CHPC Committee Report

Conservative Dissenting Report on Tech Giants’ Use of Intimidation Tactics to Evade Regulation in Canada and Across the World

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage

On behalf of the Conservative members of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, we submit this dissenting report on Tech Giants’ Use of Intimidation Tactics to Evade Regulation in Canada and Across the World. Because the main report failed to adequately explore the state of censorship in Canada and the role played by tech giants and the current federal government, this dissenting report is required.

The committee heard from eighteen witnesses, including representatives of Google and Meta, journalists, academics, and advocates. Many of them highlighted that Canadians are increasingly being censored by the government and tech giants as to what they can see, hear, and say online. Overwhelming attention was drawn to two draconian bills implemented by the current Liberal government: Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, and Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada.

1. Bill C-11

Bill C-11 amended the Broadcasting Act by bringing the internet under its provisions. In 1932, this Act was put in place to regulate TV and radio to ensure Canada’s two official languages were both given airtime and cultural diversity was upheld. This was necessary because the number of TV and radio stations was limited, and these finite resources needed to be shared.   

Unlike these two mediums, the internet is boundless. Anyone who wants to have a presence on the internet can have one. A government bureaucracy  should not regulate which content should be prioritized and which should be demoted. There is space for all.  

Today, in the Internet Age, when nearly everyone has access to smart devices and streaming services, it’s never been easier for Canadian content creators— from all linguistic and cultural backgrounds—to reach a global audience with the content they wish to showcase. The gatekeepers, such as Bell Media, Rogers, the CBC, or Corus Entertainment, have been removed. The internet is infinite, and the opportunities are endless.  

The Liberal Government, under Justin Trudeau, instituted Bill C-11 to control what Canadians watch and post online.   

There are two significant consequences of this bill:  

Bill C-11 censors what Canadians see: This piece of legislation effectively makes the government a content regulator, meaning the government instructs bureaucrats in Ottawa to determine what content Canadians can access online. In simple terms, Bill C-11 breaks our search bars. When the bill is fully implemented, Canadians will be directed to the things the government wants them to see, instead of the things they wish to see.

Bill C-11 censors what Canadians say: Once Bill C-11 is fully implemented, home-grown talent and creative content here in Canada will no longer succeed based on merit. Content will be subject to a set of criteria that bureaucrats in Ottawa will use to determine its level of “Canadian-ness.” This will favour traditional art forms over new creative content. Cultural minority groups will largely be cut out.   

Bill C-11 will not only hinder consumers’ ability to view and listen to what they want, it will also harm digital first creators in their ability to succeed and reach global audiences.

During consultations, officials from the Ministry of Canadian Heritage involved in the implementation of Bill C-11 failed to include varied opinions reflective of Canada’s diversity. Dr. Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, testified at committee:

With Bill C-11, there was ample evidence of regulatory capture, as a handful of legacy culture groups dominated meetings with officials and time with this committee. The voices of Canadian digital creators were often dismissed or sidelined, including those from Indigenous and BIPOC communities, some of whom reported feeling disrespected or intimidated by department or ministry officials.

Dr. Geist highlighted a specific incident during these consultations:

In one instance, Vanessa Brousseau, who goes by the handle Resilient Inuk, went to meet with Heritage officials and walked away feeling completely intimidated and disrespected.

Failing to consult diverse content creators results in a failed representation of true Canadian content. Additionally, the intimidation and disrespect shown to indigenous and BIPOC creators is deeply alarming and unacceptable.

Bill C-11 is a grotesque overreach of government. The internet is limitless and should allow all content creators an opportunity to reach audiences based on merit, not government criteria. Additionally, Canadians deserve the right to choose what they wish to view online, free from the preferences of an over-reaching government.

2. Bill C-18

Bill C-18 has a detrimental impact on Canadians’ access to news. While countries around the world can easily access news on social media platforms, Canadians are left in an Orwellian state in which news cannot be shared on Meta platforms and is therefore largely unavailable. This is a direct consequence of a collision between big tech and an overbearing government. Together, big tech and big government, have created small citizens constrained by intrusive policy. This was made abundantly clear through witness testimony.

Though the government claims Bill C-18 was drafted to promote Canadian news content, the flawed legislation has done the opposite. Bill C-18 has harmed small news outlets and publishers, as they have lost their audience because of this legislation. As Dr. Michael Geist stated:

The reality is that there were great benefits that came to the publishers from social media and from search. Indeed, that was the basis upon which, in many respects, this took place for a very long period of time.

Frankly, what we have seen in the aftermath of the legislation taking effect in June really confirms that. I don't think it can be understated. There is real harm with news entities talking about lost traffic in the range of 30%. There are some news outlets that have stopped their services, effectively, or suspended their operations altogether.

Undoubtedly, decreased traffic to news sites has negatively impacted smaller Canadian media outlets which cannot compete against big broadcasters like Rogers, Bell and CBC that receive hundreds-of-millions of dollars in subsidies. This concern was also echoed by Mr. Sean Speer, an editor at The Hub and a witness on the committee. Mr. Speer illustrated the harm caused by Bill C-18 on smaller media outlets by stating:

One of the consequences, of course, of Bill C-18 has been that many of us have lost the ability to communicate, reach our current audience and grow it, because the law has caused Meta to leave the Canadian market.

Sadly, Bill C-18 has impeded small Canadian media outlets from reaching their full potential and expanding their audiences. Bill C-18 has left Canadian media outlets disempowered and unable to compete against the bigger outlets, thus forcing hundreds of them to shut their doors and close down their businesses.

Additionally, Bill C-18 has cost Canada investment opportunities. Since prospects to gain viewership on social media have been eliminated, many have avoided investing in Canadian news outlets. Dr. Geist highlighted this issue by saying:

Notably, there has been real harm from an investment perspective in this country. I've had a number of entities come forward, saying that in the current environment, and given the way the legislation has been structured, investing in news in Canada just isn't something people are apt to do.

The Canadian public is also negatively impacted by the failures of Bill C-18. Because smaller outlets have been put out of business by this government legislation, Canadians have fewer choices and less freedom to access a variety of sources. 

Furthermore, Canadians have no access to view or share news on Meta platforms. This impedes their freedoms and poses a danger during emergencies when Canadians need news quickly and at their fingertips.

Bill C-18 has harmed news outlets, investment opportunities, and the freedom of Canadians to access a variety of news sources.  This is a senseless bill that fails on all levels.

Summary

Under the current Liberal government, censorship has drastically increased. Bill C-11 and C-18 are two examples of government legislation that are suffocating the Canadian Public. They must both be repealed, and freedoms must be restored.