Dispatch from the front Line: Disclose it all and let God sort out the righteous
Dispatch from the front Line: Disclose it all and let God sort out the righteous
Bills C-11 and C18 have us riled up. More on China's interference. Trudeau's Little Canada. And we're no bankers but...
Hope you’re all having a great weekend! We’ve got a ton to cover this week, so let’s just jump right into it, except for this programming note: due to March Break holidays, The Line will not be publishing a video or podcast next week. We will maintain a normal (or close to it) publication schedule for written articles, though.
So enjoy this last video … for two weeks.
We at The Line must draw your attention yet again to Bills C-11 and C-18, as matters on that file have taken a bizarre and decidedly grotesque turn this week. As noted by Prof. Geist in his recent blog post, the government is about to submit a motion demanding that Meta and Google submit to committee all of their internal and external communications relating to any Canadian regulation — including C-18. The government also wants these companies to disclose which, if any, third parties they have been funding. They must also submit all communications with third parties on these matters.
We will remind our readers that C-18 is the bill that would force these companies to pay media outlets for links to news articles published to their platforms, even links that the news companies themselves had posted. C-11 concerns an overhaul of the Broadcast Act, and would almost certainly result in certain Canadian online content creators falling under the regulatory auspices of the CRTC.
As a result of C-18, both Google and Meta have considered dropping news distribution from their platforms, or have outright promised to do so. To which we have responded: "Well, no shit, Sherlocks." We have, in fact, warned all of the parties involved with this misguided bill that that's exactly what was going to happen.
Nonetheless, the dim-witted government officials and corporate media barons who have pinned their hopes of survival to the apparent money spigot of Big Tech didn't believe us. So when Meta came right out and said it would drop news last week, the ashen-faced Minister of Heritage accused them of using "intimidation and subversion" tactics. And, thus, these demands for private correspondence appear to have been drafted.
It amounts to nothing less than a declaration of all-out war between the government and the Big Tech companies — and, by extension, the many independent media creators like ourselves.
Well. Okey Dokey then.
*cracks knuckles.*
Let's start with two very obvious points: firstly, we at The Line don't object to forcing these tech companies to disclose funding to third parties for the purpose of opposing C-18 et al. That is perfectly reasonable, in our minds. Further, if these companies are being accused of anything illegal, by all means, investigate away — after you get a warrant.
The rest of these demands are nothing short of banana crackers; it's an extraordinary interpretation of the committee's mandate. It's the kind of overbroad dragnet that will necessarily create privacy breaches for the unknown numbers of ordinary citizens, dissidents and journalists who have corresponded with these companies about these bills.
We will remind the government that private citizens and private companies do not owe the government a full accounting of their private business or communications. The government is subject to this kind of transparency and disclosure because the government works for us. Not the other way around.
We will also point out the irony. The government is demanding years worth of correspondence from private entities within a very short time frame: this is a level of transparency that no government department would subject itself to. Don't believe us? Just try to draft a similar ATIP request to any ministry; it would take years to get such a request fulfilled, and half if it would come back redacted.
The next point that needs to be acknowledged is that this is all simply public-relations theatre. Bill C-18 is a fait accompli. We would be genuinely surprised if Meta or Facebook were to comply with the government's request for internal correspondence, and we highly doubt their lack of cooperation will merit the attention of parliament. Therefore, the odds that they will be found in contempt are near zero.
However, what the government has set up is a no-win scenario. By refusing to comply, the government can then cast Meta and Google as secretive in addition to intimidating and subversive. And by extension, anyone who has dissented with C-18 will be slandered as corrupt — in financial league with the devil Facebook. After all, if they had nothing to hide, they would disclose, right?
As Geist has noted, this will have a chilling effect on dissent on these files, with fewer individuals and organizations willing to point out the legislation's extremely obvious flaws. To wit: "The intent seems fairly clear: guilt by association for anyone who dares to communicate with these companies with an attempt to undermine critics by casting doubt on their motivations."
We at The Line share Geist’s interpretation.
A motion like this is retributive. It demonstrates respect for neither the privacy of citizens, nor the right to dissent to government legislation. Further, we will note that that dissent has spanned the ideological spectrum among content creators and independent media outlets. To our eyes, the only entity engaging in “intimidation and subversion” is the government itself.
We at The Line have absolutely nothing to fear by disclosure. Our objections to these bills are rooted in both principle and straightforward common sense. We have accepted no funding from any company. We don’t want government cash. And have we not coordinated with either Meta nor Google on these files.
(The only disclosure that may be necessary here is that Meta paid for the cost of a plane ticket for Jen Gerson to sit at their table at the last Walrus Gala. None of this legislation was discussed: rather, Gerson explained to Meta employees that their Metaverse would herald a new human dystopia.)
Nonetheless, we find the government motion utterly disturbing, and cannot help but look askance at our colleagues in media who are aligning themselves with a government willing to resort to such measures. This whole affair is an utter betrayal of the principles of independence and integrity that legacy media organizations purport to stand for. Bill C-18 illustrates that none of these outlets deserve the material support they are debasing themselves to collect. Legacies may talk a good game about being the defenders of democracy, but in the end, they are acting like every other crony capitalist corporation.
To that end; if the government really wants to move forward with this motion, we at The Line suggest that the only fair way to do so is to demand parity.
You want Meta and Google's internal communications? Fine. Let's see all of it then.
We suggest the government also demand the internal correspondence of all of the entities advocating for C-18.
Let's see the last three years of internal documents, presentations and memos from News Media Canada, the lobbying arm of many of Canada's legacy media corporations. We want NMC to disclose the names of any third party entities who have received funding from the organization; send us all of the presentations and communications with any third party or government entities.
Hell, why stop there?
One of the critiques of C-18 is that receiving funding through this mechanism risks journalistic impartiality. This claim has been strenuously denied in committee hearings by journalistic outlets that stand to benefit financially from the bill. If the government believes that the private correspondences relating to this bill are within its purview to examine, the private editorial communications of media companies that have covered the bills to date should also be considered. If it’s fine to peer through the emails of journalists who oppose this legislation, there can be no defence for journalists who advocate for it.
Given the claims these outlet have made, we therefore think it's entirely within the public interest to see communications, memos, and emails, both internal and external relating to the coverage of C-11 and C-18 from companies such as Postmedia, the CBC, The Globe and Mail, The Logic, and any other company that has testified at committee, either in the House or Senate. If such an order is produced, we at The Line would be happy to comply. We are confident in our independence and our coverage: do other media organizations share our confidence in their own journalistic integrity?
After all, sunlight is the best disinfectant.