Evidence of meeting #20 for Canada-China Relations in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
As I understand it, it is possible with that information for scientists to even proactively discover and then reach out to individuals and say, “You could very well develop this disease...or this medical treatment.” I think that just puts the emphasis on how this data is important.
What do you think Canada should do to safeguard the biodata of Canadians?
Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
It's a very good question. I can only speak in the commercial context, as I'm not sufficiently aware of how it's being handled in China.
Generally, I think there should be strong requirements that delimit how information can be used, inclusive of no secondary uses can be used, or no more applications of primary uses can be used, without the affirmative and meaningful consent of the individual.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you very much, Mr. Williamson.
Ms. Zann, you have three minutes.
Liberal
Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you very much.
I have to say, it's been very interesting, both the meeting and the presentations. I want to thank both gentlemen for the very interesting information they've shared with us. I wish I had longer.
Mr. Sarts, I would like to ask you about “Disinformation as a Threat to National Security”, in your book Disinformation and Fake News.
You must have been extremely concerned when you saw what was going on in the United States with regard to the storming of Washington, of the capitol, and with all of the disinformation that has been propagated on social media and really continues.
Can you please explain to us how you think we can best fight against the creation of divisions in society and the widening of existing fractures that undermine trust in government, the military, and the country's security systems?
Director, NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence
I would say first, yes, we're undergoing profound change in the information environment, the very core of what creates and makes the democratic process run, the bloodstream of a democracy. It's changing in a way that is not helpful for society coming together.
To a large extent it is because the social media companies have found a way to monetize that environment through promoting information that is biased, creating echo chambers or information bubbles, and increasingly putting the citizens within those bubbles. It is with outside interference that it happens, and of course, outside hostile actors just exacerbate that situation.
Therefore, going back to the fundamentals, we have to make sure that the rules and laws we have in a normal democratic discourse would be applied to the same place. At least the algorithmic transparency is a must, and of course, then we would see how to make it more adequate.
Liberal
Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Thank you.
I've also read that the more explosive a statement can be on social media, the more it attracts the eyes of people. You can tell the biggest lie and make the most extravagant statement, and that's the sort of thing people are attracted to.
Could you expand on that a little, please?
Director, NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence
That's what the neuroscience says on how the human brain works. We are attracted to the emotional and instinctive things, and it is much harder to go about the rational decision-making.
The algorithms of those social media companies are actually using that element for gaining our attention. The more attention there is, the more money they can make, and I think that's actually the wrong thing with this.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Ms. Zann, your time is up.
I will now give the floor to Mr. Bergeron for one minute and 30 seconds.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for Mr. Parsons.
Adam Segal, director of the digital security program at the Council on Foreign Relations, believes that both WeChat and TikTok should not be installed on the phones of U.S. officials or government employees.
In your brief, you mention that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service apparently warned members of Parliament that they should avoid using WeChat, because of nebulous cybersecurity risks.
Should Canadians and Quebeckers also be concerned about WeChat and TikTok, and follow the recommendations from CSIS?
Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I believe what is important when looking at these platforms and systems is to appreciate that some people have greater or less great risks than others. Elected officials, in one case, might be concerned about the data that is being collected. However, in our research on TikTok we found no overt surveillance and no overt censorship. It might happen at some point, but not in our research.
In the case of WeChat, we saw that there has been the usage of Canadians' communications to build up a censor index that is then applied to individuals who operate or live within China. Therefore, I think Canadians are right to be concerned, in particular about the way that WeChat has historically, at least, used their communications to build that censor index.
Currently, we have no evidence of a clear problem with TikTok.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Your time is up.
Now we'll go to Mr. Harris for one and a half minutes.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Parsons, I have lots of questions for you but not very much time to ask them.
One very important one is that you make six recommendations regarding what companies should be required to publish with respect to their social media platforms, including publishing guidelines explaining the way they're subject to state mandate and surveillance, that they make their algorithms available for government audits, that they provide transparency reports, and so on.
Do we have the means to actually force companies to do those things in order to be able to operate in this country?
Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
For some of them, we certainly do. As one example, I think we could compel Facebook and other companies to explain how they interact with perhaps Chinese companies as well as Canadian companies.
In other cases, I believe we would have to work with our allies—the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions—to put pressure on the companies and/or pass legislation in the countries out of which they operate.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Is there any activity coordinated to do that work, or is that something you're recommending we should start to do? Is it happening already?
Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I think we're seeing pieces of that in the United States and the European Union, but it isn't something I would say is an agreed-upon position by respective governments. It's a place where Canada can participate with our closest allies to make movement on this.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
We'd better get cracking if we're going to have any control over this monster.
Senior Research Associate, Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, As an Individual
We certainly hope this will be something the government looks at.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you very much, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Parsons, thank you very much for understanding how much we appreciate you, and thank you, Mr. Sarts, for whom it's now 2:30 in the morning. I'm sure you won't mind us making a particular fuss about the fact that it's so late. We very much appreciate both of you being with us this evening.
The meeting is adjourned.