3 ms·

What are your thoughts on the fact that this bill may give the controlling government authority on what content is allowed and what gets prominently featured? C

What are your thoughts on the fact that this bill may give the controlling government authority on what content is allowed and what gets prominently featured? Can this not be a used to amplify certain ideologies while suppressing others? Whatever the stated intent is, I would argue the law should not permit any encroachment on something as fundamental as free speech. It seems former members of the CRTC do see this bill as enabling an attack on free speech (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-former-crtc-chair-says-bill-c-10-should-not-be-passed-in-its-present/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-former-crtc...).

mc32 5y ago
At least you can oust a government. What can you do if YT wants to send you garbage to watch or starts sending you ideological content or start skewing content to whatever advances their POV?
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  That’s a different line of argument but I suppose it is valid. I certainly don’t feel good about huge multinational corporations originating from Silicon Valley shaping information (and as a result, culture and politics) across the entire planet.
munk-a 5y ago
The bill will allow the government to nominate what content will be more likely to come up in recommended content - it doesn't empower them at all to specifically ban content in any manner they can't today. As for that power - it can lead to bias but I'm pretty alright with it, it's likely going to be used to both stifle the organic spread of false information (i.e. anti-vax, flat earthers etc...) and it'll also likely be used to favor content that's supportive of the current administration (so if Harper got back into power it'd likely not include pro-climate change content). I think this is a pretty acceptable trade off when it comes to stumble-upon content - but all the content not endorsed by the system wouldn't be banned or removed. The biggest downsides for me are the possible difficulty adhering to the guidelines for smaller platforms. I enjoy nebula and it's possible if unlikely that they may be forced to exit the market as a result of this bill - but bear in mind that any inherently Canadian content creators should be able to easily argue their adherence to the guidelines even if the CRTC tries to shut them down.

mc32 5y ago

At least you can oust a government. What can you do if YT wants to send you garbage to watch or starts sending you ideological content or start skewing content to whatever advances their POV?

throwawaysea 5y ago
That’s a different line of argument but I suppose it is valid. I certainly don’t feel good about huge multinational corporations originating from Silicon Valley shaping information (and as a result, culture and politics) across the entire planet.

munk-a 5y ago

The bill will allow the government to nominate what content will be more likely to come up in recommended content - it doesn't empower them at all to specifically ban content in any manner they can't today. As for that power - it can lead to bias but I'm pretty alright with it, it's likely going to be used to both stifle the organic spread of false information (i.e. anti-vax, flat earthers etc...) and it'll also likely be used to favor content that's supportive of the current administration (so if Harper got back into power it'd likely not include pro-climate change content). I think this is a pretty acceptable trade off when it comes to stumble-upon content - but all the content not endorsed by the system wouldn't be banned or removed. The biggest downsides for me are the possible difficulty adhering to the guidelines for smaller platforms. I enjoy nebula and it's possible if unlikely that they may be forced to exit the market as a result of this bill - but bear in mind that any inherently Canadian content creators should be able to easily argue their adherence to the guidelines even if the CRTC tries to shut them down.