CRTC's recent decision on Radio Canada should act as a wake-up call
Recent Conflict with the Canadian Radio and Television Communications CommissionRadio Canada on the use of n-words in the radio segment reminds us that CRTC is all about controlling speech. Normally, the committee outsources censorship to a specialized agency, but this time it did the dirty work itself. The two members objected, claiming that the CRTC was engaged in censorship, regardless of the constitutional right to freedom of speech. As a result of the
controversy, more and more people are beginning to realize that they are subject to CRTC censorship.
In May 2021, the Canadian branch of the Internet Society was Le Devoir, with Bill C-10, a revision of the Broadcasting Act now repackaged as C-11, significantly expanding the scope of "broadcasting". I wrote that I did. Therefore, it requires government permission. You can only "broadcast" if you are in compliance with the license or regulation. That is the law. Expanding the definition of "broadcasting" means expanding government regulations.
Extending the definition of "broadcast" is to extend government regulations
C-11 is a user-generated video or podcast (fact) Above, everything including audio or video) will be the subject of CRTC regulations. Indeed, it is strange that the government stopped there. Would you like to regulate your email as well? Also, speech restrictions do not stop at the Canadian border. Bill C-11 allows CRTC to exercise global authority over "programs" in any language from any source.
C-11 defenders argue that what the bill allows is not a threat to free speech. It's like saying that the Inquisition priests are guided by respect for the diversity of opinions. The Commission's decision on the use of n-word has just proved that the statement is incorrect. CRTC is all about control. In other words, who can speak within what limits, how often, and with what effect. Control is usually performed indirectly, but in this case it was obvious.
Bill C-11 advocates in the TV production community and elsewhere claim that their opponents are French TV subsidies or just English-speaking tycoons fighting such corruption. I tried. No one is interested in subsidizing television programs, whether by traditional broadcasts as a whole or by internet streaming platforms. Under certain conditions, increasing the flow of money to Canadian television production is a good idea, but that's not a problem here.
-
Jesse Kline: With C-11, liberals will do everything for you You will be in control
-
First reading: The latest liberal " The "Internet Censorship" bill is causing a backlash from Canadian YouTubers
C-11 greatly expands federal jurisdiction over speech. It does so while dressed in the flag of "Canada Content", which thrives on the Internet without permits, grants, or concerns about Canadian official culture. C-11 will actually hurt the interests of Canadian YouTube users, TikTok users and other creators.
Here, the danger of the federal government overshooting voice control is at stake. User-generated content does not require CRTC restrictions. Despite all the denials, despite all the pretense that it doesn't do that, C-11 targets user-generated content directly and expands state authority over it. I am aiming for it. CRTC's recent decision on Radio Canada reminds us of the presence of government censors. Bill C-11 states that its jurisdiction is about to expand by orders of magnitude. It's time to get up.
Special to the National Post
Timothy Denton is a former National Commissioner of CRTC (2009-2013) and current President of the Internet Society. Canada branch.
Sign up to receive daily top stories from National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc. By clicking the
Thank you for registering.
A welcome email has been sent. If you don't see it, check your junk folder.
The next issue of NPPosted will arrive in your inbox shortly.
