Media
Most Canadians oppose internet censorship, federal report finds
From LifeSiteNews
” even those who voiced concern over potentially ‘harmful’ content on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat held that it ‘was the responsibility of individuals’ and not government to determine what Canadians can and cannot view. “
Most Canadians want the Trudeau government to keep its hands off access to the internet, according to a federal report.
According to information published January 3 by Blacklock’s Reporter, an in-house Privy Council report titled Continuous Qualitative Data Collection Of Canadians’ Views has found that most Canadians believe the federal government should not introduce legislation that would censor internet content.
“Discussing actions which could be taken to mitigate online misinformation and disinformation, participants stressed the role of individual responsibility,” federal government researchers wrote in the report.
According to the report, even those who voiced concern over potentially harmful content on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat held that it “was the responsibility of individuals” and not government to determine what Canadians can and cannot view.
The research was contracted out to Strategic Counsel, which gathered information from focus groups in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Québec and Atlantic Canada.
“A number were of the view it was of critical importance for Canadians to be able to leave comments and have their voices heard regarding initiatives and policies important to them,” the report stated.
According to the research, Canadians were unsure that legislation to censor internet activity was necessary, or even a good idea, explaining that they could “filter out hateful content” without the government’s intervention.
“While most believed harmful content online represented a growing concern few felt it to be a major issue at present,” the report said. “Several were of the view that individuals were typically able to avoid harmful content by blocking it or not utilizing platforms on which it was present.”
“While a few felt actions should be taken to limit the reach or prohibit harmful online content several were concerned these efforts might have the unintended consequence of impeding what they viewed as the rights of individuals to freely express themselves online,” it continued.
“Participants were asked if they were concerned about the spread of misinformation and disinformation,” the research added. “Though all participants reported feeling some degree of concern some also expressed reservations about the potential for censorship in any attempt by the federal government to prevent the proliferation of false information online.”
The research comes as Canadians are facing increased internet censorship thanks to the Liberal government under the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
This past June, Trudeau’s internet censorship law, Bill C-18, the Online News Act, was passed by the Senate. This law mandates that Big Tech companies pay to publish Canadian content on their platforms.
As a result, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, blocked all access to news content in Canada, while Google agreed to pay Canadian legacy media $100 million under the new legislation.
Critics of Trudeau’s recent laws, such as tech mogul Elon Musk, have commented that the legislation shows that “Trudeau is trying to crush free speech in Canada.”
Musk made the comments after the nation’s telecommunications regulator announced that due to new powers granted to it via the Online Streaming Act, certain podcasters will now have to “register” with the government.
Just last week, the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), Canada’s official broadcast regulator, announced it might soon be producing draft rules for a pre-election “code of conduct” for newsrooms, which includes print and online journalists.
The “code of conduct” can be legally enforced thanks to a little known clause in the Online News Act. Clause, 27.1.b.iv says newsrooms that want Google money must demonstrate full compliance with a “code of ethics.” This “code” was not defined, however, and Canada has no such national code of newsroom ethics.
I Testified Before a Senate Committee About the CBC
I recently testified before the Senate Committee for Transport and Communications. You can view that session here. Even though the official topic was CBC’s local programming in Ontario, everyone quickly shifted the discussion to CBC’s big-picture problems and how their existential struggles were urgent and immediate. The idea that deep and fundamental changes within the corporation were unavoidable seemed to enjoy complete agreement.
I’ll use this post as background to some of the points I raised during the hearing.
You might recall how my recent post on CBC funding described a corporation shedding audience share like dandruff while spending hundreds of millions of dollars producing drama and comedy programming few Canadians consume. There are so few viewers left that I suspect they’re now identified by first name rather than as a percentage of the population.
Since then I’ve learned a lot more about CBC performance and about the broadcast industry in general.
For instance, it’ll surprise exactly no one to learn that fewer Canadians get their audio from traditional radio broadcasters. But how steep is the decline? According to the CRTC’s Annual Highlights of the Broadcasting Sector 2022-2023, since 2015, “hours spent listening to traditional broadcasting has decreased at a CAGR of 4.8 percent”. CAGR, by the way, stands for compound annual growth rate.
Dropping 4.8 percent each year means audience numbers aren’t just “falling”; they’re not even “falling off the edge of a cliff”; they’re already close enough to the bottom of the cliff to smell the trees. Looking for context? Between English and French-language radio, the CBC spends around $240 million each year.
Those listeners aren’t just disappearing without a trace. the CRTC also tells us that Canadians are increasingly migrating to Digital Media Broadcasting Units (DMBUs) – with numbers growing by more than nine percent annually since 2015.
The CBC’s problem here is that they’re not a serious player in the DMBU world, so they’re simply losing digital listeners. For example, of the top 200 Spotify podcasts ranked by popularity in Canada, only four are from the CBC.
Another interesting data point I ran into related to that billion dollar plus annual parliamentary allocation CBC enjoys. It turns out that that’s not the whole story. You may recall how the government added another $42 million in their most recent budget.
But wait! That’s not all! Between CBC and SRC, the Canada Media Fund (CMF) ponied up another $97 million for fiscal 2023-2024 to cover specific programming production budgets.
Technically, Canada Media Fund grants target individual projects planned by independent production companies. But those projects are usually associated with the “envelope” of one of the big broadcasters – of which CBC is by far the largest. 2023-2024 CMF funding totaled $786 million, and CBC’s take was nearly double that of their nearest competitor (Bell).
But there’s more! Back in 2016, the federal budget included an extra $150 million each year as a “new investment in Canadian arts and culture”. It’s entirely possible that no one turned off the tap and that extra government cheque is still showing up each year in the CBC’s mailbox. There was also a $93 million item for infrastructure and technological upgrades back in the 2017-2018 fiscal year. Who knows whether that one wasn’t also carried over.
So CBC’s share of government funding keeps growing while its share of Canadian media consumers shrinks. How do you suppose that’ll end?
We make content free for you but we require support to create journalism. Please consider a free subscription to our newsletter, or donate an amount of your choice.
By A flurry of controversial bills in Canada, some of which became law, serve to cement this impression.
Now, as President Trump prepares to start his second term in office in the US, Canada’s “orphaned” ruling class continues with the “disinformation” narrative – either as a sign of long-term commitment or looking for new “disinformation partners” elsewhere in the world – or simply as a sign of inertia.
Time will tell, and it will be interesting to see, but for the moment, news out of Canada speaks about a report compiled by the House of Commons Heritage Committee, titled, “Tech Giants’ Intimidation and Subversion Tactics to Evade Regulation in Canada and Globally.”
How about the tactics deployed in Canada – and globally – using all manner of intimidation and subversion to evade citizens’ right to free speech?
Maybe another day, by another ruling coalition.
Right now, the Liberals, the New Democratic Party, and Bloc Québécois stand behind statements such as this one, found in the cumbersomely-named report:
“The Government of Canada notes some individuals and groups create disinformation to promote political ideologies including extremist views and conspiracy theories or simply to make money.”
This looks like a call to combine (yet more) censorship with (yet more) deplatforming. And the ones to “fix” things for Canada’s current government are companies behind major social platforms, like Meta and Google.
But the group of Canada’s MPs behind the report believes so.
They want mechanisms put in place “to detect undesirable or questionable content that may be the product of disinformation or foreign interference and that these platforms be required to promptly identify such content and report it to users.”
Does Canadian parliament’s pressure on US tech companies not count as “foreign interference”? Unclear. Another thing that’s unclear – as in, undefined in the report – is what its authors have in mind when they mention “disinformation” and, “conspiracy theories.”
It’s as if these terms have become “art for art’s sake.”
Whatever that may be, Canada’s ruling parliamentarians want specific actions against these undefined phenomena to be enforced by tech companies.
“Failure to do so should result in penalties,” reads the document.
Canadian veterans battle invisible wounds of moral injury and addiction
Trump Effect: No One Gretz Off Easy Backing The Donald
New Australian law, if passed, will make the gov’t the sole arbiter of truth’
Up to $41 billion in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds
-
Brownstone Institute1 day agoThe Most Devastating Report So Far
-
Business1 day agoCarbon tax bureaucracy costs taxpayers $800 million
-
ESG1 day agoCan’t afford Rent? Groceries for your kids? Trudeau says suck it up and pay the tax!
-
Daily Caller1 day agoLos Angeles Passes ‘Sanctuary City’ Ordinance In Wake Of Trump’s Deportation Plan
-
John Stossel1 day agoGreen Energy Needs Minerals, Yet America Blocks New Mines
-
COVID-192 days agoDr. McCullough praises RFK Jr., urges him to pull COVID shots from the market
-
MAiD2 days agoOver 40% of people euthanized in Ontario lived in poorest parts of the province: government data
-
Alberta1 day agoProvince considering new Red Deer River reservoir east of Red Deer