Summary of Debate at second reading – C-11, Online Streaming Act

On this page

• February 16, 2022
• February 28, 2022
• March 29, 2022
• May 5, 2022
• May 11, 2022

February 16, 2022

Pierre Poilièvre, CPC

Comments:

• Having issues with the fact of letting the government regulates what Canadians see and say online.

Sébastien Lemire, BQ

Comments:

• Importance des radiodiffuseurs d’ici.
• Taxation de Netflix.

Amendments:

• Propose d’exclure la partie II de C-11.

Laurel Collins, NDP

Comments :

• Critical about the fact that the government is delaying the implementation of the digital services tax.

John Nater, CPC

Comments:

• Concerned about the exclusions, specifically the criteria about direct or indirect revenue.
• The CRTC must update their approach to the treatment of arts, culture and media to reflect the realities of the third decade of the 21st century.
• Concerned about free speech.
• Raised issues about user-generated content.
• Proposed authorities to be given to the CRTC are unclear and unaccountable. It is concerning that an unaccountable government agency would be enforcing and controlling what people see and do not see on social media site.
• Disappointed that C-13 will not: reduce the current regulatory burden faced by incumbent Canadian broadcasters, nor would it reduce the costs to Canadian broadcasters.
• New 4.2, this exclusion to the exclusion is so broad that the government, through the CRTC, could once again regulate wide swathes of content uploaded to social media. Concerned about the impact that this will have on creators.
• Concept of discoverability, which could be so broad and vague that Canadians would be rightly concerned about what content the CRTC would have prioritized.
• Wants to know what constitutes Canadian content in the digital world.
• The CPC will not be supporting this bill at second recording, we will nonetheless fulfill our role as Her Majesty's loyal opposition in proposing reasonable amendments at committee.

Amendments:

• Are you ready to exclude the exclusion from C-11?
• CRTC part II licence fees should be scrapped.
• Need a definition for Canadian content.

René Villemure, BQ

Comments:

• Se demande si la solution est d’accroitre les pouvoirs du CRTC plutôt que la création d’une agence séparée, dédiée et composée de spécialistes du numérique.
• Se réjouit de voir que plusieurs amendements proposés par le BQ dans le cadre de C-10 se retrouvent dans C-11.
• C'est le devoir du gouvernement canadien de s'assurer que les géants du Web paient leur juste part en taxes et en production de contenus canadiens dans le but de rémunérer les créateurs de contenu.
• Je crois que le projet de loi C-11 est un bon projet de loi, qu'il faut le modifier pour augmenter un peu sa portée et la façon dont on peut lui donner du mordant, et que la création d'une agence dédiée serait appropriée.

Amendments :

• Création d'une agence séparée

Denis Trudel, BQ

Comments:

• S’inquiète de la découvrabilité du contenu francophone sur les grandes plateformes.

Alexandre Boulerice, NDP

Comments:

• Soulève un problème au niveau de l’équité fiscale. On ne parle pas de fiscalité en termes d'imposition dans le projet de loi C-11, mais on parle quand même d'une certaine équité dans les contributions financières pour pouvoir soutenir notre secteur culturel. C'est une petite avancée, mais une avancée significative pour nos artistes, pour nos créateurs, pour nos productions nationales, locales ou régionales.
• Au NPD, nous voyons d'un bon œil ce genre de législation, qui vise à traiter également les gens qui contribuent au financement de la production culturelle québécoise et canadienne et ceux qui n'y contribuent pas en ce moment.
• Le NPD appuie le principe du projet de loi.
• Le nouveau projet de loi semble donc être plus ferme pour ce qui est des vidéos de chat ou de bébé, comme on les appelle généralement, lesquelles ne seront pas assujetties à la réglementation du CRTC. Les utilisateurs et usages personnels en ligne seront donc exclus. Je pense qu'on est plutôt dans une bonne direction.
• Se questionne à savoir comment va-t-on calculer la contribution de YouTube, par exemple, en faisant la distinction entre l'utilisation commerciale et l'utilisation personnelle ou privée du média social. Il faut s'assurer qu'on a un mécanisme pour être capable de juger la valeur de l'utilisation commerciale de TikTok ou de YouTube, par exemple, et exclure l'utilisation privée ou personnelle. Il y a là une clarification à aller chercher, et je pense que cela va être un travail important à faire en comité. Le ministre du Patrimoine canadien va devoir nous expliquer cela.
• Soulève des inquiétudes en lien avec la notion de découvrabilité si le gouvernement n’intervient pas dans les algorithmes des médias sociaux et des diffuseurs en ligne. On m'a répondu que les gens vont avoir une obligation de résultat et qu'ils vont regarder le portrait dans son ensemble. Je n'ai aucune idée comment ils vont faire pour surveiller tout cela, recueillir l'information et être capables de vérifier si les éléments de découvrabilité sont réels, ou si ce ne sont que des vœux pieux et une déclaration d'intention.
• Il y a des choses qui sont intéressantes. Il est question de financement, de production nationale, de découvrabilité et de diversité. Il y a dans le projet de loi des pas dans la bonne direction. Il y a notamment des garanties pour de la production en français.
• Au NPD, nous accueillons très favorablement le fait qu’on mette l’accent sur les productions autochtones et les productions en langues autochtones. Il y a un rattrapage à faire. C’est un point sur lequel le NPD va beaucoup insister au moment d'étudier le projet de loi.
• Aborde la question de souveraineté culturelle. Il faut que nous nous donnions les moyens de protéger les propriétés québécoises et canadiennes de nos capacités de production.
• Là où on passe un peu à côté de la plaque, c’est qu’on ne parle pas du tout de Radio-Canada dans le projet de loi C-11. On aurait pu le faire. Cela aurait pu entrer dans le mandat. On ne parle pas de l’indépendance de son conseil d’administration, on ne parle pas non plus de la place de la publicité à Radio-Canada.
• Il faudra être extrêmement sérieux et solide relativement à l'information, à la transparence des données, aux négociations avec les géants du Web et aux obligations que l'on va imposer. On a souvent vu, le CRTC être un peu mou, un peu faible et un peu complaisant avec des grandes compagnies.

Amendments:

• Points à discuter en comité :
• Comment séparer l’utilisation personnelle et commerciale des usagers sur les médias sociaux
• Comment vérifier les obligations de de découvrabilité
• Productions autochtones
• Mandat de Radio-Canada

February 28, 2022

Ziad Aboultaif, CPC

Comments:

• Bill C-11 does nothing to provide Canadian listeners with the best programs. If anything, it discourages creative programming.
• C-11 doesn’t bring new ideas and doesn’t attempt to properly define what it means by "broadcasting".
• C-11 is not about broadcasting it is about extending the reach of the government in an attempt to control the Internet and free speech. There is no doubt, the intent is to limit the choices of Canadians.
• Canadian social media stars do not want the government telling them what to do when it comes to their work as Canadians. Raised concerns about the exemption for user-generated content.
• The government is upset because they have lost control. They find that offensive and they want to regulate the Internet to somehow bring the internet under their control as broadcasting used to work.
• Instead of attempting to regulate the entire Internet, the Liberal could concentrate on large streaming services, perhaps those with half a million subscribers or more.
• Forcing streamers from outside Canada to contribute to the various Canadian talent development funds, for example, is full of risks. Fairness would say that if the government forces these entities to contribute to the fund, then it must also allow them to access the money that the fund is generating. Rather than creating a level playing field, such a move would harm Canada's traditional broadcasters.
• Less control is needed and less interference. Bill C-11 should not pass.

Amendments:

• Points to be discussed at Committee:
• Better definition of "broadcasting"
• Attempt to control the Internet and free speech
• Exemption for user-generated content

Rick Perkins, CPC

Comments:

• The good about C-11: the requirements to support the increased production of Canadian content by online service providers such as Netflix; the greater support of indigenous programming; the increased support and focus on independent production of broadcasting material; and the protection of the intellectual property of Internet service provider algorithms.
• The bad about C-11: clauses 4.1 and 4.2 We are hopeful that the government will be opened to amending it to deal with our primary area of concern, the regulation of speech on the Internet. We are asked to trust the government in its commitment not to regulate individual freedom of speech. This is asking too much of Canadians. Without knowing or seeing the regulation instruments, this is a broad power to censor the individual. There are no legislated guarantees in the bill to prevent them from being censored.
• We should be especially concerned when the government seeks to legislate on what Canadians can and cannot say if it generates any revenue at all.
• What does “indirectly” mean?
• Bill C-11 would give new, undefined power over the Internet to the CRTC, which was built to balance the needs of competing broadcasters, not those of citizens.

Amendments:

• Amend clauses 4.1 and 4.2 for not giving the government the ability to censor individuals on the Internet.
• Definition for "indirectly"

Mark Gerretsen, LPC

Comments :

• Need to clarity at committee the interpretation of clause 4.2(2) (a), (b) and (C) whether if is "and/or" or any one of those things.

Amendments:

• Clarification needed for clause 4.2

Matthew Green, NDP

Comments:

• How are we going to ensure that the individual creators who are Canadians and who are creating content are adequately compensated by large platforms, and not create a situation where the fund just goes to the multinational conglomerates that have completely captured our traditional media.

Amendments:

• Need explanation on how the government will do the oversight.

Amendments:

• Are you ready to exclude the exclusion from C-11?
• CRTC part II licence fees should be scrapped.
• Need a definition for Canadian content.

Philip Lawrence, CPC

Comments:

• Would it not have been a much better way to just cover the area we want to cover, as opposed to giving this giant scope to the government and then exempting what it chooses to exempt?

Amendments:

• Need explanation as why a large scope is proposed.

René Villemure, BQ

Comments:

• J'aimerais savoir comment le gouvernement va s'assurer dans le projet de loi C-11 que ce ne seront pas les géants du Web qui décideront ce qui constitue une « juste part ».

Amendments:

• Quels outils seront utilisés pour déterminer la juste part.

Lori Idlout, NDP

Comments:

• How the amendments in Bill C-11 can better support Inuit, first nations and Métis cultural creators?

Jake Stewart

Comments:

• The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is at stake.
• C-11 would allow political appointees to determine what we see and what we say on the Internet.

Leslyn Lewis, CPC

Comments:

• C-11 would open the doors to government control of Canadians through their Internet activity and speech.
• Gives the CRTC the power to control what Canadians can and cannot access and view.
• The bill is an attack on free speech.
• The government will use algorithms, pick winners and losers and decide which content should show up above others.

Amendments:

• Clear definition of what constitutes Canadian content

Elizabeth May, PV

Comments:

• There is a lack of clear support for smaller producers and smaller creators.

Arnold Viersen, CPC

Comments:

• Improvement: user-generated content is excluded.
• The Bill is an assault on freedom.
• The government will be able to dictate the outcome of the algorithms.
• The regulations for Canadian content will effectively manipulate the algorithm.

Amendments:

• Level the playing field and make it easier for Canadian content generators to get their content on the airways

Kevin Waugh, CPC

Comments:

• Very concerned about the CRTC being tasked with administering the act.
• The CRTC is already stretched to its limits with the broadcasting and telecom situation in this country. If the CRTC lacks the capacity to carry out the current mandate effectively, how can it be expected to take on the Internet?
• Hopes that voices in Nunavut will be heard correctly

Amendments:

• Need to define Canadian content production and media fund contributions by digital broadcasters
• Clearly defined parameters on which aspects of the Internet would be regulated and to what extent.

Martin Champoux, BQ

Comments:

• L'opinion publique est infiniment plus facile à manipuler à l’ère des médias.
• Faire taire ceux qui ne livrent pas le discours que l'on souhaite entendre n'est pas toujours la solution.
• Importance d'un projet de loi sur la radiodiffusion, qui tient compte de la réalité d'aujourd'hui.
• Nos médias d'information se font carrément manger le profit et manger leur portion de la tarte publicitaire par ces géants.
• Nos diffuseurs qui doivent se soumettre à une réglementation lourde, de plus en plus coûteuse, contre-productive et résolument inéquitable étant donné la transformation de l'industrie.
• Mettre en valeur les communautés culturelles en situation minoritaire, ainsi que les cultures autochtones.

March 29, 2022

Marin Champoux, BQ

Comments:

• Les utilisateurs privés des plateformes comme YouTube, Tik Tok, et ainsi de suite. Or dans le projet de loi C-11, tel qu'écrit actuellement, il y a des inquiétudes qui nous proviennent justement de ces créateurs.

Rachael Thomas, CPC

Comments:

• The government definition of cultural content.
• Creators, right off the top of their revenue, will have to pay 30% into an art fund
• The use of algorithms to make some content accessible and other content not
• The CRTC will define who is in and who is out
• It completely ignores the global reach of Canada's digital success stories in favour of an antiquated regionalized broadcast model
• Definition of Canadian content. Based of the definition only traditional media.
• Bill C-11 is a direct attack on digital first creators.
• Anything that uses music will be captured, and therefore the CRTC regulations will be applied to those things. TikTok videos, by their very nature, use music. That is how they are created and that is how they are structured. If a TikTok video posted by a digital-first creator has music, then the regulations of the CRTC would be applied to it.

Cheryl Gallant, CPC

Comments:

• The threat to freedom of expression with this bill comes from the impact it would have on smaller, less popular minority expressions
• The Prime Minister wants to tax Canadian and foreign artists not covered by the current Broadcasting Act. He wants to tax them and give that money to the powerful media and cultural lobbies.
• It places limits on Canadians' freedom to broadcast their expression.
• We cannot pass legislation that limits or restricts Canadians' access to artistic expression
• On ne demande pas à une libraire de mettre de l’avant les livres canadiens. On ne peut pas demander à internet de faire la même chose. C’est contre les libertés.
• Vote contre C-11.
• This legislation is regressive protectionism. It looks backward and inward.
• The focus of the censorship is to reduce the ability of minority cultural groups to speak on the Internet

Louise Chabot, BQ

Comments:

• Je ne comprends pas que l'on s'oppose au présent projet de loi.
• La Loi sur le Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes date d'une autre époque et manque de mordant.
• De combien de temps le CRTC aura-t-il besoin pour mettre les changements en application

Amendments:

• Are you ready to exclude the exclusion from C-11?
• CRTC part II licence fees should be scrapped.
• Need a definition for Canadian content.

Charlie Angus, NDP

Comments:

• We need to be looking at the need for Canada's legislation to actually address the right of artists to get paid in the digital realm. For too long in Canada we sort of pat our artists on the head.
• Il faut mettre en place un seuil de responsabilisation.
• We need to ensure that these tech giants, which are making unprecedented amounts of money, actually put some money back into the system so that we can create an arts sector that can compete worldwide.

Brad Vis, CPC

Comments :

• 9.1 proportion
• The heavy tone of all the regulations in this bill, in my opinion, is more of government oversight rather than cultural and language promotion.
• Too complex for what we try to achieve.
• This legislation risks causing the same reality we witnessed with cable TV, but applied to the Internet, including fewer choices, and fewer independent actors and creators. At the end of the day, is this just another attempt by the government to prop up failing legacy media
• Impossible de penser que le gouvernement pourrait réguler le web.
• this bill would leave much of those decision-making powers up to the CRTC
• Give power to the regulator to choose winner and loser.
• Ce projet de loi tente, au moyen d'un langage très alambiqué, de faire entrer dans une catégorie tout contenu canadien diffusé sur Internet en le considérant comme de la radiodiffusion

Gerald Soroka, CPC

Comments:

• This bill would give the CRTC enormous powers by putting the commission in charge of regulating streaming services and video sharing sites as well as traditional broadcasters.
• Diverses lacunes concernant les pouvoirs conférés au CRTC auprès des créateurs essentiellement numériques. Comme les balises sont trop floues, ces pouvoirs peuvent viser n'importe quel contenu diffusé en ligne.
• Tout le contenu de tiktok sera assujetti.

Melissa Lantsman, CPC

Comments:

• Allow the CRTC to regulate any content that generates revenue, directly or indirectly. That means virtually all content would still be regulated, including independent content creators earning a living from platforms such as YouTube, Spotify or even TikTok
• The online streaming act would skew the algorithm our online platforms use to match them with viewers' personal preferences.
• This act would bestow on the CRTC the ability to determine its own jurisdiction without constraint
• Broadcasting Act was not meant to regulate the Internet

Corey Tochor, CPC

Comments:

• An Internet tsar that will tell us what we can and cannot post and what content we can watch

Denis Trudel, BQ

Comments:

• Il y a là un danger, dont ne traite pas ce projet de loi. Le fait que ces grandes plateformes mondiales absorbent la moitié de l'ensemble des dépenses publicitaires représente un danger pour la démocratie et les médias indépendants.

May 5, 2022

Alexandre Boulerice, NDP

Comments:

• Les géants du Web participent à l’écosystème de financement et de production culturelle, notamment francophone
• Problème au chapitre de la découvrabilité des œuvres

Sébastien Lemire, BQ

Comments:

• Le CRTC est la cible de plusieurs critiques à cause du manque de transparence sur son processus décisionnel. Il faudra rendre disponibles au grand public les lignes directrices que le gouvernement transmettra au CRTC pour suivre les nouveaux diffuseurs étrangers.
• Garantir la présence de Québécois qui connaissent bien la culture québécoise et l'industrie traditionnelle de l'information du Québec
• L'examen de la refonte de la Loi sur la radiodiffusion devra être fait de façon particulière pour le Québec

Charlie Angus, NDP

Comments:

• Making sure that the tech giants properly pay their share is a fundamental issue, because the tech giants are not just letting people make their own choices as they claim

Michelle Rempel Garner, CPC

Comments:

• Proposed the following amendment: That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “that” and substituting the following: “Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, be not now read a second time, but that the order be discharged, the bill withdrawn and the subject matter thereof referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.”
• The lobbyists for legacy media are all over this, as are the lobbyists for streaming services. They each want Parliament to do what is in their best interests. It is our job to come up with what is in the best interests of the Canadian public, and the bill does not get it done
• The mainstream media lobbyists in ensuring that a new, emerging, disruptive source of content provision is brought into their old paradigm of operating so that they do not have to compete. At best, if the bill passes, all it does is really kind of sustain their profits in an old operating model for a few more years.
• We are basically saying that we should be propping up the old models of the gatekeepers of the past several decades through restrictive regulation that does not even come close to the universe that we are all operating in.
• Concerned about the overreach of the CRTC
• We do have to have a conversation in Parliament about the broader principle of algorithmic transparency

Gérard Deltell, PCC

Comments:

• Il faut trouver l'équilibre entre les médias traditionnels et les nouveaux médias. Il faut permettre aux créateurs d'émerger dans le monde actuel tel qu'il est.
• Ce projet de loi n'estime pas assez correctement l'équilibre que l'on doit retrouver et le paiement équitable qui doit être fait pour tous les producteurs et pour tous les diffuseurs, sans nécessairement entraver la qualité et l'initiative des créateurs, que ce soit sur YouTube ou ailleurs.

Philip Lawrence, PCC

Comments:

• Je crains que, aquand nous changerons les bases législatives, qui permettent la liberté d’expression, nous puissions faire plus de mal que de bien, non seulement sur le plan de la liberté d’expression, mais aussi sur celui de la production de contenu canadien.
• La réglementation du contenu contrôlé par les utilisateurs aura certainement un effet d’inhibition sur la quantité de contenu produit.
• Quand on laisse la bureaucratie décider, la reddition de comptes fait défaut au gouvernement.
• Many terms that it simply does not define. “User-generated content” is not defined, and “social media” is not defined, yet these words are used repeatedly. One of the troubling sections is the user-generated content. It was excluded and then brought back in, and that is troublesome.
• Lack of definition and clarity on what Canadian content is and on the regulation of user-generated content, which is very challenging.

Amendments:

• Proposed subsection 4.1(2) creates an exception to an exception for user-generated content when the user makes some type of profit or dollars from it. That is absolutely brought in and is clear.

Matt Jeneroux, PCC

Comments:

• In Bill C-11 the government has included an exclusion on user-generated content on social media. However, upon reading the bill, there seems to be an exclusion to this exclusion. What does that mean? It means that once again, the government, through the CRTC, could regulate user-generated content

Brad Redekopp, CPC

Comments:

• The major criticism of Bill C-10 surrounded the issue of user-generated content: those pictures, audio files and videos that many of us share daily on social media. There was a clause in Bill C-10 that exempted this from regulation, but it was removed at committee, which created a firestorm of concern. At the very least, I had expected the government to address this issue. Instead, it added an exception to allow the CRTC to regulate user content.
• User-generated content is not subject to regulation unless the CRTC decides it is subject to regulation, in which case it is subject to regulation. The vague language in this bill opens the door for the government to abuse its power and regulate user-generated content.

Jeremy Patzer, CPC

Comments:

• Proposed a subamendment to the motion of Michelle Rempel Garner: “and that the committee report back no later than 10 sitting days following the adoption of this motion.”

Amendment:

• Section 4.1 is back in Bill C-11, but it is now accompanied by section 4.1(2), which allows for an exemption on the previous exception. This creates a loophole for the CRTC to regulate any content that either directly or indirectly generates revenue. In other words, the CRTC can regulate nearly anything on the Internet.

May 11, 2022

Damien Kurek, CPC

Comments:

• The bill needs to be clear on the terms of reference defining Canadian content provided to the CRTC

John Nater, CPC

Comments:

• Is the CRTC the appropriately neutral entity to regulate the internet?

Raquel Dancho, CPC

Comments:

• Canadian content creators are an increasingly important part of our society, and C-11 will subject this user-generated content to regulation (also granting new power to Cabinet to influence CRTC regulations)
• 4.2 provides exception to the exception that would allow the CRTC to regulate user-generated content
• Proposed subsection 7 allows Liberal cabinet to dictate policies for CRTC concerning online content
• This bill, along with its corollary C-18, will harm online freedom of expression

Warren Steinley, CPC

Comments:

• 4.1(2) provides exception to the exception, essentially allowing for CRTC regulation of user-generated content according to three criteria, but bill does not specify how CRTC should weigh these three factors

Dan Albas, CPC

Comments:

• Allowing government to regulate online content through policy directive to CRTC is an indirect violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, BQ

Comments:

• Comment l’importance du contenu francophone et sa découvrabilité est reconnue dans ce projet de loi?

John Nater, CPC

Comments :

• How would the Minister of Canadian Heritage direct the CRTC to implement discoverability through C-11?

Mike Morrice, GPC

Comments :

• Section 4.2.1 is of concern, how is user-generated content truly excepted from this bill?

Lori Idlout, NDP

Comments :

• Bill does not include timeline for web giants to pay their fair share, or transparency on how profits will be shared with the public

Elizabeth May, GPC

Comments :

• Will C-11 deliver on promises to increase broadcast indigenous content?
• Community broadcasting element needs work: broadcasters working with community content want that definition fixed as “fully community run”
• Concerned about overreach criticisms, because CRTC is a very powerful body that has decision-making authority that can only be overturned by a Cabinet decision
• Online content and social media – approach should be to regulate the system, not the speech; CRTC should not be itself determining what constitutes hate speech, but social media enterprises themselves must be fully transparent and accountable

Amendments:

• Will be working with committee as a non-member of committee to get some amendments protecting community-run content

Richard Bragdon, CPC

Comments :

• Concerns about government overreach in regulating content, stifling free expression
• Content available to Canadians should be as diverse as possible

Cheryl Gallant, CPC

Comments :

• Concern with the definition of “broadcaster,” which could expand to include the people who are broadcasting their own news stations (such as Canada Proud and True North)

Don Davies, NDP

Comments :

• Section 4.2 allows the CRTC to create regulations regarding content uploaded to social media services, which are considered as programs considered according to three factors (including revenue generation)
• The bill does not tell the CRTC how to weigh these factors, and revenue-generating content uploaded to platforms such as TikTok could be defined as programs to be regulated by the CRTC

Dan Mazier, CPC

Comments :

• CRTC capacity is too limited to effectively monitor and regulate Internet content
• Lack of transparency around the policy directives for the CRTC, which the Liberals have promised to release only after C-11 becomes law

Peter Julian, NDP

Comments :

• How will this bill address the growing inequality of profit between Canadian artists and web giants?

John Brassard, CPC

Comments :

• Concerned that the policy directive to the CRTC will be released after the bill is passed

Cathay Wagantall, CPC

Comments :

• C-11 would give sweeping power to the CRTC to regulate the Internet, with no clear guidelines for how that power will be used
• There is no mechanism for accountability from the CRTC to the public

Glen Motz, CPC

Comments :

• The exception in 4.2 indicates that users would not be regulated like broadcasters, but their content could be treated as a program subject to CRTC regulation
• Key terms like “social media” remain undefined in this bill

Marty Morantz, CPC

Comments :

• 4.2(2) allows any content that generates revenue to be regulated, allowing the CRTC wide latitude to regulate social media
• Section 7 allows Cabinet to direct the CRTC on regulation of online platforms, thereby shifting power from an independent authority to the political sphere

Bob Zimmer, CPC

Comments :

• Quoting Andrew Coyne, the bill allows for wide regulation of not only the Internet but also other services such as podcasts, audiobooks, and news channels, even those based outside of Canada