KINSELLA: Our freedoms once again under attack by federal Liberals

Article content material

It’s baaaack.

Article content material

C-10, like an axe-swinging Jack Nicholson within the horror traditional The Shining, is again. And the Trudeau Liberal’s try to throttle reliable expression on-line — whereas bearing a distinct identify, and taking a distinct kind — is arguably a lot worse than earlier than.

You keep in mind C-10, don’t you? Earlier than it met a deserving finish when Justin Trudeau referred to as an pointless and undesirable election, C-10 was the greatest-ever assault on free speech, and a free media, this nation has ever seen.

Invoice C-10 was allegedly designed to replace the Broadcasting Act. And it wasn’t geared toward eradicating the issues we are able to all agree are dangerous — like baby pornography or violent hate propaganda. C-10 was really all about censoring you, and what you say on-line — in a tweet, a Fb publish, on a weblog. It was about limiting your skill to specific your self in a democracy.

Article content material

However an explosion of opposition — plus the above-noted undesirable election — stopped C-10 from occurring.

Now the Trudeau apparatchiks try once more — they usually’re hoping you don’t discover.

Right here’s the important thing details:

– Invoice C-11 is solely a crafty redraft of Invoice C-10, and it extends the attain of the Broadcasting Act to digital media. Invoice C-18, in the meantime, is a associated invoice that implements the “On-line Information Act,” which makes an attempt to exert additional management over on-line information sources and companies. And get this: the Trudeau authorities has additionally hinted at a associated Invoice within the works, with the identical goal — management of expression.

– Invoice C-11 acquired to Second Studying just a few days in the past — and has now been referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Invoice C-18, its bastard twin, can be in Second Studying and has already been debated.

Article content material

– Invoice C-11 tries to cope with the identical points as Invoice C-10 — however really removes a few of its meagre protections on the regulation of user-generated content material. Part 4, specifically, needs to be an enormous concern for anybody with a considerable following on social media — your phrases and pictures might be regulated beneath this new regulation. Full cease.

– How? Properly, the unelected and unaccountable faceless bureaucrats on the CRTC can decide, with no oversight, which user-generated content material is protected, and which isn’t. That’s numerous energy. And anybody with hyperlinks, say, to YouTube or different such revenue-generating companies can be on the mercy of the CRTC’s behind-closed-doors decision-making.

– That’s not all. The sleek-talking minister overseeing all this, Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez, claims his authorities is concentrating on issues like music on YouTube — however components of the proposed regulation go nicely past that, to podcasts, music on platforms, and even TikTok movies. Manual pdf

Article content material

– This invoice would even give the CRTC the facility to require platforms to “prioritize” some content material over others — or face stiff monetary penalties. They gained’t have any algorithm or code to take action — the CRTC will simply do it, based mostly on private bias and whims.

– Probably the most notable a part of Invoice C-18, in the meantime, is part 2. That part applies the iron fist of the regulation any time information content material is linked, referenced, or “facilitated by any means” in a media supply. That’s numerous content material, of us.

– College of Ottawa Professor Michael Geist factors to a Fb publish authored by Rodriguez, which features a hyperlink to a La Presse article. This laws would have the impact of requiring Fb to pay La Presse for the hyperlink that he posted — however, ominously, would create a “necessary arbitration system overseen by the CRTC to make sure that they do.” That’ll have the apparent impact of discouraging social media platforms from enabling customers to hyperlink to authentic sources. Which, in flip, may scale back accountability on the social media platforms, and sure result in the proliferation of much more conspiracy theories and pretend information.

There’s much more to be fearful about, in each Payments. However the backside line stays the identical: C-11 and C-18 characterize actual and current risks to reliable expression by common residents.

And that’s the reason they’re as dangerous, if not worse, than Invoice C-10.

As a result of C-10? It’s again.

— Kinsella has been an adjunct professor on the College of Calgary’s School of Legislation. Analysis for this column was assisted by Daisy Group affiliate Logan Whitmore