This is a long one but the topic is pretty
important. Over the last 20 years of
being online, here and there I'll let it slip out that I'm
anti-censorship. If you want to ban something/anything,
it's a sign your brain hasn't developed fully and you shouldn't sit at the
Adult Table on holidays. Also,
committees that censor things usually don't have a collective IQ over 80. So hearing that there were amendments to the
Broadcasting Act (Bill C-10) coming up and that it's to regulate Canadian
Content on the Internet while giving powers to the State's mouthpiece, my ears
perked up.
I don't have the illusion I live in the
democracy I was told I did. I do know
that Canada in the last 5-6 years has just become an embarrassing shit show of
incompetence at the top (read Canadian Federal Government), displaying their
ineptness on a daily basis. You'd think
a minority government that lost 30 seats last election would be a tad bit humbled. Even worse, these amendments are being pushed
by the Heritage Minister, an activist whose claim to fame was climbing up the
CN tower with another activist and unfurled a banner that read “Canada and Bush
Climate Killers.” Remember, all
activists are self-centred assholes but apparently, it's enough of a
qualification to get you a Ministry seat.
By the way, that khunt's name is Steven Guilbeault and he can't even get
a decent haircut. See?
It is true that the CRTC will be given a
blank cheque of power... because it is blank. Khunt already said that he doesn't know
exactly what powers the CRTC has yet because they haven't figured them out
yet. They get to make those up after the
Bill passes. How could that fail? That on its own should be enough for it not
to pass. The always-losing NDP already
said they'll support it, not because they understand where this could go (they
don't) but probably because they're broke again. Tip: don't hire a virtue signaler as your
party leader; nobody will vote for you.
At least they'll be the second party to be censored by these amendments.
It's pretty doom and gloom. Could it stifle Freedom of Expression? Sure, totally, and also in terms of any
competition that goes against the CBC. It's
the same thing in the States where they want all cable news channels competing
with CNN/MSNBC off the air because CNN/MSNBC's ratings are so dismal.
The more you read on the Department of
Justice's page,
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/charter-charte/c10.html it's apparent
that most of these amendments are just to keep the bloated carcass, called the
CBC, on life support indefinitely by getting rid of the competition and adding
in some social justice language to it to try and fool people that it's all
about expanding Canadian Content.
Bill C-10: An Act to amend the
Broadcasting Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
You know, just amendments to other acts
while we're here.
Bill C-10 amends the Broadcasting Act
(the Act). The Act sets out the broadcasting policy for Canada, the role and
powers of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the
Commission) in regulating and supervising the broadcasting system, and the
mandate for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The Act plays an important
role in supporting Canada’s cultural industries and ensuring Canadian content
is available and accessible.
The Commission, an independent
administrative tribunal, is responsible for determining the regulatory
requirements to be imposed on broadcasting undertakings with a view to implementing
the policy established by the Act, and for enforcing those requirements.
Regulatory decisions are generally made following processes that allow for
input by interested parties and the public.
This thing is poorly worded. At first The Commission is the CRTC and in
the next paragraph, the Commission is a tribunal. Can’t these people pretend to care about
their work? And don't kid yourself, the
Commission will not be independent and there will be no public input from here
on in.
The Bill would provide the Commission
with new powers to regulate online services, and update the Commission’s
regulatory powers as they relate to traditional broadcasters.
Clause 8 would amend the Commission’s
power to make regulations, including a new power to make regulations requiring
broadcasting undertakings to register with the Commission
Remember the blank cheque of powers, the
ones that haven't been thought up yet?
This is where the censorship stems from.
Everyone that's watched the Harry Potter movies should think this looks
familiar (for the grownups, it's the Animal Farm Seven Commandments). They call it regulation.
The following considerations support the
consistency of the proposed regulatory requirements with section 2(b). The
provisions aim to establish a fair competitive environment for online and
traditional broadcasting services in Canada, in the context of changing market
trends that have not been favourable to traditional broadcasters. Traditional
broadcasters remain a key source of information and programming for Canadian
consumers, including francophones and those living in rural and remote
communities. By levelling the regulatory playing field, the provisions will
help ensure that traditional broadcasting services remain viable and accessible
to Canadians. Traditional broadcasters subject to licences often use radio
frequencies that are a limited public resource. Licencing helps to manage this
scarce public resource in the public interest. The proposed amendments will
also advance the Act’s cultural objectives by helping to ensure that all
broadcasting undertakings contribute equitably to the implementation of the
objectives of the broadcasting policy for Canada, which may include support for
the production of Canadian content. In so doing the Bill would further the
values and principles that underlie freedom of expression. These values are
promoting the search for truth, the opportunity for individual
self-actualization through expression, and participation in social and
political decision-making.
I guess I could have made the Blog post
about this one paragraph. The CBC can't
keep up and adapt with the Internet and other news media that actually shows
what's going on, so instead of the CBC upping their game or re-evaluating
themselves to figure out why they suck, they close out the competition. This doesn't fix any problem at all. Nobody wants to watch the CBC because of its
shit programming and "news".
And I know this first-hand living on a border town, Canadian content
isn't as good as US content, or as good as other parts of the world. Canadian Content is like a female stand up
comedian: second rate. That would be my
version of Hell: all comedy clubs only have female stand up comedians. If Canadian Content was so good, it would
sell itself.
"These values are promoting the
search for truth, the opportunity for individual self-actualization through
expression, and participation in social and political decision-making." Once a state broadcaster
starts spouting the word "truth", you can be sure you'll get anything
but. Also, political decision making is
hardly a value. Pretty much all of the
political decisions made in Canada over the last 5-6 years absolutely have had
no value.
Just in case you forgot what MP Khunt looks like:
The Bill is carefully tailored to
achieve these objectives. Users of social media who upload programs for sharing
with other users and are not affiliated with the service provider will not be
subject to regulation. The Bill maintains the Commission’s role and flexibility
in determining what if any regulatory requirements to impose on broadcasting
undertakings, taking into account the Act’s policy and regulatory objectives,
the variety of broadcasting undertakings and the differences between them, and
what is fair and equitable. The Act provides that it must be interpreted and applied
in a manner consistent with freedom of expression. In making regulatory
decisions, the Commission must proportionately balance the objectives of the
Act with the protection of freedom of expression in light of the facts and
circumstances. The Commission’s decisions on matters of law or jurisdiction are
subject to review by the Federal Court of Appeal.
The Bill isn't carefully tailored at all,
that's part of the problem. Also, a
glossary would have been helpful. What
exactly is a "program"?
Software, like a video player, or a program meaning a show? Or "service provider"? Is that an ISP or YouTube? It doesn't help that the Commission is
flexible. Why not make Freedom of
Expression paramount, like it should be and not some balancing act? I know, I keep forgetting the Bill is
carefully tailored. The only thing I got
out of that is you'll never, ever get anything honest or worthy out of the
CBC. It's a brand that no one's
interested in, from the crummy news to its frumpy looking TV anchors. I won't even watch hockey on the CBC; I'll
watch it through NHL.com.
Information collection and disclosure
powers (clauses 7, 17, 23 and 31) is so wishy-washy, that you don't know what
information is to be collected and nothing is confidential anymore.
The prohibition on public disclosure of
confidential information submitted to the Commission has the potential to
engage section 2(b) of the Charter. Section 2(b) may provide a limited right of
access to documents in the possession of government bodies. Such access is
constitutionally protected only where, without the desired access, meaningful
public discussion and criticism on matters of public interest would be
substantially impeded. However, even where a case for public access is
established, access may be declined based on countervailing considerations.
I love how they slip a "however"
in there. Countervailing
considerations. I haven't seen
censorship worded like that before.
You can't have a Bill without fines:
Administrative monetary penalties (clause 23)
Clause 23 of the Bill would create an
administrative monetary penalty regime for violations of certain provisions of
the Act or of the Accessible Canada Act. Persons designated by the Commission
for that purpose would be empowered to issue notices of violation where they
have reasonable grounds to believe that a person has committed a violation. A
notice of violation would include the act or omission giving rise to the
violation, the amount of the penalty, and a summary of the person’s rights and
obligations, including the right to make submissions to the Commission with
respect to the violation or the penalty. The Commission would then determine,
on a balance of probabilities, whether the person committed the violation.
Proceeding with a notice of violation would preclude proceeding with criminal
charges.
You know, certain provisions, in this
carefully tailored Bill. "A
notice of violation would include the act or omission". You know, one or the other, or whateves,
LOL. The CRTC isn't full of lawyers, but
if they probably think you made a violation, whether you did or not, you're
busted. I don't know how that's
legitimate.
Add some systemic racism, (or is it institutional
racism? It's hard to keep up) to it:
Other provisions (clauses 2, 4 and 7)
The Bill would amend the Act to take
greater account of Indigenous cultures and languages and of Canada’s diversity.
Clause 2 would update the broadcasting policy for Canada by specifying that the
Canadian broadcasting system should provide opportunities for Indigenous
persons to produce programming and carry on broadcasting undertakings, and
should provide programming that reflects Indigenous cultures and programming
that is in Indigenous languages. It would also add that through its programming
and employment opportunities, the Canadian broadcasting system should serve the
needs and interests of all Canadians including Canadians from racialized
communities and of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds. Clause 4 would update the
regulatory policy by adding that the broadcasting system should be regulated
and supervised in a manner that takes into account Indigenous language
broadcasting and programming.
I say we should just pull the plug on the
CBC. It doesn't offer any value. Have a look at their Parents section on their
website. There's more useless shit on
there than an outhouse on Summer Break.
Local Public Radio has always been better, and I don't mean NPR or PBS,
I mean real public radio. And stop using
diversity as a noun; it's not grammatically correct for one thing. "Canada's diversity"... what
does that even mean?
I don't have anything against Indigenous
people to make up their own programs; go ahead... but who's going to listen to
it? There's too much product out there
already and it such a tiny demographic that even regular viewers/listeners of
the CBC will switch it off, especially if it's not in English. CBC diehards talk the talk but when it
actually comes to following through, good luck.
If you tried to implement that policy on a normal radio station that
didn't bleed tax payer money, they'd be out of business in a month.
This whole thing seems like a bad
joke. Let's expand Canadian Content by
censoring other Canadian Content at the same time deregulating the CRTC.
Typically rushed without thinking ahead.
"The Canadian broadcasting system should serve the needs and
interests of all Canadians including Canadians from racialized communities and
of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds."
See, when you use language like that you just make a run-on
sentence. All Canadians covers all
Canadians and the CBC should serve the needs and interests of all Canadians but
it fell short decades ago.
Update as of May 3rd: Liberal Members of
the Heritage Committee have voted to end the debate on the Conservative motion
that would review Bill C-10 under a charter of rights review, so it already
goes against the Charter. But that's
what happens when you give a myopic, self-centred, shitty activist a job that
has real life consequences for others, and I wasn't referring to the inept
PM. This won't turn out well but it'll
be at least 10 years down the road until we all see its ill effects played
out. Maybe I'll luck out and be dead by
then.
In the meantime, get your VPNs ready;
Canada is taking a turn for the worst.
