Discussions

Claims this is censorship and gives the liberal government too much power to control the content online  
But when I attempt to read through the actual text of Bill C-11, I see alot of wording about protecting our rights, freedom of expression especially across the board culturally, protecting and supporting cultural diversity and Canadian content.  
 
text of Bill is hard to read so is there someone here who can show where the concerns are around censorship and how this bill is dangerous as discussed in the attached links. Would be much appreciated.  
 
A des:cription of Bill C-11 and its purpose:  
https://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/charter-charte/c11_2.html  
 
Does Bill C-11 really allow for censorship as claimed in this link:  
https://rightedition.com/2022/11/04/canadas-bill-c-11-explained-a-chilling-law-that-lets-the-government-censor-user-generated-content/  
 
or is it really a threat to freedom of expression? as this link claims:  
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-c-11-threat-freedom-100000452.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACcH8fIsfjVo28w3S5TgZWZSkrIHIF5rUp1ZU1j2IPXNz4gJMQ7etLeX5kf4Za3E81-yzD5o-vZSsycPf3YFDeeuD-1aXVlOlHPceB9t81I2gbXwMmY_ymiu8P4Qeg6wu99VqK3vji2U1gqGz-0PqM4E7mE3XZ1RpEm3oDdMv6zL

I don't understand why your second and third links are framed as being oppositional to one another. Both say similar things, only one is from a right-wing crank and the other is from a right-wing thinktank.  
 
The Wikipedia article on the bill has a decent synopsis. An argument could be made that online content should be regulated in the same way that television and radio broadcasts are (If possible) and that foreign companies like Netflix who make money from Canadian audiences be required to contribute towards the creation of Canadian-made content. The Parliamentary history of the Bill leaves something to be desired: however, much of the opposition seems to be people and groups who want to have the authority and reach of a credible news organization but none of the responsibility or accountability that would come with some form of regulatory oversight.

When you type something in the YouTube search bar the idea is that Bill C-11 will force YouTube to show Canadians who use YouTube whatever the CRTC deems "Canadian Content" FIRST in the YouTube search results that you / others have searched for.  
 
So if you type something into YouTube, you would get Canadian results instead of say US / UK / Australia etc.  
 
The idea is that this will benefit Canadians.  
 
The problem with how the CRTC works is... You need to be filthy rich and able to afford lawyers to get into the "club" that is the CRTC.  
 
So even if you are Canadian born and raised and run a small company or YouTube channel... If you cannot afford to pay to get your CRTC paper work... It doesn't matter that you are born and raised in Canada... In the eyes of the CRTC you aren't Canadian and do not have the CRTC's paperwork to say so.  
 
This will allow the large media corporations to control the flow of information and content on YouTube and decide what you and everyone in Canada see because only people who can afford lawyers will have the CRTC paper work.  
 
The biggest failure of Bill C-11 means you will be force fed content you have no desire to watch or are interested in because the YouTube algorithm will be forced to show you a certain percentage of content just because its "Canadian" with no option to opt out.  
 
Nothing about Bill-C11 is good. It's to keep large legacy media company's "relevant" and in control when they should be lost to time as that's how the world and technology works.  
 
If you want a better des:cription or more detailed one then I suggest YouTubers like Linus Tech Tips or SomeOrdinaryGamers on YouTube  
 
These are some videos from large Canadian YouTubers covering Bill C-11  
 
Linus Tech Tips  
https://youtu.be/zavtUQUOUE8  
SomeOrdinaryGamers  
https://youtu.be/VFyVFLGOBL0  
 
Edited by Bassman, 2022-11-06 02:40:25

The last 2 links are simply examples of what I am seeing online about the C-11. I did not nor was it my intention to frame anything as 'oppositional'  
 
I am looking for the most unbiased perspective. Not sure Wikipedia is a good source. But it does help to dumb down the Bill down so lay people can understand it better.  
 
The same for the second post from Bassman. You are using individual perspectives as a source of information? They have their own biases that are influencing their perspective as well I suspect they do not have the knowledge base to truly understand Bill C-11.  
I truly believe this is where using the internet is a mine field of information where if you do not tread carefully your information will be loaded with individual opinions based on a lack of understanding. These pieces are often loaded with emotional language geared to fear mongering.

An aside from the purpose of this thread but a very real impact:  
 
While our leaders are a source of the division in our country so too is the internet a major contributor to the division in our country. The internet is a unregulated venue where people with their own agendas post their messages. Those agendas may cause more chaos in any discussion around government policy, freedom of expression etc. I do not believe in censorship. I do believe in basing your opinions on facts and having an open debate in a respectful manner. I do not believe vitriol being spewed by bullies whose sole focus is to prevent you from your own freedom of expression. Where is this coming from?  
 
Briefly I joined or followed Canadian groups like Canada Unity, Proud to be Canadian, Federal political groups and many others like the Facebook group for the Trucker convoy where I was simply banned from the group for asking questions. It was largely my interest in seeing what was being said but also looking for a venue where there is open discussion and debate. I have yet to find that. Instead if you post an alternate opinion (and I try to do so based on the evidence/facts as best I can) all that happens is people attack, bully and troll. You get called a liberal sheep or stupid/blinded and oversensitive etc. Their narrative is quite predictable and caustic. They hide behind the accusation that you are making assumptions about them when in fact they are spewing assumptions about you. Calling you a troll etc.  
This is worrying as the bedrock of a democracy is the having the right to express your opinion and open debate about the issues.

It is an eye-crossing experience to say the least. I am still looking and reading but thought to post some interesting links. One tip I learned about searching on the internet is to never, never 100% rely on the links that show up on the first page of your search. Continue reviewing links past page 1 as far as you have the energy to do so. And avoid opinion pieces as much as possible. Focus on groups who are honestly trying to advance the democratic process.  
 
In this search I reviewed over 6 pages and picked the links I found most interesting.  
 
For anyone who is interested, here they are:  
https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2022/op-c11_addario/  
 
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/bill-c-11-a-proposal-to-regulate-online-1333859/  
 
https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2022/05/the-unrecognizable-bill-c-11-the-online-streaming-act-comes-to-the-heritage-committee/  
 
https://openmedia.org/article/item/whats-wrong-with-bill-c-11-an-faq  
 
a couple of these links are from groups who are currently involved in the democratic debate around Bill C-11.  
 
Edited by Spades!!, 2022-11-06 10:21:21

I'm not a fan of this. The bill seems designed to help big media companies at the possible detriment of small content creators. This is not a surprise, as the CRTC often seems to favor their friends at large media companies over the public interest or small competitors.  
 
"Who is Bill C-11 actually for?  
 
The real motive of the Online Streaming Act is simple: streaming platforms and creators on them are bringing in more and more revenue, and legacy media wants a piece of the pie."  
 
I believe that the internet should be as free from regulation as possible. C-11 does the opposite.  
 
Edited by TheBrofessor, 2022-11-06 10:39:21

From what I have read so far, Bill C-11 is a rewrite of Bill-10. Bill C-11 is called the Digital Charter Implementation Act. This bill would create 2 separate acts: The Consumer Privacy Protection Act which outlines the responsibilities of commercial organizations with respect to handling personal information and the Personal information and Data Protection Tribunal Act establishes a tribunal to hear appeals from organizations and complainants. You can read more about this in the link I provided above.  
 
I did attempt to read the actual text of Bill C-11. I saw a lot of wording around protecting Canadian content, ensuring international media support Canadian content and contribute funding for same. It also talks about supporting and giving an open door for smaller media groups to be able to compete with larger media groups. It talks about protecting individual personal information.  
All good things IMO.  
But yes there is room for improvement and the links I gave above (not in my first post but my 3rd post) indicated there is room for improvement. Some sections of Bill C-11 are vague and need clarification, powers to CRTC should be outlined and IMO with boundaries set on the power they have.

I vote with my wallet. I wont shop at any local business that support Bill C11 or vote for any parties who support Bill C11.  
 
I won't post more links as the examples I gave in my original post are as clear as they can be.  
 
I agree with TheBrofessor  
Bill C11 is about censorship and control.  
 
If it wasn't about censorship and control how come they didn't leave "User Generated Content" out of the bill so that it doesn't apply to people who upload cat videos or a video of grandmas birthday? I don't think anyone who read Bill C11 or watched the YouTube videos understands how bad this bill really is. It also applies to all user generated content... Which guess who decides what user generated content is?  
 
Enough said. Its a censorship Bill 100%. Otherwise why would it the CRTC need to regulate cat videos? Seriously...

neither are opinion pieces from media sites or from individuals who run their own blogs/podcasts etc. At best these people may give something to discuss and debate. But you then have to seek out credible sources for information. Such as reading the original document for yourself or read a couple of different credible websites that explain the document. By reading a couple of sites you can better sift through their biases.  
 
To dismiss something based on emotional rhetoric is poor decision making, it does not show good critical thinking which is lacking in this country and it does nothing to support the democratic process. Democracy is all about being informed.  
 
I had hoped this thread would spark some interesting discussion.

My sources are the links that you posted, mainly these two  
 
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/bill-c-11-a-proposal-to-regulate-online-1333859/  
 
https://openmedia.org/article/item/whats-wrong-with-bill-c-11-an-faq