By Denis Carmel
OTTAWA – On Oct. 29, the heritage committee of the House of Commons (CHPC) held a meeting to study Bill C-18, the Online News Act.
Before this, on Oct. 21, Facebook (owned by Meta) published a blog post about not having been invited to speak in front of the committee. The committee “appears to have concluded calling witnesses for its study of the Online News Act (Bill C-18),” the post reads.
“But faced with adverse legislation that is based on false assumptions that defy the logic of how Facebook works, we feel it is important to be transparent about the possibility that we may be forced to consider whether we continue to allow the sharing of news content in Canada.”
So, the committee invited them to appear on Oct. 28, which they did. Except for the Conservatives, the members did not welcome them with open arms.
“It’s absolutely shocking. This is modern-day robber baron tactics that Meta is demonstrating, and you say, ‘Don’t regulate us, we’re good corporate actors.’ It truly is amazing to look back at what happened in Australia,” said the parliamentary secretary of the minister of Canadian Heritage.
Meta said they would provide a copy of their proposed amendments.
As an example of their concerns about the bill, they said “In the current economic climate (…) we are being asked to acquiesce to a system that lets publishers charge us for as much content as they want to supply at a price with no clear limits. I hope you will agree with me that no business can operate this way.”
Other witnesses also made comments on the bill.
Konrad von Finckenstein, former CRTC chair, argued the definition of Digital News Intermediary (DNI) is too vague: “The concepts of size, market, strategic advantage and prominent position are all borrowed from competition law and very much depend on the context,” he said. “They do not have an objective meaning. Rather, it seems to me this is going to be a dog’s breakfast trying to identify DNIs.”
“In my view, this section should be amended to provide that ENBs (eligible news businesses) have to be Canadian-owned and controlled, adhere to journalistic standards as set out in the code of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists, and should not include licenced broadcasters and their affiliates or government actors,” von Finckenstein added.
Matthew Hatfield, campaigns director at Open Media told the committee “without substantial amendments, Bill C-18 will be enormously destructive to the quality, distribution of and public trust in Canadian journalism.”
“It nudges legitimate news outlets to make more of it to see their shares grow and earn more compensation. It offers yellow journalists and content mills/click farms a real possibility—of qualifying for guaranteed mandatory platform subsidy and promotion.”
The Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture said they support the bill but insists on amending it to ensure quality journalism criteria are included for the beneficiaries of the funds. That position is shared by most. Also, they said there should be a way to ensure the funds be earned be reinvested in the gathering of news.
The next meetings will be held tomorrow and Friday, Nov. 4. The deadline for committee members to submit amendments is Thursday, Nov. 10, 2022, in order to begin clause-by-clause consideration on Friday, Nov. 18.
Screen capture of Kevin Chan, global policy director of Meta, taken from the online feed of the meeting.
