Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

Questions and Answers – Social Media

On this page

Why was section 4.1 included in Bill C-10 in the first place?

The Government of Canada recognizes that social media services have clearly become an important tool for self-expression for Canadians. As you are all aware, section 2.1 clearly excludes users from being considered broadcasters in respect of the programs they post to a social media service. Section 4.1 clarified that programs that are uploaded to a social media service by an unaffiliated user of the service would not be covered by the Broadcasting Act. We did this specifically to acknowledge the use of social media services as important fora for people to express themselves.

The Government, after hearing from industry stakeholders, felt that the calibration of section 4.1 wasn’t right. Leaving section 4.1 in place would have raised serious issues of fairness. Also, it would have prevented the CRTC from requiring social media services that are engaged in broadcasting to support the discoverability of Canadian creators and artists. The Government believes it is important to promote Canadian creators, and discoverability is an important part of that objective. This objective furthers freedom of expression values, which include artistic and cultural self-expression.

Why did the Government propose to remove section 4.1?

The Government, after hearing from industry stakeholders, felt that the calibration of section 4.1 wasn’t right. According to a recent survey from the Media Technology Monitor, nearly two-thirds of Canadians use YouTube as their primary music streaming service; many Canadians turn to social media services for programming that informs, enlightens, and entertains. Leaving section 4.1 in place would have raised serious issues of fairness – social media platforms that provide similar services to Canadians as other regulated online services like Spotify would not have had similar obligations to contribute to the Canadian broadcasting system.

Section 4.1 would have also prevented the CRTC from requiring social media services that are engaged in broadcasting to support the discoverability of Canadian creators and artists. The Government believes it is important to promote Canadian creators, and discoverability is an important part of that objective.

I want to clarify that section 4.1 was not going to be simply removed without adequate protections being adopted in its place. The Government has moved a motion and communicated its intent to move another that would allow the CRTC to regulate social media services in respect of programs posted by their unaffiliated users in only certain respects. One, it could require contributions to Canadian content from the social media services themselves. Two, it could require social media services to register with the CRTC and provide information such as financial information. And three, it could require social media services to promote the discoverability of Canadian creators.

In light of the Government’s new proposed amendments, what is the current policy regarding social media?

The Government remains committed to safeguarding social media services as the new “town square” and to further enable the free exchange of ideas and opinions online. That is why, as Parliamentary Secretary Dabrusin has mentioned, the Government is proposing to limit CRTC regulation to three types of powers in respect of programs posted to social media platforms by unaffiliated users.

First, the CRTC will be authorized to ensure social media services make financial contributions to support the further development of Canadian culture.

Second, the CRTC will be granted an order-making power to raise the visibility of Canadian creators – for example, by requiring social media services to showcase Canadian artists. The CRTC will determine the most appropriate means to implement discoverability after holding public consultations with interested parties. But let me be clear that the CRTC will not have the ability to censor what Canadians upload to social media.

Third, the CRTC will be able to obtain relevant information from online broadcasters that provide a social media service, but NOT from users. This is crucial in order for the CRTC to properly administer the Broadcasting Act and supervise the Canadian broadcasting system. This will include the authority for the CRTC to audit the records of such social media services and establish registration requirements with respect to social media services in their capacity as an online undertaking, NOT to audit users and not to impose a registration requirement on users.

How are you defining “social media service”?

Bill C-10 does not define the term “social media service”. That’s because this is a commonly used term and it has a well understood meaning. Many dictionaries include a definition of social media. For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines social media as: forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos).

As well, including a definition in the Act could prevent the legislation from keeping pace if the concept of “social media” changed and evolved over time.

Why are you proposing to give the CRTC powers to regulate discoverability with respect to social media services?

The Government has proposed an amendment that would allow the CRTC to make orders relating to the discoverability of Canadian creators of programs on online undertakings that provide a social media service in respect of programs posted by its unaffiliated users.

Social media services are powerful platforms for raising the visibility of our artists and creators. The order making power would allow the CRTC to, for example, ask that social media services showcase Canadian artists or increase the prominence of Canadian artists in search results.

“Discoverability” is not intended to be a prescriptive concept, but to allow the CRTC to craft rules that make sense for the nature of social media services.

Does the ability for the CRTC to regulate discoverability of Canadian creators on social media services mean that there will be “Government-sanctioned” social media channels?

No. Social media services are powerful platforms for raising the visibility of our artists and creators. The principle of freedom of expression remains paramount and social media will continue to be places that enable the free exchange of ideas and opinions online.

The order making power to promote discoverability of Canadian artists would allow the CRTC to, for example, require that online undertakings that provide social media services showcase Canadian artists or increase the prominence of Canadian artists in search results. This power does not allow the CRTC to require social media services to block or censor content in any way.

Why does the discoverability power for social media differ from the one that applies to other broadcasters?

We want to ensure that Canadian stories and music are visible, easy to find and promoted in Canada.

In the past, the CRTC has imposed various requirements related to discoverability on tradition broadcasters, such as Canadian exhibition requirements and Canadian music quotas.

Bill C-10 clarifies that online broadcasters can now be regulated under the Broadcasting Act. When it comes to social media services, we know that the Government should not dictate what programs Canadians can or cannot see. However, we also know that social media services can be powerful platforms for showcasing Canadian creators. That’s why we are recommending that the CRTC be provided with powers to ensure that online undertakings that provide social media services play their part in ensuring that Canadian creators are findable and promoted on their services. As the expert regulator, it will be up to the CRTC to impose appropriate discoverability requirements that make sense in the context of social media services.

Why are you proposing to give the CRTC powers to require financial contributions from social media services?

Bill C-10’s primary objective is to clarify that the Broadcasting Act applies to online broadcasting services and ensure that they support Canadian cultural expression when that would contribute in a material manner to the implementation of Canada’s broadcasting policy. Bill C-10 gives the CRTC the tools it needs to put in place rules that create more sustainable sources of funding for Canadian music and stories.

The proposed amendment to Bill C-10 would specify that the CRTC has the authority to require financial contributions from online undertakings that provide social media services and to direct these contributions to purposes such as supporting Canadian creators. Traditional broadcasting undertakings have already been subject to similar obligations for decades. The underlying principle is that services that operate in Canada’s broadcasting system should support Canadian creators, music and storytelling.

Why are you proposing to give the CRTC powers to gather information from social media services?

The collection of information is a crucial component to the proper administration of the Broadcasting Act as well as the supervision of the system as a whole. The information gathering provisions permit the CRTC to have a better understanding as to how online undertakings that provide social media services operate and can best contribute to the stated broadcasting policy objectives.

In order to put in place the appropriate contribution requirements for these services, it will be necessary for the CRTC to be able to gather financial data from these services. Moreover, the information gathering provisions will allow the CRTC to determine if the platform is complying with the rules in place.

Is there a privacy concern with information gathering?

The proposed changes are specifically intended to provide the CRTC with the powers to properly administer the Broadcasting Act. These information gathering provisions would allow the CRTC to obtain relevant financial information from an online undertaking that provides a social media service as well as programming information. But to safeguard privacy, the CRTC cannot request information that could identify an individual audience member.

In a recent interview, you said that prominent YouTube creators will be regulated. How does this correspond with the Government’s latest amendments?

With respect to online undertakings that provide a social media service, Bill C-10 as amended would give the regulator the power to regulate only the following in respect of programs posted by unaffiliated users of that service:

A person, who uses social media will not be considered as a broadcaster merely because they post programs to that service, and they will not have any type of broadcasting regulatory obligation whatsoever as long as they are not affiliated with or acting as the agent of the social media service. Even influencers with millions of subscribers will not be regulated, as long as they aren’t agents of the service or affiliated with the service in the sense described below.

What do you mean by “an affiliate” of a social media service?

Bill C-10 defines “affiliate” in terms of corporate control. Examples include a corporate parent or subsidiary of a social media service.

In speaking about the Bill in a non-technical manner we often refer to “unaffiliated users” as a short-hand that means everyone but for (i) affiliates in the defined sense, (ii) the service itself and (iii) agents of the service.

Bill C-10 differentiates between affiliated and unaffiliated users in order to ensure that the CRTC can distinguish between social media platforms who, as part of their service, engage in activities that are akin to traditional broadcasting (i.e., when they, an affiliate, or their agent post programs to their own service), and ordinary social media users who use the service to express themselves.

Page details

Date modified: