Sommaires de l'étude du projet de loi par le comité (à ce jour)

Sur cette page

• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 2 mai 2023, 9h-11h
• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 3 mai 2023, 18h45-20h45
• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 9 mai 2023, 9h-11h
• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 10 mai 2023, 18h45-20h45
• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 30 mai 2023, 9h-11h
• Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 31 mars 2023, 18h45

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 2 mai 2023, 9h-11h

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Équipe des Affaires parlementaires, Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet

Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la réunion

Projet C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

9h – 10 h

Institut Macdonald-Laurier

• Peter Menzies, chercheur principal

Les AMIS

• Marla Boltman, directrice générale
• Sarah Andrews, directrice, relations gouvernementales et avec les médias

À titre personnel

• Michael Geist, Chaire de recherche du Canada en droit d’Internet et du commerce électronique, Faculté de droit, Université d’Ottawa

10 h – 11 h

Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes

• Scott Shortliffe, directeur exécutif, Radiodiffusion
• Daniel Pye, directeur, Rémunération des médias d’information
• Adam Balkovec, conseiller juridique, Secteur juridique

Sommaire

Institut Macdonald-Laurier: Peter Menzies;

• Constitutional legitimacy problem
• Lack of evidence to support its economic rational
• C-18 does not help neither ones who want to survive or the ones who want to enter
• The ones who need more will receive the least from C-18
• Amend C-18 to apply only company who primary business is news.

Les AMIS : Marla Boltman et Sarah Andrews;

• Ensure Canadian news media are properly compensated for their work
• Public disclosure mandatory
• Plus grande transparence exigée par Radio-Canada
• Revenus doivent être réinvestis dans les nouvelles locales
• Radio-Canada demeure l’une des sources de nouvelles les plus consultées
• Besoin de plus de transparence dans C-18

À titre personnel : Michael Geist, Chaire de recherche du Canada en droit d’Internet et du commerce électronique, Faculté de droit, Université d’Ottawa;

• C-18 likely to cause more harm than good if not amended
• Fundamentally about mandated payment for links (Section 2 sub 2 should be removed)
• Funds based on the Canadian media fund mandated contribution based on adds revenues

Questions

Paula Simons (GSI)

• Can you tell me how you think C-18 may be in violation of the burn convention?
  • Geist : You have a positive right. It is an obligation.
• What does relevant regulation look like?
  • They should not be included at all. I don’t think it is appropriate. Encourage access.
• What remedies might the government have that we could take?
  • We are part of a trade agreement. Google and Facebook are slightly different in this context. Unconvinced that a law can force someone to index.

Julie Miville Dechêne (GSI)

• La programmation de CBC doit répondre à 3 critères. SI on manque d’argent est-ce que ce n’est pas parce que nous dépensons trop d’argent en production ? Il y a-t-il un rééquilibrage à faire ?
  • Andrews : Les AMIS demandent une révision du mandant de Radio-Canada pour recentrer son mandat public.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Préoccupé par la question de la transparence. Avez-vous réfléchi à l’idée de modifier l’article 86 qui pourrait être transparent sur le contenu des ententes ?
  • Boltman : We have thought about this. The auditor is helpful but only annual.
• Concernant l’article 32.1, il y a un élément manquant. Qu’est-ce qui en est d’un accord qui est pris par une entreprise de média seul ?
  • All agreements should be filled.

Peter Harder (GPS)

• Is this simply a dispute between the professor and the government with respect to the policy approach? Are you raising concerns to reinforce your policy preference?
  • Geist: Australia does not reference the limitations and exceptions. Concerns about press independence. CRTC is overly involved in this.
• How do you look at what the UK is complementing. How do you judge their approach?
  • They are experiencing the same issues. We have an opportunity here to put something that can be more effective.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• This bill trouble me, it will restrict our access to formations. Are you concerned about the reduction of exchange of ideas?
  • Geist: Concerned about the outcome of the bill.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• You said that you felt that only company whose primary business is news should be included, what does that mean?
  • Menzies: The technical shift has undermined the platform who supported news.
• How can we remove CBC?
  • Geist: If you don’t provide a rational to CBC. Ensure that many Canadians have access to information.
  • Menzies: The problem is that CBC is running newspapers out of business.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• What is the role of the public broadcaster in terms of news?
  • Andrews: CBC vital source of information. The CBC should be part of the C-18 framework.
  • Menzies: CBC should be a public broadcaster and not compete with others.
• Regarding the industry news policy, can you give me more thoughts about it?
  • It has to be multitasked. Value independent and innovation needed and trust.

Fabian Manning (C)

• How do you see C-18. How do we strengthen trust in Canadian news?
  • Menzies: Primary commodities. Without trust there is no hope.

Leo Housakos (C)

• We are encouraging medias to compete. How can a government give so much to a news outlet?
  • Andrews : CBC remains one of the top consulted media online.

Sommaire

Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes : Scott Shortliffe, Daniel Pye et Adam Balkovec

• Accords devront respecter l’indépendance journalistique
• Grande expérience de supervision des processus de résolutions des conflits, évaluation des plaintes

Questions

Julie Miville Dechêne (GSI)

• À quel moment allez-vous être prêt à faire des arbitrages ? En tout 650 médias ont été identifiés. Vous n’avez pas d’expérience en arbitrage.
  • Avant l’arbitrage nous devons avoir des audiences publiques pour fixer les définitions.
  • Normalement le processus de consultations/règlement entre 1 et 2 ans.
• Pouvez-vous nous proposer quelque chose qui serait plus facile ?

Paula Simons (GSI)

• About section 27.1.4, how do you square it?
  • Make sure it is a viable journalistic organization. Our understanding is there should be clear definition, and neutral in its application.
• Meta and Google have indicated their displeasure with this bill. How will you conduct this algorithmic analysis? How will it be transparent?
  • Be on to the platform to demonstrate to the public.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Avez-vous des craintes à l’effet du nombre de plaintes que pourrait recevoir le CRTC au sujet de la discrimination (article 51) ?
  • Difficile de prévoir.
• Concernant l’article 6, est-ce que les critères devraient être plus précis ?

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• The CRTC does not have the capability to support this bill so he will need to start contracting. Have you started the process?
  • We are not expecting any contracting about C-18.
• No additional hiring?
  • There has been addition hiring. To set up C-18.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• I would expect there should be some contact between the CRTC and minister office to make sure you can do what they expect you to do.
  • We never deal with MINO, we deal with PCH staff. We have never spoken to MINO or MPs.
• About section 93, seems that it would be quite a while before it goes into effect fully.
  • They could start immediately.
• How regulations are made. Do you put out draft regulation for feedback?

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• Can you explain what throttling means?
  • Telecom context.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• What do you need to be successful here (team resource)?
  • We have the right model right now. The team is there we have a Worland in place. We have the funding in place to execute our mandate.
• Do you have any opinion on C-18 vs. other countries models?
  • This bill is much more transparent. Public reporting provision.

Leo Housakos (C)

• A réitéré que l’invitation initiale au CRTC était dirigée vers la présidente elle-même et que le comité aurait souhaité l’entendre.

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 le mercredi 3 mai 2023.

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 3 mai 2023, 18h45-20h45

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet

Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la réunion

Projet C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

18h45 – 19h45

Google Canada

• Richard Gingras, vice-président, Nouvelles
• Jason J. Kee, conseiller en affaires gouvernementales et en politique publique

19h45 – 20h45

Meta Platforms, inc.

• Rachel Curran, responsable des politiques publiques, Meta, Canada
• Marc Dinsdale, responsable des partenariats avec les médias, Meta, Canada

Sommaire

Google Canada : Richard Gingras et Jason J. Kee

• C-18 will not encourage the continuation or expansion of publisher licenses agreement
• May jeopardize current product
• Clarify eligibility criteria
• Extreme level of uncertainty of C-18

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• L’un des problèmes de C-18 est le flou qui entoure la valeur que les éditeurs de presse doivent négocier. Les plateformes font référence à la valeur commerciale. Comment avez-vous remédié à cela en Australie ? Que proposez-vous ici ?
  • In Australia the bargaining code was a piece of legislation quite unworkable. The government gave us a clear understanding on how we can be exempt. That bill does not apply to us in Australia. The Bill creates a disincentive for us.
• Comment calculez-vous la valeur du contenu journalistique sur Google ?
  • We have been transparent. We are willing to do more than is provided to us.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• Given the rise of AI, would that not have been prejudiced if you blocked all Canadians from seeing Canadian editions links?
  • I don’t recall a statement that we would pull out Canada, but we would have to reconsider how we use link.
• How could that possibility work for you in an AI model?
  • We are in a very early staged of the development of these technology. We are seeking a constructive path forward.
• Are you calling on the government to create more policing on what is creating?
  • No, it is not our intention. The underlying precept of the bill was to drive support to the local community. The definition of local news is going far behind.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Pouvez-vous nous donner quelques exemples d’ententes conclues avec des médias d’ici ?
  • Range from training programs to innovation programs. We seek to make our program available. We want to be as broad as diverse.
• Quel est votre enjeu avec l’article 11 ? Qu’est-ce qui vous empêche de conclure des ententes volontaires aujourd’hui ?
  • We feel that the exemptions are quite vague, and how it can be a good path. The purpose is too insensitive. We want clarity on how much is enough.
• Vous dites que le CRTC n’a pas d’expérience dans les nouvelles. Pourquoi n’avez-vous pas pris davantage d’initiative d’avoir des ententes volontaires ?
  • We engage with news publishers. We have been engaging with publishers in Canada for some time. Without a clear sense of a path of exemption, it’s difficult to move forward.

Jim Quinn (GSC)

• What comments do you have about the values?
  • Misunderstanding around what happened to the advertising with the rise of the Internet. The Internet disrupted the advertising.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• You agree that you are prepared to help media. What would you rather see instead of this bill?
  • We feel that the role of a search engine is very important. We would rather see an approach such as a fund where the source of the revenue would not be tied to companies.
• In terms of fund, who would it be governed by?
  • Canadian journalism tax credit. There are many ways to do that.
• Would you still not be making deals with news businesses?
  • It does guide us to private news business. We need to reinforce trust.
• How many deals do you have in place, and do they cover indigenous media?
  • I don’t have the number in mind.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• On the eligibility, do you have any idea of who was eligible? Have you asked those questions do you get the sense they know who they think provides news in this country?
  • We have asked those questions. Nobody has right now clear answers to those questions. It is tricky.
• I fear that with this bill there will be less access to a variety of sources. It will restrict that free exchange of ideas.
  • These questions are very sensitive.
• Do you have the sense that the government understands your business model and your concerns? I don’t want the government, or you to be involved.
  • We have made several efforts to raise our concerns.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• If the bill passes as is, what would you do?
  • We don’t know yet. There is still a degree of uncertainty. Do we need to assess how we use links?
• Regarding the Australian right now are you satisfied with the status quo?
  • We are satisfied, we feel we have addressed the interest of the government and the industry. Australian model as created a precedent.

Leo Housakos (C)

• What are the benefits of standards commercial arbitration?
  • Form where 2 parties put their final offer on the table. It’s well established brings the parties closer. Benefit of being flexible.
• What would be a better approach if we want to achieve more diversified news?
  • An approach where the criteria were more precise. We see an unfortunate lost of trust in medias.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• Section 51, you have a concern about it. Last year Google was fined for using his powerful dominance. This section set up a safe mechanism.
  • Profound effect in us engaging in rankings.
• Transparency about ranking, how Canadians know about how Google is doing it?
  • We are transparent about it.

Sommaire

Meta Platforms, inc.: Rachel Curran et Marc Dinsdale

• Technological changes will continue to challenge business models
• Frameworks like C-18 are based on a false premise
• Our tools and apps are good for the news
• More than 90% are links posted by publishers
• The legislation ignores the reality of how the platform works, we won’t have other choice than ending news ability if bill pass as it is

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Vous dites que vous n’allez pas vous conformer à cette loi. Bluffez-vous encore comme en Australie ? Pourquoi devrions-nous vous croire maintenant ?
  • We are not designated under the legislation in Australia. We have reached a compromise. All of that actually happen in Canada without legislation.
• How many deals have you concluded and with what kind of media? Why are you saying that you are not paying for the value of news?
  • Number of news programs over 3 years.

René Cormier (GSI)

• J’aimerais comprendre les ententes que vous passez. Quel chiffre pouvez-vous nous donner sur le montant d’argent fait sur les ententes et l’argent que font les médias avec les ententes ?
  • Foundation of value of the free marketing of more than $230 million a year.
• Quel est l’impact monétaire sur vous ? Si vous n’avez plus d’ententes, combien d’argent perdriez-vous ?
  • People don’t go on Facebook for news they go on Facebook to connect with others.
• Expliquez-nous quel est le principal enjeu du projet de loi C-18?
  • We are being asked to compensate publishers for material that they voluntary place on our platform because they gain a certain benefit of doing so.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• You said people want to see video. There is a lot of videos being shared on Facebook. You would like to scope out all audio and visual content from the bill as it is regulated under the broadcasting act. But it as nothing to do with the compensation. Can you explain what is your rational to exclude this?
  • Audio and visual content posted by broadcasters should be scoped out.
• I don’t accept the premise of the bill, but I don’t understand why we would not include the audio and visual content.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• Even if news are not a big part of your products, you are still willing to support it, why?
  • We want to be a platform where there is a sharing of content. We think it is now equitable.

Fabian Manning (C)

• Are you telling us that medias such as Global News, Toronto Strat, that would post content on their page, this bill will make Facebook pay for that?
  • It is right. We would be forced to compensate them for their posts.
• What would be the result for you?
  • Unknown of liability. Volume that we don’t control. We can’t control how much they post, how much we pay for that material. Uncertainty around the framework.

Leo Housakos (C)

• Would Facebook prevent news outlets from posting links is this legislation passes and your force to pay for those links?
  • Yes, we have made that decision. We will prevent the sharing of news links.
• Big impact on journalism.
  • We are providing a lot to these industries.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• You have operated deals in Australia, did you make deals with Mr. Murdoch and is massive company there?
  • The Australian legislation contains a number of differences of the Canadian model that allowed us to reach short-term agreement. We are not sure how long that agreement will last.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• You said that if you stop carrying links to Canadian news you have nothing to lose?
  • That is correct, yes.
• What should the political system do?
  • It is important for parliamentarians to look at it. We should look at the framework. Other models would be easier for us to support.
• Who would set the framework? Would it be the corporation?
  • Important role for policy-makers, important role for government to play in supporting industries. It deserves government support.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• You do keep data on who’s clicking on news, that data gives you an advantage in terms of who you are going to target your ads. I don’t understand how news does not have an economic value.
  • It is such a small part of the experience that it is highly substitutable, and it would not affect our business.

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Regarding the fact that news have no commercial value to you, can we have figures on that?

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 le mardi 9 mai.

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 9 mai 2023, 9h-11h

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Équipe des Affaires parlementaires, Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet

Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la réunion

Projet C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

9 h – 10 h

Conseil national de la presse et des médias ethniques du Canada

• Thomas S. Saras, président et chef de la direction

Conseil national des musulmans canadiens

• Karine Devost, avocate-conseil principale
• Rizwan Mohammad, agent de plaidoyer

Consortium des médias communautaires de langues officielles en situation minoritaire

• Linda Lauzon, directrice générale, Réseau-Presse

10 h – 11 h

The Western Standard

• Derek Fildebrandt, éditeur, président, directeur général

Alberta Weekly Newspapers Association

• Evan Jamison, président
• Dennis Merrell, directeur général

Coalition des magazines du Canada

• Nicolas Lapierre, membre de l’Association des éditeurs de magazines québécois
• Kim Coles, membre de Magazines Canada
• Nicole Doucet, consultante

Sommaire

Thomas S. Saras, président et chef de la direction Conseil national de la presse et des médias ethniques du Canada

• Ethnic press is dying
• Steps to make sure free journalism
• If we want free journalism, we have to pay for it
• Asking to vote in favor of C-18, make a difference in the vitality of journalism

Karine Devost, avocate-conseil principale et Rizwan Mohammad, agent de plaidoyer Conseil national des musulmans canadiens

• Urging the government to address online hate
• Amend C-18 to make sure that news business that promotes hate are not eligible to be funded by big tech companies
• If Major news businesses are funded by big tech giants, it will lead to further division, more discriminatory
• Eligibility criteria in the bill should be clarified
• Code of ethics which would apply evenly to all news businesses
• Need to have a complaint procedure if the code of ethics is being violated

Linda Lauzon, directrice générale, Réseau-Presse Consortium des médias communautaires de langues officielles en situation minoritaire

• Les médias locaux n’ont jamais eu accès a une masse critique d’annonceurs locaux
• La publicité gouvernement s’est effritée dans les médias locaux
• L’achalandage sur la plateforme numérique n’a jamais été fort
• Amendement pour ajouter à l’article 11 la reconnaissance explicite des médias issus des CLOSM
• Reconnaitre l’existence des pigistes à l’article 27

Questions

Leo Housakos (C)

• I oppose the Bill, because I don’t think it meets its target. The vast majority of the funding will go to the tech giant. How much the advertising pie is actually going to local medias?
  • Saras : We have a problem for years now with the government on the advertising site. The ethnic publishers only received $1.6 million.
  • Lauzon : Projet de loi fait pour les grands médias. Le processus proposé n’est pas accessible aux petits médias.

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Concernant la question du discours haineux peut être traitée par les tribunaux. J’aimerais vous entendre sur la délicatesse de cette liberté de presse et la façon de s’attaquer aux discours haineux.
  • Mohammad : We support a free press. Our amendment is not to be met to undermine that. We want fairness and consistency.

René Cormier (GSI)

• J’ai cru entendre que certains médias avaient conclu des ententes avec Google. Pourriez-vous nous donner un aperçu de cela ?
  • Lauzon : Cela s’est passé par notre intermédiaire. L’Acadie Nouvelles l’a fait comme elle a plus de moyens. Beaucoup de ressources, c’est plus facile de mettre en œuvre des recommandations. Du côté de La Liberté, il y a eu une entente de 100 000 $. Nous avons fait une entente de 172 000 USD au bénéfice de tous.
• À l’article 11 vous dites que les CLOSM doivent être cités, que proposez-vous ?
  • Les médias des CLOSM sont reconnus par la LLO. Nous voulons la même reconnaissance dans cette loi et le montre explicitement.
• Dans l’article 27 vous parlez des pigistes. Pouvez-vous nous expliquer le modèle d’affaire?
  • 65 % des journalistes qui travaillent dans le réseau actuellement sont pigistes.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• If you don’t see the CRTC as the body who regulates C-18. Who would you see?
  • Mohammad: The current approach to having the media to regulate themselves is not a great idea. It led to targeting minorities. There is an opportunity to have a fair code of ethics.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• You mentioned JDM, are you saying that they should not get funding?
  • Mohammad: JDM should be available for funding if they follow the code of ethics.
• So, they would pass the bar to get the funding?
  • If the code is breached, there is a clarification on what should be done.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• If you’re getting any kind of support from the web corporation or from government, does that reduce your independence?
  • Saras : I don’t think so. We are an official agency. We are holding money from the government for 2 projects.
• If you get funding from them does that affect your independence to criticize the government?
  • I don’t criticize the government. They did a good job in the past 2 years. We explained to them that the industry is going down.
• Vous dites que la désignation de 2 membres du personnel serait problématique. Pensez-vous qu’il est nécessaire d’avoir des critères pour déterminer s’il s’agit d’un véritable média ?
  • Lauzon : Plusieurs de nos journaux ne pourraient pas être admissibles.

Peter Harder (PSG)

• I presume that your support of this is in part to make sure that there is a bargaining process?
  • We are expecting that if you support the bill, then we are going to negotiate for a very fair deal. If it does not pass, I don’t think there is any way to cut them.

Sommaire

Derek Fildebrandt, éditeur, président, directeur général The Western Standard

• Media must be independent from the state
• Plead to stop the government with C-18

Evan Jamison, président et Dennis Merrell, directeur général Alberta Weekly Newspapers Association

• Concern that majors platform will try to reduce the value of the deals
• News does add value to the platform
• Concern about the timeline projected by the CRTC, it’s far to long
• There is not a clear path for success of small businesses
• Support C-18 but much more is needed

Nicolas Lapierre, membre de l’Association des éditeurs de magazines québécois et Nicole Doucet, consultante Coalition des magazines du Canada

• Amendement à l’article 27, suggère que le « et » soit un « ou ». De plus 3i devrait être retiré
• L’article 31.1c être retiré. L’article 31 b suggère que le « et » soit un « ou »
• contrairement aux journaux nous n’avons pas de financement
• Inquiétude au niveau de l’intelligence artificielle

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• How about an opt-out clause in section 27? Would you be satisfied with that?
  • Fildebrandt : It would be an improvement but not enough. I should not be in by default.
• Inclure les magazines, qu’est-ce que cela veut dire ? Comment faites-vous la différence entre les magazines à potins, par exemple, et les magazines plus sérieux ?
  • Doucet : Pour chacun des magazines à potins, je peux vous fournir des exemples de magazines de nouvelles. Il ne faut pas négliger les autres.
• Donc cela serait du cas par cas ?
  • Oui.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• C-18 does not include a fund model. There must be a more tactical way to support small publication rather than force them to bargain.
• There are a lot of great magazines in this country. Has the government provided information about how magazines were going to be classified?
  • Doucet : We don’t have specific information about this. We asked PCH to know who they see as eligible.
• It’s really important for the press to be free to report news. You do not wish the help of C-18. What are the challenges with the idea of the CRTC deciding who is eligible or not?

René Cormier (GSI)

• Selon le pdl actuel, combien de magazines seraient admissibles ?
  • La majorité le serait.
• À combien évaluez-vous les revenus que vous recevez en publicité et en abonnement ?
  • Fildebrandt : 50% subscription and 50% advertising.
• Le type de publicité que vous recevez, vous avez de l’indépendante journalistique n’est-ce pas ?

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• What are your thoughts about the future of your media if this bill does not pass?
  • Jamison : We will continue to see loss of papers news.
  • Doucet : J’aimerais mieux voir des bourses de fonds indépendants que de Meta même. Ce n’est pas tous les citoyens qui ont accès au numérique ou qui sont à l’aise.

Peter Harder (GPS)

• In Australia there are large organizations who did not succeed in reaching agreement and small organizations that did.
• Could you describe the drop in revenue you have experienced?
  • Jamison : Rate of decline over many years. We’ve seen a lot of members who disappeared.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• Are you asking for all magazines to be covered or only some?
  • Lapierre : Right now, there is a minority of our members who would be eligible. I don’t think we want to include every single one magazine that we represent.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• Meta was here last week saying that they will cut off links to news. How can this affect you?
  • Lapierre : It will affect them.
  • Doucet : Les géants ne devraient pas gérer nos nouvelles, nos magazines, ni ce que nous faisons au niveau national.

Leo Housakos (C)

• With CBC having over a billion dollars a year of government funding and they compete in the same marketplace of you. And now they will receive more money with this bill. What is your vue?
  • Fildebrandt : The biggest challenge is that our competitions are subsidized with our own tax dollars.

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 demain le 10 mai.

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 10 mai 2023, 18h45-20h45

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Équipe des Affaires parlementaires, Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet

Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la réunion

Projet C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

18 h 45 - 19 h 45

Association canadienne des radiodiffuseurs

• Kevin Desjardins, président

Association Canadienne des usagers et stations de la télévision communautaire

• Catherine Edwards, directrice générale
• Amélie Hinse, directrice générale, Fédération des télévisions communautaires autonomes du Québec

Presse universitaire canadienne

• Amy St. Amand, vice-présidente
• Hannah Theodore, directrice de la logistique

19 h 45 - 20 h 45

Hebdos Québec

• Sylvain Poisson, directeur général
• Benoit Chartier, président du conseil d’administration

À titre personnel

• Dwayne Winseck, professeur, École de journalisme et de communication et directeur du projet Global Media & Internet Concentration, Université Carleton

Sommaire

Kevin Desjardins, président, Association canadienne des radiodiffuseurs

• Support bill C-18 because it is necessary and fair
• Giants have dramatically impacted the advertising market through algorithmic
• Trade deficit in advertising in Canada
• C-18 strike an important balance: negotiation framework; allowed collective bargaining; no threat to press freedom
• Fair opportunity to be compensated
• Adding a clause requiring coming to effect no later than 180 after Royal Assent

Catherine Edwards, directrice générale et Amélie Hinse, directrice générale, Fédération des télévisions communautaires autonomes du Québec, Association Canadienne des usagers et stations de la télévision communautaire

• Amend article 27 to ensure the eligibility of community news organizations even if they don’t meet the 2 journalists minimum
• Amended to 27.1b to add ‘’or is in a not-for-profit broadcasting undertaking that produces news

Amy St. Amand, vice-présidente et Hannah Theodore, directrice de la logistique, Presse universitaire canadienne

• Not included in ant conversation
• Asking that student journalism be recognized

Questions

Paula Simons (GSI)

• What do you think about Meta saying that we should remove audio and audiovisual content from C-18, what do you think about that?
  • Desjardins : We were taking it back by this. It is highly problematic.
  • Hinse : La télévision a aussi été victime de la perte de revenu de publicité.
• If your advertising dries up because of competition, don’t university papers have student unions. What would be wrong with those options?
  • St. Amand : Some of our publications are not even funded by our unions.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• The platforms tell us that they provide great value to your members. How do you see this, what value to they provide, do they have deals?
  • Desjardins : We don’t know, and they are private. I don’t think those digital platforms became billionaire by handing out free links.
• If Meta of Facebook pulls out, what impact would it have on your members?
  • That would be difficult for them to do. There would certainly be pushed back from their users.
• You were talking about how your members have difficulties negotiating. Will they be able to do so under C-18?
  • De la façon que la loi est écrite actuellement, le 3 / 4 de nos membres serait exclu.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• For the others from Canadian University Press and CACTUS, are you looking at doing joint negotiations with the platforms and how do you think that that will work?
  • Edwards : Because we are about 70 community TV members, our approach would be to negotiate as a group.
  • St. Amand : We are having the same kind of feeling as the others who have spoken. We work as a collective to represent our members.
• Is it going to be worth your time and effort at the end of the day?
  • Not necessarily, but I do think that any money is helpful. Even the legitimacy that being a part of this would grant to some of our papers would be beneficial.

Peter Harder (PSG)

• I presume that you’re predicting that, without this legislation, there will be an ongoing downward spiral of capacity. I would like you to talk about “what if this doesn’t happen.”
  • Desjardins : Yes. I wouldn’t think that many of my members would have started spending this money before we get through this legislative process and the next regulatory processes.
• Do you have contact with your analogs in other jurisdictions?
  • There is interest from other jurisdictions. Certainly, there was something similar in the U.S. that started to come out.

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• De votre côté, on parle de combien de télés ou de radios communautaires non couvertes?
  • Hinse : Il s’agit de 42 membres de la fédération au Québec, plus ceux qui ne sont pas membres; cela peut atteindre 46 membres au maximum.
  • Edwards : There are nine in Canada that have licences, so they are already covered and eligible, but there are 25 and growing that aren’t.
• Do you have any idea if community radio and community TV are on Google and Facebook; are they being shown there?
  • I think Facebook is more used than Google.
• Vous avez demandé à ce que l’article 93 soit modifié afin que le projet de loi entre en vigueur six mois après la sanction royale. Dites-moi pourquoi vous en êtes arrivé là?
  • Desjardins : I would say there is a fair bit of urgency in terms of moving forward with this legislation and getting a negotiation framework in place.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• I was a bit concerned to hear that the student unions don’t put any money into university papers. Can you explain how you engage with students, how your members engage with students? What platforms do they use? What’s the connection with community there?
  • St. Amand : u. I’ll first clarify that not every student association doesn’t fund papers. I don’t have exact numbers. There are many that do, but there are also many that don’t.

Pierrette Ringuette (GSI)

• Provenant d'une petite communauté où on a une radio communautaire et une radio privée, essentiellement, ce sont des entreprises locales qui achètent la publicité. Compte tenu de cela, pouvez-vous nous dire au niveau de vos membres, combien de revenus locaux ils auraient perdu à cause l’émission de Google?
  • Hinse : Les revenus sont reliés à ce que le câblodistributeur donnait pour la télévision communautaire, soit un pourcentage de ses revenus bruts.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• Do you think it’s fair that campus radio stations are specifically enumerated as saying that they qualify for funding, whereas campus newspapers are not?
  • St. Amand : I don’t, personally, especially given your statement of saying that campus radios aren’t reporting the news in the same capacity.

Sommaire

Sylvain Poisson, directeur général et Benoit Chartier, président du conseil d’administration, Hebdos Québec

• Facebook et Google laissent aussi libre cours aux agrégateurs de contenu auxquels Internet a donné naissance
• Joué un rôle fondamental dans la livraison de l’information au cœur de plusieurs communautés locales
• Permettre la négociation collective pour pallier le déséquilibre du marché entre les plateformes Web mondiales et les éditeurs de médias d’information locaux et régionaux
• Géants du Web ont réussi à s’attirer 80 % des investissements publicitaires

Dwayne Winseck, professeur, École de journalisme et de communication et directeur du projet Global Media & Internet Concentration, Université Carleton

• C-18 is about creating a fair carriage framework to govern how a select few very large digital platforms index, aggregate, rank and integrate news content into their search, social media, app stores, advertising marketplaces and other emerging products and services
• These companies derive tremendous benefit from operating in our country
• Section 51 could be improved by including a statutory limitation on the exercise of editorial control over the news services they do distribute
• Add a clause at the end of section 2(2)(b) to explicitly exclude the provision of what I will call “naked hyperlinks” or URLs
• Add specific thresholds based upon reach, market share and capitalization in section 6, similar to the criteria used in the EU to designate very large online platform services or very large online search engines, that are covered by the Digital Services Act or the Digital Markets Act
• Add personal privacy and data-protection measures for online news audiences

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Est-ce que les hebdos du Québec ont signé des ententes avec Facebook et Google?
  • Chartier : Aucune.
• Est-ce que vous avez tenté de le faire?
  • Non, cela ne nous intéresse pas.
• Vous attendez l'arbitrage?
  • On attend l’entrée en vigueur du projet de loi C-18 et l’arbitrage par la suite.
• Vous préférez l’arbitrage?
  • Cela dépend. Cela prend l’entrée en vigueur du projet de loi. On va négocier tous ensemble en solidarité, d’un seul morceau.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• What is a “naked hyperlink”
  • Winseck: A naked hyperlink is my provocative label for basically a stripped down link that you would get in, say, the old 2002 version of the Google search engine, which basically sent you back just a straight-up link without all the sponsored links surrounding it.
• You are calling for even more rigorous rules to say that they can’t be prejudicial in the way they show their news. What would you say in response to their claim that that will break the algorithm?
  • I think they are being disingenuous here in that they are characterizing this rule as if every single news story or piece of information has to be treated exactly the same way.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• Vous avez présenté un dossier très solide, mais certains disent que ce projet de loi soutient, entre guillemets, les dinosaures. Ces derniers disent que vous tirez profit de la publication de votre contenu sur leurs sites. Quelle est votre réponse?
  • Chartier : Ce sont clairement eux qui bénéficient de notre contenu, car notre contenu amène énormément de rigueur et de crédibilité à leur plateforme.
• What do you think of their view that this is just a changing world, get over it, and they don’t want the evil state or the CRTC telling you what should get supported and what shouldn’t?
  • Winseck : Yes. I think that view might have made a lot of sense before the consolidation, centralization and remaking of the internet in the image of a handful, on a planetary scale, of digital conglomerates like Google, Facebook and Amazon. These entities are now the antithesis of the open internet themselves.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• You did mention the vast revenues that these platforms get from Canada. It could also, let’s say, very well be true that if they take news off, it may not affect their revenues one whit. Is that not correct?
  • Winseck : Regardless of what Meta or Google says, as I said, about a third to half of Canadians use Google and Meta as pathways to the news. So Canadians find it quite important. Second, the value of news is very hard, like any cultural and information commodity, to establish a price for.
• So what you are saying is that the government is going to say that you have to be a purveyor of news?
  • Yes, the legislation would say it is a public obligation.

Fabian Maning (C)

• I’m wondering what your view is in terms of Bill C-18 actually making things worse. For instance, if Google and Facebook do not participate and start deleting news, will that make it worse for consumers? If the U.S. initiates trade measures against Canada in relation to Bill C-18, could that make things worse?
  • Winseck : I said that I do not believe that Facebook and Google caused the crisis of journalism. My view is that this bill is not ambitious enough. It doesn’t do enough to undermine or to put sticks in the spokes of the surveillance capitalism machine that has allowed Meta and Google to build the fortresses and the moats that they have.
• What would you look at as a priority to amend the bill or to add to the bill in some way, shape or form that you would see as an improvement of where we are today?
  • A lot of attention should be put on the linking part in section 2. Clarify that, that naked links are out and the rest of the services are in. Section 6 and I would say let’s model ourselves on what they have done in the U.S., through the concept of covered platforms, or in the E.U., through the concepts of VLOPs. Go with the idea of beefing up the must-carry common-carriage measures of section 51 and learn from that history that goes in section 36 and section 26 of the Telecommunications Act

Peter Harder (GPS)

• Could you tell us about the pressures that you are under in the immediate term?
  • Chartier : Oui, on a de très grandes pressions. Lorsque le revenu n’est pas là pour payer la salle de rédaction et payer toutes les dépenses qui s’y associent, cela devient une pression incommensurable.

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 le mardi 30 mai.

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 30 mai 2023, 9h-11h

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Équipe des Affaires parlementaires, Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la réunion

C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

9 h – 10 h

Médias d’info Canada

• Paul Deegan, président et chef de la direction
• Pierre-Elliott Levasseur, président de LaPresse et directeur de News Media Canada

Le Devoir

• Brian Myles, directeur

The Globe and Mail

• Phillip Crawley, chef de la direction et éditeur

10 h - 11 h

Canadaland

• Jesse Brown, propriétaire

À titre personnel

• Jen Gerson, journaliste indépendante

Village Media

• Jeff Elgie, chef de la direction

Sommaire

Paul Deegan, président et chef de la direction, Médias d’info Canada

• Not fair that small publishers are not getting the same type of deal that big publishers like the Toronto Star are.
• Make sure that all are equal
• Amendments: CRTC role should be clarified, timelines for negotiation and mediation down to 45 days each, bill should come into force quickly.
• Federal advertising; support Canadians instead of big companies
• CBC should be free of commercial advertising
• US anti-trust lawsuit

Brian Myles, directeur, Le Devoir

• We support C-18, and we intend to comply with new legislation
• Very important for us that publishers have choice and ability for negotiation
• We need the strength of platforms like Google and meta to strengthen reach to publishing
• There is a power imbalance between powers and stakeholders here and that is why we need C-18
• Subscription platforms should be included in C-18
• C-18 should have oversight mechanism to CRTC so that linguistic duality can be respected
• Concern for equity and equality in future negotiation with big companies compared to small companies
• Suggest that maximum allowance be put in C-18 and in order to do that look into the payroll more thoroughly

Phillip Crawley, chef de la direction et éditeur, The Globe and Mail

• Creating good content comes with lots of costs
• Take closer look at amendments presented
• Allowing CRTC more power to look for provisions is an overreach
• Tighten up language to create more confidence in bill
• Amendments to look at:
  • Remove right of CRTC to designate a news organization as subject to the act should be voluntary
  • Amend section 53, allows CRTC to compel any information it deems necessary from news organization
  • Amend section 86, troubled by power of gov. to compel information

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• M. Levasseur do you agree that subscription is a good solution? Where do you stand?
  • Levasseur: I do not want to comment on others’ models, but we do not see any value coming from platforms that is in line with our contributions. What we hope is that C-18 will be passed so we will be able to sign equitable and fair agreements.
• Google is saying they will withdraw if it does not suit them. What do you think of this statement?
  • It is highly irresponsible as we have focused on quality and demonstrated our value to Canadians.

Paula Simons (GSI)

• What assurances do we have that if this works out there won’t be massive labor cuts of journalists like the ones seen in Australia? If Google and Facebook follow through on their threats what will it mean if you cannot share your content on those platforms.
  • Crawley: That business could be greatly disrupted, at the moment we pay Google and Facebook a lot of money to bring an audience. Journalist jobs are already disappearing in Canada.
  • Myles: We need C-18 in order to give us what we need. If Google and Facebook follow through, we will suffer. This is why I call for a swift answer between C-18 and the ruling.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Can you talk to us about the negotiation process between you and Google/Facebook and what are your fears in terms of non-renewal?
  • Myles: We had a choice of making offers and counteroffers starting in 2014. The issue is with the scope, the more viewers, the more negotiation powers you have. I believe in terms of scope the Australian plan is better. The platforms have already started to consider the fact of not renewing.
  • Crawley: It’s a more complicated relationship than just paying. These big tech companies help finance projects as well.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• I’d like to know if the current situation for francophone media is more difficult and pressing than anglophone media in Quebec. It this bill more necessary for you? You’ve asked for changes and amendments made, are you willing to wait, is it that important to you?
  • Levasseur: The point of the bill is about giving us the ability to sign a fair commercial arrangement for value we believe we create for the tech platforms. We are asking for the opportunity to negotiate a fair deal.
  • Myles: Papers that depend on print or small markets take risks all the time without C-18 anyway.

Fabian Maning (C)

• What happens if these tech giants decide to leave?
  • Deegan: Our sole focus is making sure these small groups get their fair deal. We want to make sure small players benefit just as much as big players.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• What will happen if Facebook leaves, what will be the impact?
  • Crawley: we will lose millions of dollars but there are other players we can still work with, like Apple. I am more concerned about the independence of media then losing money. I want to get the bill language right and the CRTC is not equipped to deal with paper press.
  • Levasseur: We would lose less than 1 million in terms of financial hit, I think they are mostly worried about spill over into the United States, I think they are more concerned about this legislation happening in the USA than what’s going on in Canada.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• Do you believe CBC should be a cut-off of outsource advertising and ad revenue?
  • Deegan: Yes, the CBC should not be accepting advertising for news and current affairs. It is a huge issue and the Fed gov. needs to step up. The amendments we proposed, we believe can be added in a timely manner.

Peter Harder (GPS)

• You’ve stated that you want this bill in place by the summer but you also have stated many amendments that you want made. If you have to choose one, what would it be?
  • Deegan: I want to get it done but I have faith and believe you can do both.

Sommaire

Jesse Brown, propriétaire, Canadaland

• There is a crisis in the news industry that does not get spoken about and that is trust. Many studies found that a majority of Canadians do not trust the news.
• Do not trust because they do not think the news is free from political influence.
• Proposed amendment would standardize funding relative to the size of editorial expenses, not payroll. This would allow for expenses to be told to the public and Meta and Google not have as big of a say

Jen Gerson, journaliste indépendante

• This bill is very flawed, and I am not sure the amendments can fix it.
• If this bill had truly been a grassroots collaborative effort, it would not look anything like this.
• Built in transparency method and CRTC would have nothing to do with it.
• The best-case scenario is a system that the legacy media would benefit from large corporations and everyone else will suffer.
• Outline is that money will be going to companies that have already demonstrated that they are willing to cut costs and mass layoffs.

Jeff Elgie, chef de la direction, Village Media

• We believe strongly that issues with C-18 will hurt the industry more than help it.
• The most realistic solution is to amend the bill completely
• Potential for C-18 to only benefit large companies by allowing then to create secret deals

Questions

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Why would the platforms not negotiate if it is available? It seems to me it is a false analysis.
  • Gerson : If any big tech companies feel they should be engaged then that is not up to the government to be a part of. There is no need for legislation.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• Do you think direct government funding has contributed to the erosion of trust in journalism.
  • Brown : I do think it has contributed and research has supported that.
  • Gerson : I think this bill is a disaster and it will inherently damage the industry.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• If you could quantify the impact if Google and Facebook pulling out and blocking your content what would that be?
  • Elgie : They represent up to 50% of traffic and them leaving would end our business. New digital start-ups can possibly help us in the future.
  • Gerson : We have stopped putting stuff on Facebook as it is not a reliable source for us to advertise on and it is a consistent problem seen lately.

René Cormier (GSI)

• An amendment was passed in order to allow small start-ups to access funding. In your opinion does this amendment allow better access?
  • Brown : I was glad to see more newsroom organizations will have access, however, that is still not enough. The model that has been working is “micro newsroom” and this amendment does not allow for those models to access funding.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• Where do you see Canadian media in 10–20 years from now? Will the legacy media be gone?
  • Gerson : I don’t think C-18 will allow for a sustainable media future. I see much more dependance on CBC and an increase of AI and micro newsrooms.

Peter Harder (GPS)

• Are you experiencing self-censorship as someone who pays Google and Facebook?
  • Elgie : We are not experiencing that and our writers do not face this.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• What do you think the impact of Meta or Google leaving would be on media and trust?
  • Brown : Meta has been tightening the spigot and now makes you pay to reach your full audience. If they leave, however, it would have next to no impact on my company. I do think anti-trust measures will have a positive impact, however.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• Can Meta and Google go through on their threats without losing big time? What would be the most urgent amendment that has been outlined?
  • Brown : The most urgent would be the fair universal funding formula that doubles as a transparency mechanism. When it comes to the threats, I do take them seriously as they might use this legislation to make an example of Canada to the world as to what will happen if you mess with big tech companies.

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 le mercredi 31 mai.

Comité sénatorial permanent des transports et communications (TRCM) – 31 mars 2023, 18h45

Les commentaires des participants sont fournis dans la langue d’origine.

Rapport préparé par

Équipe des Affaires parlementaires, Direction des Affaires parlementaires et du Cabinet

Patrimoine canadien

Sujet de la Réunion

C-18, Loi sur les nouvelles en ligne

Témoins :

18h45 – 19h45

Minderoo Foundation

• Emma McDonald, conseillère principale, Politiques

Star Observer

• Lawrence Gibbons, éditeur de groupe, Star Observer et City Hub et coprésident de Public Interest Publishers Alliance
• Chris Gogos, éditeur de Neos Kosmos et directeur d'Independent Multicultural Media Association

À titre personnel

• Rod Sims, professeur, Université nationale d'Australie

19h45 - 20h45

Unifor

• Randy Kitt, directeur du secteur des médias

OpenMedia

• Matthew Hatfield, directeur des campagnes

Internet Society Canada Chapter

• Philip Palmer, président
• Sue Gardner, membre, Comité d'orientation

Sommaire

Emma MacDonald, conseillère principale, Politiques, Minderoo Foundation

• Facebook and Google have been profiting from the inclusion of news content on their platforms
• Government intervention is the only mechanism that will force them to the negotiating table to pay for news and information that delivers value to their businesses
• Agreed to support a group of 24 small independent publishers by offering to collectively bargain on their behalf to help them negotiate deals with Google and Facebook
• Need to support local news more than ever

Lawrence Gibbons, éditeur de groupe, Star Observer et City Hub et coprésident de Public Interest Publishers Alliance et Chris Gogos, éditeur de Neos Kosmos et directeur d'Independent Multicultural Media Association, Star Observer

• Stand for the old-fashioned principle that a civil society requires a fiercely independent press to inform our citizenry
• Google and Facebook suck up over one third of all global advertising revenues combined
• Only the passage of a law compelling the digital duopoly to bargain with a range of public interest publishers will ensure that Canadians continue to have the rich and diverse media landscape you so richly deserve

Rod Sims, professeur, Université nationale d’Australie

• The News Media Bargaining / the Canadian equivalent, is absolutely necessary otherwise won’t get commercial fair dealings between the platforms and the media companies

Questions

Paula Simons (GSI)

• How am I to have confidence that this is actually working in light of the fact that over a thousand journalists lost their jobs once Rupert Murdoch had this deal?
  • McDonald : Evidence that the job advertising numbers have increased by 46% since the bargaining code has been introduced in Australia.
  • Gogos : What the bargaining code has done for us is actually given us capacity not only to keep people, but also to add journalists to our staff and accelerate our transformation into the digital era, which is critical for a sustainable publication of our size to be viable. It’s as simple as that.
• Are you getting anything close to 35% of your operating budgets from these deals?
  • Gibbons : We are under a non-disclosure agreement that prevents us from providing that information.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Pouvez-vous nous dire comment l'initiative Frontier Technology a apporté du soutien à ces petits médias? En matière de ressources, êtes-vous en mesure de nous détailler ce que Frontier Technology offre et à combien évaluez-vous les services que vous offrez à Public Interest Alliance? Ma deuxième question pour vous est la suivante : j’ai une crainte avec le projet de loi C-18 que les petits médias canadiens auront aussi de la difficulté à conclure des ententes volontaires. Avez-vous des recommandations pour nous dans le contexte du projet de loi C-18?
  • McDonald : In terms of how we assisted the small publishers, first of all, I have to acknowledge the support of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the ACCC, who made the collective bargaining process extremely easy. One of the things about the ACCC’s process that made it so easy was that it was simply a form-filling exercise where I had to list the publishers. One condition was attached; they had to have an annual turnover of $10 million or under to participate in this particular form of collective bargaining. Once we had lodged the forms with the ACCC that we were bargaining, we notified Google and Facebook. Then it was just a back-and-forth negotiation with Google — not with Facebook as I mentioned in my opening statement. I met with Google regularly. I convened meetings with the group of publishers and gave them updates on how the discussions were going with Google. Lawrence and others also convened separate meetings for that group to help them understand what was happening through the bargaining process.

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• You talked about an increase of 50% in the number of journalists all across the industry. What is the retention rate? I especially want to hear you about the firing or the letting go of 1 journalist in 20 by News Corp, the Murdoch empire. They got a of money from the platforms, and it seems that it has not gone to journalism. What does that say about the Australian model?
  • Sims: The number of new journalists rose by 50%. It was not an increase in the number of journalists by 50%. We could see that across many media companies.
• Do you have some information on the retention rate? Are they there, the journalists who were hired?
  • I know for a fact that the journalists hired by the ABC, which is the extremely large, public-owned broadcaster, are still retained. I know at the Guardian Australia, they are still retained because I know the number of journalists they had before the bargaining code and afterwards.
• Does it make sense that small and big media, in such a number we’re talking more than 500 newspapers get together, who is going to be the loser and the winner there from your point of view?
  • We certainly noticed benefit from individual deals. I should say individual deals were done by the large players, they were done by the medium-sized players and they were done by some of the small players.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• There have been references to having these deals with these major corporations. Is it any different from the deals you do with your major advertisers?
  • Sims: When Google threatened to move their search out of Australia and Facebook threatened to take all news and emergency advice off their platforms, there was a large pushback from the Australian population that this was Google and Facebook being disrespectful to Australia and disrespectful to Australian politicians. I think there is an underlying democratic issue there.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• Can you tell what the expectations were from Google versus the expectations from Facebook?
  • Sims: During the discussion and the lead-up to the legislation, Google always engaged with the ACCC, which I chaired at the time, and the government. Facebook did not, so they always took a very different position. Google was most concerned about anything that interfered with the integrity of their algorithm. Once they were convinced that wasn’t an issue, while they didn’t like the code, they went ahead and negotiated. Facebook just wanted the whole thing to go away.
• Did the companies get more money out of Google than Facebook?
  • Yes, they did.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• We keep referencing in our discussions the Australian legislation. In point of fact, it never really came into existence. It was the threat of the legislation that actually led to whatever negotiations, however badly they may have been handled. Would you confirm that?
  • Gibbons: I 100% confirm that. I know that other people have other opinions, but I can tell you that there were a number of independent publishers who didn’t get deals.
• One of the concerns here is that we are giving the power to a broadcast regulator who will have to develop expertise in this particular area. We’re giving that body, the CRTC, the power to designate at their whim. Do you have any thoughts on that?
  • McDonald: But I would certainly have faith in the Australian Communications and Media Authority, who understand how the media sector works and certainly understand digital disruption. They have followed the path of studying how media has been impacted by digital platforms for a very long time.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• About the fact that you went from a competition policy to an economic model. In Canada, we’re quite interested in competition or the lack of it. Why did that happen? Why did it go from that to the economic model?
  • Sims: k. We decided not to make this a copyright issue and instead to make it a market power issue. Market power is very much something the ACCC, the competition regulator, deals with. The ACCC doesn’t just work with competition law; it also works on market power issues.

Peter Harder (GPS)

• We talked about designation. Could you comment, Mr. Sims, about the data collection and transparency in this legislation versus yours and any comments you might make on that?
  • Sims: I think the data transparency provisions you have in the Canadian bill are excellent. That is a deficiency.

Sommaire

Randy Kitt, directeur du secteur des médias, Unifor

• Journalism is an essential element to a functioning democracy
• In the last year, almost every major news outlet has shrunk, whether it be by layoffs, buyouts or attrition
• Social media has proven to be an unreliable alternative
• Believes a crucial part of the funding puzzle is Bill C-18
• On inclusivity, the bill acknowledges that diversity must play a key role, smaller outlets must be included
• On accountability, maintains that this money should go towards news creation
• On transparency, the platforms have ensured that the value, duration and other terms of deals negotiated thus far are shrouded in non-disclosure agreements

Matthew Hatfield, directeur des campagnes, OpenMedia

• Bill C-18 is built on the idea that online platforms are collecting substantial revenue from the sharing of news stories on their platforms, revenue that would otherwise go to news outlets. That premise is not true
• The false idea that simply permitting links to news demands fair payment is not only a fundamental break with how the internet has always worked, it goes against what is healthy for us all, encouraging linking to incredible journalism to spread as far as we can
• C-18 negotiations are with existing publishers, and new revenue will likely be connected to their existing web traffic, we’re overwhelmingly rewarding the few large national chains that are still making a go of it, not revitalizing local journalism
• The mechanisms for determining who is included in Bill C-18 and on what terms are simply too flimsy and secretive to serve
• Bill C-18’s fundamental flaws are so deep, it should be rejected and replaced by a simpler, fairer media support bill

Phillip Palmer, président et Sue Gardner, membre, Comité d'orientation, Internet Society Canada Chapter

• The exemption power will act as a disincentive to participation in the scheme of compensation
• The structure of the exemption power denies finality to the negotiation process, it threatens to destabilize the results of good-faith negotiations
• The exemption power forces platforms to subsidize a range of news businesses who would not qualify for commercially based compensation
• C-18 represents a contribution program with governmental, rather than commercial, objectives
• The Bill provides that cabinet can set further conditions by regulation. The number and kinds of conditions are unrestrained by the legislation
• The agreements between platforms and news businesses must ensure that platforms supervise the use to which compensation will be put and regulate the relations between the business and its news operations

Questions

Paula Simons (GSI)

• In other words, if they are threatening to do this in California, should that make us more or less worried about them doing it here, do you think?
  • Gardner : I would be more worried rather than less worried.
• What should we make of a statement from Meta like this? Should it make us more or less willing to play chicken with them?
  • Hatfield : I don’t think that we can be certain of what either Meta or Google intends. I think Meta’s business model is so far from the news, ultimately, that I think they probably will at some point.

René Cormier (GSI)

• Do I understand that you proposed amendments? Is that what I heard? If so, did we receive any information on that?
  • Kitt : We proposed the amendments to the House of Commons, not to the Senate, but I could give you a copy of those.
• From your point of view, could Section 86, which deals with the independent auditor’s report, be made clearer as to its content? Do you think that could help with transparency?
  • Yes, I think that currently the bill provides for aggregate information from the CRTC and not individual deals. Unifor believes that the value of these deals should be made public as journalism is in the public interest, so the public should know the value of these deals.

Julie Miville-Dêchene (GSI)

• Est-ce que vous admettez qu’il y a une différence de pouvoir et qu'en ce moment, les plateformes ont le beau jeu, ont le gros bout du bâton? On n’est pas dans une concurrence parfaite. Je sais que vous êtes un défenseur de l’Internet complètement libre. On n'est plus tout à fait là. On est dans une société où on essaie de conserver notre journalisme ou nos médias vivants. Que conseillez-vous? Parce que c’est beau de dire qu’il ne faut pas toucher à Internet, que c’est sacré. Il me semble qu’on n'est plus rendu là.
  • Palmer : I do have particular criticisms with respect to this legislation, and I do think that in comparison with the Australian model, the Canadian model is flawed. It doesn’t lead to clean conclusions. The Australian legislation leads to deals.

Andrew Cardozo (GPS)

• What are your thoughts about the CRTC as the agency that would be doing this work?
  • Kitt : From someone who has been advocating at the CRTC for many years and has disagreed with many decisions that they’ve made, oddly enough, I was comforted by the decision to put the regulation into the hands of the CRTC because, as you said, it’s quasi judicial and it’s independent to a point.

Pamela Wallin (GSC)

• We were subsidized by the selling of cars or the rental of apartments. So when we talk about funding the organizations rather than journalism, I think we’re kind of fundamentally missing the point. I think that also has an impact on the new media that we’re seeing develop because they don’t want money from government or big tech; they just want access to viewers, readers’ eyeballs, and we’re going to make that more difficult. Do I have a sense of what you’re saying?
  • Hatfield : There is absolutely likely to be some types of reporting that need some form of subsidy, to your point. It has always been thus. The subsidy used to be advertising that came from non-news sources. That’s not working anymore. We’re sort of skipping a crucial step where people see that advertising is now a platform and they are like, well, that must mean that the fact there is news and advertising on those platforms, clearly these two things are linked and they are taking value that belongs to the news.
• We’ve heard this concern expressed by many that the beneficiaries of Bill C-18 are likely to be the big players, the national chains or the CBC, and the CBC is, of course, already receiving more than a billion dollars in government funding. Are you concerned that in that context, if this bill passes, then the new, more innovative approach, the online news organizations that have reverted to a subscription base where people are responding to their actual content, they may somehow be punished or neglected by this system?
  • Yes, some parts of the support could be interpreted as a subsidy against those start-up outlets.

Donna Dasko (GSI)

• Is there anything that you would suggest that can be done with the bill in terms of top priorities you might have for change, in particular with respect to the stability and uncertainty issues that you’ve outlined?
  • Palmer : I think the interim exemption power, the power to issue interim exemption orders, is probably a mistake. It will lead to blackmail, regulatory blackmail. It will force the reopening of concluded agreements, which will destabilize the commercial players.

Bernadette Clement (GSI)

• If Bill C-18 is going to be what we get here, how can we make it better in terms of transparency? Can we talk about the pros and cons of transparency?
  • McKitrick : We’re all owed transparency here. As government, if we’re going to impose this legislation and help these parties out, these news creators, they owe the public the knowledge of what these deals are worth.
• How do we do that? Do you have any suggestions, any of you?
  • They have to report it to the CRTC.
• Have you spoken to your counterparts in Australia? There’s a lot of positivity around that. Have any of you talked to them %
  • I’ve talked to some Australians who take a less enthusiastic view of the workings of the Australian process.

Prochaine réunion :

Le comité poursuivra l’étude du projet de loi C-18 le mardi 6 juin.