“… However, most “if not all” members of the advisory group appointed by Heritage Canada have suggested that the categories of harms targeted should be broadened to include, among other things, “misleading political communications,” “propaganda,” and online content that promotes an “unrealistic body image.” The government has not yet indicated whether it will accept all of the group’s recommendations.”
In theory this should spell the end of the CBC.
The Holocaust loomed large in my childhood imagination, growing up in Edmonton in the 1970s. My father’s family was one of the very few in Alberta who succeeded in sponsoring some relatives who were able to escape Nazi-occupied Austria in 1938, just weeks before Kristallnacht.
Mackenzie King was a polite anti-Semite and his government’s attitude towards Jewish refugees was “none is too many,” yet my father’s mother’s cousin Luba was somehow able to win the support of her MP from Vegreville, who, according to family lore, fought for a special order-in-council for visas to allow my grandmother’s first cousin Rosa, her husband Hans and their small children, George and Helen, to escape Vienna just in the nick of time.
Despite the federal government’s assurances that it won’t regulate videos Canadians post for fun on platforms like YouTube and TikTok, a former top regulator has warned that a government bill still leaves the door open for doing precisely that.
Imagine you woke up one morning to find out your Facebook account had been locked out.
At first you think maybe you got hacked, but when you check your email, you see something from Facebook informing you that, unfortunately, according to the new censorship laws, the status update you posted that contained a criticism of the government was labelled as “hate speech” and “disinformation,” so they were forced to shut your account down.
That may seem like a bit of a wild example, but that possible future is closer than you think.
Is freedom about to fall in Canada? If the secret world of internet censorship is an indicator, the time is upon us. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has had enough of freedom of speech. His timing is impeccable. Just as the cat is out of the bag regarding the Liberal-WEF-WHO interconnection, government stand at the precipice of muzzling our population.
Since its introduction in the House of Commons last month, the Online News Act (Bill C-18) has been debated or discussed just once. The bill was tabled without comment by Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez on April 5th. Thus far, Friday, May 13th was the only one day devoted debate on the bill at second reading, a day when so many MPs were not present that there was a question on whether there was sufficient quorum to proceed. Rodriguez did not deliver a speech or answer questions that day, leaving it to his Parliamentary Secretary Chris Bittle, who I pointed out inaccurately characterized the requirement for payments by Internet platforms as “use” of content and implausibly argued that the bill involved “minimal government intervention.” There has been a total of less than two hours of speeches and debate with just 10 MPs speaking to the bill or asking questions (Bittle and Mark Gerretsen being the only Liberal MPs).
The Biden administration announced this week that it was putting its “Disinformation Governance Board” on ‘pause’ for the time being, with another report noting its goofy director, Nina Jankowicz, would be resigning.
But on Thursday, a new report noted that the Department of Homeland Security, under which the board will serve, announced the names of two new successors to Jankowicz who are expected to manage the new agency during the pause.
CRTC Chair Ian Scott appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage yesterday and Bill C-11 proved to be a popular topic of discussion. The exchanges got testy at times as Scott seemingly stepped outside of his role as an independent regulatory by regularly defending government legislation, even veering into commenting on newspapers, which clearly falls outside the CRTC’s jurisdiction. With respect to Bill C-11, most newsworthy were two comments regarding the regulation of user content and the timelines for implementing the bill if it receives royal assent.
US tech giant Google has blasted the Trudeau government over a federal plan to regulate online news, calling it a sweeping attempt to impose government control over the web.
Vice President and Managing Director of Google Canada Sabrina Geremia warned in a lengthy post on Monday that Bill C-18 – also known as the Online News Act – would give the federal government “sweeping new powers” to regulate news content.
“The bill gives the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) unprecedented, sweeping new powers to regulate every aspect of the Canadian news industry,” wrote Geremia.
The Trump Media and Technology Group has announced a major access expansion for the company’s first offering, Truth Social.
As of now, the platform can only be reached via an app, and only for Apple products, as there is no app for Android devices yet. But that is about to change.
According to Just the News, very soon the platform will be reachable via the Web, like Twitter, which will open it up to millions more users.
As Revolver and others have covered, Nina “Moaning Myrtle” Jankowicz is a joke. The Harry Potter superfan-turned-propagandrix is now the Biden Administration’s chosen head for the “Disinformation Governance Board.” Among many other embarrassing videos in circulation is the following clip of Nina Jankowicz bizarrely and emphatically dismissing the notion of the so-called “deep state.”
Free speech on the internet endangers democracy, Barack Obama told Stanford University.
The widely hailed speech at Big Tech’s favorite university claimed that autocrats are “subverting democracy” and that democracies have “grown dangerously complacent”. In the slow parade of teleprompter clichés he even warned that “too often we’ve taken freedom for granted.”
To Obama, the threat to democracy doesn’t come from government power, but the lack of it.
“Is it a great success that a multi-billionaire would be now deciding what is appropriate for people to exchange by way of discourse? I think it can hardly be described as anything other than a manifestation of an incredible and dangerous narcissism,” the 5’3″ octogenarian opined at what was supposed to be a climate change conference at Dublin City University, clearly referring to Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter but declining to identify the South African entrepreneur by name.
Is there any corner of our government bureaucracy that isn’t overrun with woke, partisan operatives seeking to enact their political agendas? I think we all know the answer to that, and the latest example comes via the FTC moving to “investigate” Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter on…anti-trust grounds?
This comes after Democrats and their media allies have spent the last few weeks absolutely losing their minds over the fact that conservatives might have a single platform that doesn’t bias their policies against them.
Some of the most high-profile liberal figures have joined together to encourage advertisers to boycott Twitter if Elon Musk brings in his promised policy of unfettered ‘free speech.’
