Despite the federal Liberals not actually getting Bill C-10 and C-36 passed through the House of Commons and Senate this past parliamentary session, the message is clear to Big Tech platforms; start throttling alternative media or face increasingly heavy regulations.
The Sunday morning “news” shows that serve as delivery systems for the Biden regime’s propaganda advanced the chilling idea that dissenting viewpoints need to be censored.
To do their dirty work, the administration dispatched US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy to rail against “misinformation” which he blamed on conservative media.
It came as no surprise to me to see activists ‘celebrating’ Canada Day by setting fire to churches and toppling statues of Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria, while chanting, ‘No pride in genocide.’
Canada has managed to cultivate a culture that is simultaneously self-hating and self-righteous. We have no pride in being Canadian. Yet we are confident we are better than everyone else.
h/t Marvin
Both the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) and the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) have condemned the bill as dangerous and infringing on Canadians’ rights.
When asked whether they support a federal government bill to promote and demote content in the results of search functions on social media sites like YouTube and Facebook, 62% of Ontario residents said they oppose this initiative. Of those, 41% said they strongly oppose the government having this power, while only 6% strongly support it.
They have an opportunity to reconsolidate some of the lost conservative vote, and focus the attention of the nation on a true debate over freedom of expression and the limits of government power.
Anyone wishing to see any site like this one, or one that may contain facts which contradict the narrative, need to get a VPN today. Make sure you set the server proxy outside Canada. For all I know, the Government of Canada has a workaround for this. But for the moment this should defeat any blockages that the Trudeau Government installs.
Recently, liberal feminist author Naomi Wolf was banned from Twitter for publishing what the BBC described as “anti-vaccine misinformation.”
One would think that, if Wolf’s views on vaccines were mistaken, then the answer would be to explain why she is wrong, to correct bad speech with good speech. Twitter, however, does not believe its users capable of deciding the truth for themselves, and so it promptly banned Wolf.
Friday on FNC’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” host Tucker Carlson explained how despite Big Tech efforts to censor claims related to the COVID-19 pandemic, some of those claims have turned out to be true.
Facebook-owned Instagram is “fact checking” satirical posts about Anthony Fauci, and forcing users to delete them, according to reports.
According to a post by Reclaim the Net, YouTuber Luke Rudkowski was censored by Instagram after sharing a satirical headline about Fauci entitled: “Face masks over your eyes so you can’t read his leaked emails.”
“Anything that would go against World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations would be a violation of our policy, and so removal is another really important part of our policy,” Wojcicki said.
Never mind the endless examples of lies and deceit from WHO, CDC, governments in general, etc. Never mind the inconsistent messaging on masks or propaganda on vaccine efficacy from the “authorities” and “experts.” Never mind all the doctors who have actually treated patients who disagree with YouTube’s preapproved sources. Never mind the corrupt fact-checkers and shills.
In a recent op-ed published by CNBC, Facebook Vice President of Global Affairs Nick Clegg outlined the values that Facebook believes it must promote worldwide. Clegg stated that Facebook focuses on promoting American values such as “free expression,” a statement many would find ironic considering the allegations of censorship Facebook has faced in recent years.
For a month, the federal government has been under fire over its broadcasting bill C-10 and its implications for free speech. Peter Menzies, a former commissioner of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, said the bill “doesn’t just infringe on free expression, it constitutes a full-blown assault upon it and, through it, the foundations of democracy.” The National Post’s Anja Karadeglija examines the issues and what’s at stake.
Lametti believes that parliament can affect – i.e., limit, Charter Rights and Freedoms in the process of legislation if it is determined that these limitations are “in the broader public interest.”
“This is entirely legitimate. The rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Charter are not absolute but subject to reasonable limits, so long as those limits can be demonstrably justified,” he told the committee.
The Liberal government’s internet regulation bill, C-10, has gone through a convoluted path.
First, user-generated social media content was exempt.
Then, that exemption was stripped away during a heritage committee meeting.
Then, Minister Steven Guilbeault said the exemption wasn’t necessary (ignoring the inconvenient fact that he had presented it as essential when it was first put in the bill.)
Then, Guilbeault changed his mind – again – and promised to exempt content Canadians post to social media from regulatory oversight by the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission after all.
