Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 26th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 16 of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

Before we begin, I'd ask all in-person participants to read the guidelines on the updated cards on your table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including our interpreters. You will notice there is a QR code that links to a short awareness video, should you need that.

Pursuant to the routine motion adopted by the committee, I can confirm that all the witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of this meeting.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before you speak. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Wednesday, November 5, 2025, the committee is meeting to study the effects of influencers and social media content on children and adolescents.

With us today we have Natalie Coulter. She is an associate professor of communication and media studies from York University. We have Holly Wood, a research and advocacy coordinator from Defend Dignity. She is joining us online. We have, also by video conference, Naomi Holland from Escalate the Conversation. Here in the room, from MediaSmarts, we have Kathryn Ann Hill, executive director; and Matthew Johnson, director of education. Welcome. Humberto Carolo, chief executive officer of White Ribbon, is joining us online as well.

Welcome, everyone. You have five minutes per organization to give us your opening remarks, starting with Natalie Coulter.

You have the floor now for five minutes.

[Natalie Coulter, Associate Professor, Communication and Media Studies, York University, As an Individual]

Thank you very much for having me here today.

I've spent the last eight to 10 years thinking about the deep connections between young people and their digital worlds. The question of the impact of children's and adolescents' exposure to online content is crucial, especially as we're in this moment of great change with the web as we move to one centred around AI and an unfolding metaverse.

To start, I have a few points.

Young children and adolescents are deeply entwined with their online culture. The old way that we might think about the digital space as separating a real life from an online, digital life no longer works. Children are enmeshed in the digital, so any sort of abstinence-based solution, such as turning it off or blocking youth from social media, is not really a viable option.

The second point I want to make is that the Internet has enhanced children's lives in many ways. It's a space of social connection, community, play, fun and information. There's lots of research indicating this. For example, a lot of LGBTQ youth have found social media to be a lifeline for their own identities within communities, but of course, as we do this, we need to make sure that children have safe, productive and ethical Internet experiences on social media.

Social media influencers, unlike in other forms of media, are often young people themselves. They often come from the same communities that their young followers come from, and this creates a certain authenticity and credibility that these influencers have with young users. Often, young people can develop parasocial relationships, meaning that they feel like these influencers are their friends or they have connections with them, so they give them a lot of their trust and their time.

Social media platforms, as you know, are designed to keep a user on and scrolling for as long as possible. To do this, they have access to a huge amount of data that keeps users endlessly scrolling and trolling, and they can tweak their algorithms in real time to ensure this. There are all these pervasive design features baked right into social media platforms to capture and hold users' attention. This puts young people and children—and, frankly, all of us, as I'm sure we all know that endless scrolling—at a massive disadvantage in countering this, because we don't have access to those same resources.

Knowing all of this leads me to thinking about the impact that social media influencers have on young people.

First, they have a huge influence on how young people spend their time. Many young people—like us, probably—struggle to control their use of social media. The World Health Organization recently surveyed 280,000 youth aged 10 to 15 and found that more than one in 10 teens indicate that they struggle to control their social media use and experience feelings of withdrawal when not using it, and I think this is only growing.

At the same time, a survey in the United States reported that 51% of teenagers spend at least four hours a day using a variety of social media apps. There's little information on young children using them, because they're not supposed to be on social media, even though we know they either are on social media as content or are on social media themselves; there's not a lot of information on young people.

All of this being always on and always scrolling has a huge impact on children's overall health. Research has indicated that there is lower academic performance and that it often impacts young people's sleep, along with many other health and well-being impacts.

The other aspect I talked about is trust. Influencers on social media are given a huge amount of trust by young people, but these influencers, as we know, aren't regulated and often don't have qualifications. We can be really concerned about the long-term social media habits of young people when they're learning information coming from these influencers that is based on unregulated content, unlike the traditional media sources that many of us grew up with, which have professional infrastructure such as fact verification, qualified media professionals, etc.

There are numerous outcomes that result from this increased trust. First, there's a wider dissemination of disinformation, which has a huge impact on young people. We have this spread of false information around health, politics and social issues, leading to widespread disinformation. Recent examples include a reinforcement of unrealistic beauty or lifestyle standards. We know that social media influencers curate these images that look authentic but are highly constructed, which can lead to dissatisfaction, negative self-comparison and maybe lower self-esteem. Also, there is the promotion of unhealthy, harmful or dangerous products like diet pills, detox teas and a range of products that are unapproved.

The second impact of the trust is that there's a huge potential for the radicalization of young people. We can see this clearly with the growth of social media influencers like Andrew Tate, who are currently radicalizing young boys into extreme misogyny. This has far-reaching impacts on young people—those who have been radicalized and also the culture of young people as a whole. Current research shows that this has had an impact on both school environments and the professional life of female teachers. A lot of female teachers are struggling, teaching these misogynistic boys.

Finally, there are concerns globally about children's exposure to hate messages and violent images online. This, of course, impacts their well-being and also their sense of their rights. A recent UNICEF study found that globally there's a steep rise in exposure to this. This exposure can lead to potential mental health issues but can also have an impact on perpetuating racism, hate and deeper misogyny.

My last point is on the lack of privacy in the collection of data by social media companies. We know very little about where this collection of data will go and about where it will go over the long term. I think this is a really important focus. What happens for a child over their entire life course when this information may be bought and sold to third parties and end up in many different spaces, particularly when it's scraped up into AI predictive tools? We could imagine an AI predictive tool designed for university admissions, insurance companies or employee services having access to data from across a child's life course when they become an adult. There are many serious concerns about the impact of this on young people over their life course.

Children have a right to a safe, productive, diverse and ethical Internet experience, and yet we also know that the social media spaces our young people take up and spend so much time in were not created for young people and were not created with their needs and interests in mind. I ultimately think that tech companies need to be held accountable by governments, by the media and by the public to live up to their social licence to operate and their social and corporate responsibility to create a fun, productive, safe, diverse and ethical Internet experience.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

We will now go online to Holly Wood from Defend Dignity.

Go ahead. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Holly Wood, Research and Advocacy Coordinator, Defend Dignity]

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Holly Wood. I am the coordinator of research and advocacy for Defend Dignity, a national organization that has been working to end sexual exploitation in Canada since 2010. In 2015, we began offering our survivor support fund to financially aid individuals who have experienced sexual exploitation. We are actively engaged in advocacy with all levels of government, and we educate the public.

For this presentation, I want to speak to three very important points about the effects of influencers and social media content on children and adolescents.

My first point focuses on how we have allowed social media influencers to become unregulated educators to children across Canada. Social media influencers and the content they post teach things like appearance, identity, idealized beauty and values, all without educational training or strict standards and with very limited, if any, oversight. Social media influencers post a variety of content, from makeup to promoting facial filters to adult beauty routines and highly sexualized dances, all things being adopted by and ingrained in children as young as 10 or 12. While this may seem harmless, research indicates that it deeply affects identity development and increases vulnerability, especially to sexual exploitation.

Second, online algorithms have now become, in a sense, parents. With children spending up to seven or eight hours a day online, doomscrolling Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat, they are being shaped by big tech algorithms rather than by parents, teachers and communities. On the surface, algorithms may appear harmless, because they're suggesting content that relates to what a child shows interest in when they are browsing, but under the surface, algorithms are teaching our children values, appearance standards, popularity cues and social norms. Algorithms do not consider age appropriateness, safety or mental health. The algorithm is not our friend, and it certainly cannot replace parents and communities, who are the most valuable for guiding our children through the building blocks of life.

All this said, my final point is that parents need to parent, but governments need to govern. Parents already juggle school schedules, meal prep, sports schedules, child care, mortgage payments, heating bills, dentist appointments and their own mental health. Yes, some families are under huge stress, but even parents who are organized, attentive and doing everything right still can't keep up with big tech. This isn't about effort; it's about reality. No parent can outsmart billion-dollar algorithms designed to pull our kids in and hold their attention. It is unrealistic, and I would even go as far as saying that it is impossible. I hope any parents present in this committee meeting can agree with me on that.

We don't treat any other issue this way. We don't ask parents to personally regulate alcohol or tobacco for minors. We don't expect them to set the voting age or decide when a child can drive. Governments set these rules, because protecting our kids protects all of us. Why would big tech be the one area where we leave parents on their own? The world our children are growing up in is more dangerous and complicated than ever before, and there is no parenting manual that prepares you for that. While I appreciate that the government is invested and supportive of prevention education, we must remove the unfair burden placed on parents to teach their children everything.

Therefore, I argue that governments must be responsible for setting guardrails so parents' best efforts are enough. We need legislation and policy that protect our kids, but we also need legislation and policy that prioritize the importance of parenthood in shaping our children.

I have two suggestions.

First, we need policy and legislation that protect our children. Senate bills like Bill S-209, or any other bills in the House of Commons related to this, are a prime example of what we need. Some countries, for instance Norway and Denmark, have taken stronger steps, setting strict limits on children's access to social media and smart devices until they reach a more appropriate age.

As my colleague Val Caldwell pointed out in our presentation in Saskatchewan last week, children do not need cellphones with cameras. They don't need Instagram or TikTok when they're 10 years old. Yes, parental controls can help, but children are clever. They often find a way around these controls, and parents may not even know how to use them properly. That's why we cannot rely on parents alone. We need laws and regulations that set clear boundaries so all kids get the same protection.

Second, we need our government to incentivize social media influencers so they post age-appropriate, positive content, and we need to remove all content creators who do not, or we need to add age controls to certain apps that require parental permission to access harmful or suggestive content. We need policies that protect kids and policies that support parents in the most important job there is—raising them.

Thank you to all parliamentarians who continue to raise the alarm on issues that deeply affect childhood, and thank you for working so hard to protect it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Next, we will go to Naomi Holland, also online, from Escalate the Conversation.

Welcome. You have five minutes, starting now.

[Naomi Holland, Founder, Escalate the Conversation]

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

Unprecedented rates of depression, eating disorders, skyrocketing visits to the ER for self-harm, overdoses from drugs purchased through social media, and suicides and deaths caused by viral challenges are some of the harms scientifically proven to be caused by social media use. Today, I'll highlight three harms caused by social media and influencers on tween and teen girls. I will focus on girls because, according to research, girls use social media more than boys and are more vulnerable to it.

The first harm, performing for likes, is addictive. Many girls today strive not to experience life, but to stage experiences that will garner likes and elevate their status online. Social media's intermittent reward system, or notifications, capitalizes on this desire. Built by design to addict, these apps take advantage of adolescents' undeveloped brains, tethering girls to their phones, endlessly scrolling for affirmation and validation.

Let me give you an example of what this looks like for a 12-year-old girl. A few years ago, a plank challenge went viral. Girls soon discovered that if they positioned the camera at a certain angle in front of them, they could get more likes and be pushed up the algorithm ladder. Very quickly, girls learned that removing their bra would see an even more dramatic surge in responses. Despite the cruel comments and inappropriate requests from adult men, the brain registers the red notifications and releases dopamine, signalling to the brain to do it again and again.

A second harm on social media is regular exposure to highly sexual content. The prevalence and frequency of hypersexualized content have desensitized girls and contributed to a concerning trend whereby 25% of children view sending nudes as normal. Sharing nudes or self-generated child sexual abuse material opens the door to cyber-bullying, sextortion, sex trafficking and sexual exploitation, as well as a plethora of emotional and mental torment.

These two behaviours, the addictive dopamine cycle and the sexualization of children, create the perfect storm for another harm gaining momentum on social media: OnlyFans. OnlyFans is “pornified” social media with a monetary intermittent reward system. Technically, anyone over 18 can create and sell subscriptions to their own porn channel. Ask anyone working with youth today, and they will tell you it is common to hear girls say, “Only ugly girls get diplomas,” implying that when they turn 18, they plan to become an OnlyFans content creator—a more accurate term would be porn producer.

What's the connection to social media? Strategically, OnlyFans does not have a search bar. No one can log on to OnlyFans and find their favourite porn producer without a direct link, so where do 4.6 million porn producers market, recruit and normalize porn production and consumption? They do it on social media. OnlyFans and underground OnlyFans agencies have cultivated a culture of exploitation on social media, where they aggressively promote the illusion of freedom, wealth and empowerment, while softly grooming a generation to idealize becoming sex workers.

To be clear, content creators do not just produce porn. Many are in the sex trade. The small minority who make money openly normalize and glamorize sex work while insidiously masking and minimizing the many harms. On every social media platform—especially Instagram, TikTok, Snap and YouTube—OnlyFans influencers have hundreds of millions of followers. Many are underage girls who idolize them, follow their fashion tips and duplicate their cute TikTok dances. Underage girls even send in application videos in the hope of getting invited into this girl power community. All of this predatory grooming behaviour is promoted and normalized on social media.

The undeveloped adolescent brain and we as parents do not stand a chance against expert predators, nefarious algorithms and apps designed by neuroscientists, nor against the grooming tactics of a multi-billion dollar sex industry. The Canadian government must act quickly to intercede and protect childhood.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

That's very disturbing testimony so far today.

Thank you for that.

MediaSmarts, you're next. I'm not sure if you're sharing your time, but, Kathryn and Matthew, you have five minutes altogether.

[Kathryn Ann Hill, Executive Director, MediaSmarts]

Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members.

My name is Kathryn Hill. I'm the executive director of MediaSmarts, or HabiloMédias. We are a registered charity. We're Canada's centre for digital and media literacy. I'm joined by our director of education, Matthew Johnson, who will join me in presenting and responding to questions.

I'll tell you a bit about us. MediaSmarts has been researching and developing educational resources about youth, media and technology for almost 30 years. We were founded in 1996 and we advocate for an approach that emphasizes conscious and positive media habits to equip all Canadians, particularly young people, with the skills they need to thrive in the digital age.

In this complex area with many conflicting ideas and opinions, we have set verified scholarly evidence as our north star, and that informs our approach, our content development and our comments.

[Matthew Johnson, Director of Education, MediaSmarts]

Research has shown that some patterns of social media use are consistently linked to harm, such as engaging in social comparison and the displacement of essential activities like sleep. However, the evidence shows that social media is not intrinsically bad for youth. It also offers significant benefits like social connection, education and self-expression.

How we use social media is significant. Researchers have found that activities like messaging, posting or communicating with others are associated with positive well-being and social connection, whereas passive use such as scrolling feeds or browsing profiles is associated with higher levels of loneliness and negative well-being. Youth who feel that they are in control of their media use also report better mental well-being. Conversely, feeling dependent on social media is associated with feeling worse after using it. If youth constantly hear that they are addicted to social media or to digital devices, it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Boosting self-efficacy—the feeling of being able to use media for one's own benefit—leads to better outcomes by helping people see their use as meaningful. In order to do that, we need to educate young people to feel empowered to take control of their digital habits.

Influencers may be seen as a microcosm of the risks that youth face from social media. Young people often form parasocial attachments with influencers, which may affect their self-image and they may also take influencers' messages as though it were personal advice from a friend. Influencers may promote unrealistic body images and share health misinformation, such as false treatments.

When it comes to advertising, while the disclosure of influencers' relationships with sponsors is important, evidence shows that just knowing that a post is paid content does not guarantee that youth will engage with it critically.

Addressing digital risks like the ones associated with influencers requires us to move beyond trying to avoid them completely and instead move to empower youth to manage them. To do that, we need to acknowledge that most young people have mixed feelings about social media and digital technology, and recognize that while most have a generally positive experience with it, they also often have qualms about its role in their lives. The youth in our research have advocated forcefully for healthier online spaces that embrace rights-respecting approaches such as safety and privacy by design.

Alongside any regulatory approaches that may be considered, any effective policy must include digital media literacy education, which equips youth with the critical thinking skills they need to learn how to recognize and counter the ways in which apps manipulate us into spending more time on them than we want to. It teaches them how to curate their feeds, how to choose healthier activities and content and how to recognize the blurred commercial intent of influencer marketing. We need to teach young Canadians that they, not their devices, are in control.

[Kathryn Ann Hill]

Digital media literacy education must be introduced early. It must also be revisited throughout childhood, adolescence and, frankly, into adulthood. It should be part of lifelong learning. For example, it should help to teach parents how to guide their kids' online lives in a supportive way, not through restrictions and surveillance only but by having open and honest conversations about what their kids are doing online and what the risks might be. They should model and show them better ways to behave online.

At MediaSmarts, we have been advocating, for more than a decade, for a national digital media literacy strategy. Canada has fallen behind compared to examples like Finland, the United Kingdom and Brazil. They have implemented national strategies with positive results.

A national strategy would foster a collaborative and community-centred approach to helping youth, educators, parents and all Canadians develop healthier media habits. Most of the countries engaged in regulation efforts have also equally invested in national strategies for lifelong digital media literacy education and learning.

Despite repeated calls for action and investment from multiple studies in Canada over the past 15 years, Canada has still not acted. Once a leader, we have fallen behind many nations, and we will continue to do so unless we act now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Finally, we have Humberto Carolo from White Ribbon joining us online.

You have five minutes.

[Humberto Carolo, Chief Executive Officer, White Ribbon]

Thank you so much for the opportunity to join you today.

My name is Humberto Carolo. I am the CEO of White Ribbon, based in Toronto on the traditional territory of many indigenous nations. White Ribbon is the world's largest movement of men and boys working to end gender-based violence. This work is both my personal and my professional commitment. I grew up witnessing violence in my home and community. As the adoptive father of three young men, I see first-hand the pressures that boys face in increasingly complex digital worlds.

As a member of the Ontario Domestic Violence Death Review Committee, I've observed that misogynistic attitudes and prejudice against women are key risk factors in intimate partner violence death. Research shows that supporting boys early, before harmful patterns and ideologies take root, is critical to preventing cycles of violence.

Social media is central to youth identity and belonging, but it also exposes boys to content that reinforces misogyny, unhealthy stereotypes and radicalization. Boys who begin in milder online spaces focused on men's issues often progress to forums that blame women and girls and promote gender-based violence. Some spaces, such as incel forums, have been directly linked to sexual violence and homicides of women. CSIS now classifies violent misogyny as a form of ideological extremism, the foundation of the online manosphere.

The influence of online content is reflected in troubling statistics: 99% of perpetrators of sexual violence towards women and girls are male; 75% of ideologically motivated violent extremism profiles belong to boys and men; and 83% of all sextortion victims are boys and young men. CSIS recently reported that nearly one in 10 terrorism investigations now involves at least one young person under the age of 18. Earlier this year, the RCMP arrested a 15-year-old in Edmonton for alleged links to an online violent and misogynistic extremist network known as 764, which targets youth.

These cases highlight the urgency of prevention. This is why we created our recent campaign, “My Friend Max Hate”. We saw how harmful influencers and ideologies were in shaping boys' attitudes, leading to misogyny, isolation and radicalization.

We are pilot-testing lesson plans to help educators address these issues. White Ribbon's new research, “Boys are at Risk”, in partnership with Angus Reid, examined the impact of misogyny and online radicalization on youth from the perspective of parents and professionals in education, mental health and child and youth care across Canada. The findings are deeply concerning: 84% of the professionals have encountered radicalized ideologies among boys and young men; 67% have seen these linked to incidents of gender-based violence; and 89% feel they lack the adequate training or resources required. Furthermore, 71% of boys, in particular, worry about the hateful content online and its impact on them.

These harms are spilling over into classrooms and communities. Research with the Canadian Institute for Far-Right Studies revealed similar trends in rural and francophone communities: 59% of educators described students making racist jokes or comments, with incidents escalating to physical violence. Parents and professionals are asking for tools—tools currently unavailable—to help boys and young men navigate digital spaces safely and develop critical thinking skills, empathy and resilience. Primary prevention can create the most transformative and lasting change. Studies show that prevention strategies yield two dollars to $20 for every dollar invested. Emerging research demonstrates the effectiveness of “attitudinal vaccination”, which exposes youth to a small and controlled portion of harmful online ideology to inoculate them against it.

We can ensure that boys and young men are supported, not blamed, as they navigate increasingly complex digital worlds. I urge you to prioritize investments in primary prevention and partner with organizations like White Ribbon. We have much more to share about the impact of misogynistic influencers on boys and young men, and in turn on women, girls and gender-diverse people.

We'll follow up with a fuller brief, but I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this study. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

You're right on the five minutes. You are a practised testimony-giver. I remember you from the status of women committee last Parliament, sir. Thank you for your good work.

I will turn now to questions from committee members, starting with Mrs. Thomas for six minutes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Great.

Thank you so much to each and every one of you for being here. We really do appreciate your taking the opportunity to share your research, knowledge and experience with us.

My first question is for Defend Dignity.

Ms. Wood, you made an interesting statement. It was one of your first three points. You said, “parents need to parent, but governments need to govern.” I would like you to expand briefly on what you mean by “governments need to govern”. What policy requirements are needed right now in order to better protect children?

[Holly Wood]

Absolutely. I used Bill S-209 as an example. It is about the age verification for pornographic material online. That bill has been in Parliament for five years, and it is a prime example of how slowly Parliament moves on issues critical to protecting our children. I think the government does a great job of bringing these bills up and having conversations like this, but at the end of the day, when our kids are at the centre of this issue, I believe there should be some sort of rush on legislation that deeply affects them.

I think that we, as a government, as government bodies, need to invest in working with tech companies to provide those protections for our kids. We need to look at what the options are. I'm not a tech specialist, but I know that if we work with big tech, we can find a solution. I just hope that the government moves forward with meaningful conversations and a rush on legislation that can implement change so that our kids are protected.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

I was reading some of the things that have been published over the years—things that you and others have said. At the time when Bill C-63 was before the House of Commons—and of course this has to do with online harms—it was brought forward in the last Parliament, and then, due to the government choosing to prorogue, it died.

Now, there were good things within that bill, but there were also a lot of problems with that bill, as was highlighted by many stakeholders. You highlighted this as well, that there was some good stuff but it didn't go far enough. One of the areas where you felt it didn't go far enough was that it was lacking a robust plan to protect kids from exposure to pornography, and of course the effect that it has on them during their childhood and later in life. Do you want to expand on that a bit more, in terms of what more needs to be done for kids?

[Holly Wood]

I'm a big believer in prevention education. I'm a nationally licensed prevention educator. I think that should be in every classroom across Canada, and it should be part of the curriculum, but it shouldn't necessarily be up to the teachers to teach.

When I talk about a robust plan, rolling out prevention education is at the top of that plan for me. There are so many organizations across the country, such as MediaSmarts and Defend Dignity. We want to be in those classrooms, and the biggest obstacle that we face is school boards telling us that they have to go above this person and up the ladder for someone to approve it. For us to get into a classroom and teach prevention education is extremely hard.

I think one of the key steps you can take is standardizing prevention education, allowing certain agencies or organizations into those classrooms, saying that we are allowed to be there as much as possible and allowed to work with the schools without facing any red tape or bureaucracy around it.

I understand that legislation and policy take time, but I just think that our kids are the most important thing in the world, and we should be moving legislation as quickly as possible when it comes to them.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I understand that prevention education.... Absolutely, there is huge value there, but again, to come back to the point that you made, there is the parents' role and the educators' role or the school systems' role, and then there's the government's role.

As legislators, we have the opportunity to bring substantial legislation forward with regard to platforms, how they are used and how they are regulated. We have the opportunity to make changes to the Criminal Code. I'm curious if you can really get into the substance of what is needed to better protect children and also what is needed to better advocate for those who are victimized.

[Holly Wood]

Legislation-wise, I think there are a handful of bills currently in Parliament, which I understand have to go through studies and processes. If we passed the majority of the bills currently active in the House of Commons and in the Senate that protect children from online harm, our world would be a much safer place for our kids. The problem is that, as advocates and researchers, we look at that legislation and say that it's two or three years away, when our kids need to be protected now. That's my big thing with legislation, just how slowly it moves. I think it moves too slowly.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Holland, you seem to want to weigh in on this. I'd love to give you that opportunity. Unfortunately, it's probably pretty short, but I can come back to you later as well.

[Naomi Holland]

I just wanted to quickly say that, for me as well, trying to get into schools is very difficult. I try to organize parent nights, and parents don't come. If children are not being educated and properly protected at home, the best place to access them is in schools, yet getting into schools is harder than going through airport security. It's so difficult.

Funding is part of that issue. They can afford to pay you almost nothing. That's a big hindrance. Months have gone by, and I haven't been in a school. It breaks my heart, knowing the statistics that Holly talked about. The kids are suffering now. Their mental health is in a crisis now. We're in a mental health epidemic right now with suicides, depression and anxiety. All these numbers are through the roof.

It was good that we pulled phones out of schools, but we know that it's not really happening. I get a lot of reports from schools saying that the kids are on their phones in class, and they're sneaking in. Again, it falls on the teachers, and that's not right.

Our kids are addicted to their devices. We're not really acting fast enough to help them get off them or to know how to maintain that addiction. There's just so much more. It has to be done quickly. We are losing our youth.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Mr. Al Soud, you have six minutes. You have the floor now.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's good to see you, as always.

Thank you to our witnesses for being with us today. It is, of course, truly appreciated.

At the risk of annoying my colleague, Mr. Champoux, with yet another reference to my youth, I remember that when I shifted to secondaire 1, my parents sent me to school with what was by then already a relic—a flip phone. At the time, not having a smart phone when my peers did annoyed me. However, my parents' decision to do that has only been further justified as time has moved on. The ease of access to social media on devices has granted predators a degree of access they never previously had to children.

Ms. Holland, in a LinkedIn post you wrote six months ago, you said, “For 2 years, I lived as the house mom in an emergency home for women fleeing the sex trade. I saw first hand the violence and devastation at the hands of pimps and predators. When phones came out, I saw these same men move online and be given full access to our children!”

From your perspective, how did this change not just the method but also the nature of grooming? What behavioural patterns in victims or in perpetrators emerged that were previously less visible or even impossible?

[Naomi Holland]

Yes, it's exactly that. When the phones came out and almost every child was given one, we did not know then what we know now. When social media came out, especially in 2010 and 2011 with Snapchat and Instagram, all the predators basically went online. They had full and easy access to all of our children, because we did not realize what was happening for so long. With gaming now, they can chat directly with kids through games. They can pretend to be anybody they want to be. They can create their own avatars.

Currently, the platforms give predators direct and easy access to our children. Since our children are spending so much time online, they're very vulnerable and very open with some of their struggles, with their mental health issues. Maybe they are angry with their parents, or maybe they're complaining about not having enough money for this or that. Then, that gives the predators easy information from which they are going to try to feed that need or address that emotional need that isn't being met.

They create this friendship and this trust very quickly, and they bring that child into a place where they feel like they're best friends. Then they slowly start to groom them and slowly move the chat perhaps somewhere more private like Snap. Eventually comes the ask for a photo, for a nude, for a more explicit photo. From there, that just opens the door to all the things we talked about: sextortion, trafficking, sex trafficking.

Kids are being sex-trafficked from their bedrooms, because when sharing that photo, they don't realize that the average nude image of a child, a CSAM, is viewed 400,000 times, as stated on Defend Young Minds. That is sex trafficking right there. It's being sold, traded and uploaded to Pornhub, where it's monetized. Kids are being trafficked from their bedrooms through the devices that parents have given them, and parental controls are not enough.