“Misleading political communications” should be federally regulated, say censorship advisors appointed by Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez. The group said unregulated political discussion and disinformation was a kind of pollution that “erodes the foundations of democracy.".“A range of harmful content was said to be important to scope in including fraud, cyberbullying, mass sharing of traumatic incidents, defamatory content, propaganda, false advertising and misleading political communications,” wrote staff. “Many experts voiced concern over misinformation and disinformation and highlighted it was not included.”.According to Blacklock's Reporter, the remarks are from minutes of eight separate meetings of the Expert Advisory Group on Online Safety held between April 9 and June 3. Rodriguez on March 30 appointed the committee to propose methods of censoring legal internet content deemed hurtful..“They stressed Canadians’ ability to have conversations about basic policy disagreements has been severely impacted and complicated by the phenomenon of disinformation,” wrote staff. “They explained it erodes the foundations of democracy, polarizes people and reduces social dialogue to confrontational encounters.”.Disinformation was like pollution, they said. “The Expert Advisory Group agreed the problem has grown to become one of the most pressing and harmful forms of malicious behaviour online.”.“Some experts introduced the notion that disinformation undermines the rights of users,” wrote staff. “They asserted by polluting the information environment with false, deceptive or misleading information, disinformation undermines citizens’ rights to form their own informed opinions. Some experts stressed disinformation undermines ‘freedom of attention’ by crowding and diverting citizens’ attention.”.Meetings of the group of 12 appointees, mainly academics, were conducted with federal managers. “The Advisory Group was joined by government representatives from the Department of Canadian Heritage, Justice Industry, Public Safety and the Privy Council Office,” wrote staff..“Representatives of the RCMP were also present,” wrote staff. Minutes of one meeting concluded: “Most experts agreed that something must be done.”.The heritage department last July 29 issued papers that proposed appointing a chief internet censor called the Digital Safety Commissioner. The appointee would have powers to take anonymous complaints on hurtful content, conduct closed-door hearings, levy fines and issue takedown orders to block websites..They said internet censorship should include not only written content like Facebook posts but also video games, listings on Amazon.com and Airbnb and private communications like direct messages on Twitter, said the minutes of one session. “Many experts mentioned there is justification to look more widely at including some interactive services like Airbnb and gaming platforms,” wrote staff..“Many experts supported the notion that private communications should be included under the scope of the legislative framework,” wrote staff, who added: “Some experts explained private messaging services should be regulated.”.The Expert Advisory Group stressed censorship must apply to content regardless of whether it is legal. Illegal content like hate speech has been regulated under the Criminal Code since 1970..“Many members stated grey zone content — speech that is lawful yet harmful or ‘awful but lawful’ — poses unique challenges,” wrote staff. “They explained most harmful content online falls into this category.”.“They emphasized freedom of expression does not deal with cumulative harms or novel harms very well,” wrote staff. “For instance, they explained it's difficult to reconcile the issue of disinformation with the freedom of expression.”.“Some experts questioned where the limits on freedom of expression should be,” wrote staff. “They asked whether it made sense to tolerate a racist theory, one that would inevitably influence people to be violent. Some experts emphasized the right to freedom of expression includes the right to offend.”.Rodriguez earlier told reporters the group’s advice would form the basis of a censorship bill..“We will take that information, work on a bill and table it as soon as possible,” he said..“Every government’s first priority will always be the safety and the security of Canadians. That’s why I am convinced we will be able to find a path forward.”
“Misleading political communications” should be federally regulated, say censorship advisors appointed by Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez. The group said unregulated political discussion and disinformation was a kind of pollution that “erodes the foundations of democracy.".“A range of harmful content was said to be important to scope in including fraud, cyberbullying, mass sharing of traumatic incidents, defamatory content, propaganda, false advertising and misleading political communications,” wrote staff. “Many experts voiced concern over misinformation and disinformation and highlighted it was not included.”.According to Blacklock's Reporter, the remarks are from minutes of eight separate meetings of the Expert Advisory Group on Online Safety held between April 9 and June 3. Rodriguez on March 30 appointed the committee to propose methods of censoring legal internet content deemed hurtful..“They stressed Canadians’ ability to have conversations about basic policy disagreements has been severely impacted and complicated by the phenomenon of disinformation,” wrote staff. “They explained it erodes the foundations of democracy, polarizes people and reduces social dialogue to confrontational encounters.”.Disinformation was like pollution, they said. “The Expert Advisory Group agreed the problem has grown to become one of the most pressing and harmful forms of malicious behaviour online.”.“Some experts introduced the notion that disinformation undermines the rights of users,” wrote staff. “They asserted by polluting the information environment with false, deceptive or misleading information, disinformation undermines citizens’ rights to form their own informed opinions. Some experts stressed disinformation undermines ‘freedom of attention’ by crowding and diverting citizens’ attention.”.Meetings of the group of 12 appointees, mainly academics, were conducted with federal managers. “The Advisory Group was joined by government representatives from the Department of Canadian Heritage, Justice Industry, Public Safety and the Privy Council Office,” wrote staff..“Representatives of the RCMP were also present,” wrote staff. Minutes of one meeting concluded: “Most experts agreed that something must be done.”.The heritage department last July 29 issued papers that proposed appointing a chief internet censor called the Digital Safety Commissioner. The appointee would have powers to take anonymous complaints on hurtful content, conduct closed-door hearings, levy fines and issue takedown orders to block websites..They said internet censorship should include not only written content like Facebook posts but also video games, listings on Amazon.com and Airbnb and private communications like direct messages on Twitter, said the minutes of one session. “Many experts mentioned there is justification to look more widely at including some interactive services like Airbnb and gaming platforms,” wrote staff..“Many experts supported the notion that private communications should be included under the scope of the legislative framework,” wrote staff, who added: “Some experts explained private messaging services should be regulated.”.The Expert Advisory Group stressed censorship must apply to content regardless of whether it is legal. Illegal content like hate speech has been regulated under the Criminal Code since 1970..“Many members stated grey zone content — speech that is lawful yet harmful or ‘awful but lawful’ — poses unique challenges,” wrote staff. “They explained most harmful content online falls into this category.”.“They emphasized freedom of expression does not deal with cumulative harms or novel harms very well,” wrote staff. “For instance, they explained it's difficult to reconcile the issue of disinformation with the freedom of expression.”.“Some experts questioned where the limits on freedom of expression should be,” wrote staff. “They asked whether it made sense to tolerate a racist theory, one that would inevitably influence people to be violent. Some experts emphasized the right to freedom of expression includes the right to offend.”.Rodriguez earlier told reporters the group’s advice would form the basis of a censorship bill..“We will take that information, work on a bill and table it as soon as possible,” he said..“Every government’s first priority will always be the safety and the security of Canadians. That’s why I am convinced we will be able to find a path forward.”
