major democracies, according to The Washington Post.
The security tool at issue in the U.K. is Advanced Data Protection (ADP), which provides end-to-end encryption so that only owners of particular data – and reportedly not even Apple – can access it.
“Apple can no longer offer Advanced Data Protection (ADP) in the United Kingdom to new users and current UK users will eventually need to disable this security feature,” an Apple spokesman said.
According to Apple, the removal of ADP will not affect iCloud data types that are end-to-end encrypted by default such as iMessage and FaceTime.
The nine iCloud categories that will reportedly no longer have ADP protection are iCloud Backup, iCloud Drive, Photos, Notes, Reminders, Safari Bookmarks, Siri Shortcuts, Voice Memos, Wallet Passes, and Freeform.
These types of data will be covered only by standard data protection, the default setting for accounts.
Journalist and Twitter Files whistleblower Michael Schellenberger slammed the U.K.-initiated move as “totalitarian.”
The decision was otherwise roundly condemned on X as “horrific,” “horrendous,” the hallmark of a “dictatorship,” and even “the biggest breach of privacy Western civilization has ever seen.”
Elon Musk declared Friday that such a privacy breach “would have happened in America” if President Donald Trump had not been elected.
Jake Moore, global cybersecurity adviser at ESET, commented that the move marks “a huge step backwards in the protection of privacy online.”
“Creating a backdoor for ethical reasons means it will inevitably only be a matter of time before threat actors also find a way in,” Moore said.
Britain reportedly made the privacy invasion demand under the authority of the Investigatory Powers Act of 2016.
Snapshots of Alberta and Canadian trade with the US
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
Is Our Five-Year Nightmare Finally Over?
Two New Studies Find Fewer Clouds Cause Warmer Temps
-
Alberta20 hours ago
Snapshots of Alberta and Canadian trade with the US
-
Censorship Industrial Complex11 hours ago
Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”
-
Censorship Industrial Complex19 hours ago
Is Our Five-Year Nightmare Finally Over?
-
Opinion18 hours ago
Two New Studies Find Fewer Clouds Cause Warmer Temps
-
Health17 hours agoThe FDA is trying to shut down his successful cancer treatments. Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski’s patients are outraged
-
Bruce Dowbiggin10 hours agoWith Carney On Horizon This Is No Time For Poilievre To Soften His Message
-
Business2 days agoPepsiCo joins growing list of companies tweaking DEI policies
-
Energy2 days agoFederal Government Suddenly Reverses on Critical Minerals – Over Three Years Too Late – MP Greg McLean